Posted to facebook.
“Anyone with a problem with Elizabeth Warren’s tone, or likability is suspect for misogyny until I see the details. ESPECIALLY if you’re a Trump voter. That chucklefuck doesn’t get to be the only one using aggression. I will call that cowardly shit out. Learn to engage with aggressive women. Try to change their tone from what’s legitimate and I’ll poke at that weakness until you crack.”

The behavior in the comments of a recent post by PZ reminded me of another political issue I’ve been meaning to write about. Race and “whiteness”.

I was raised to identify as white and today I hate that political construct. It is useless unless one wants to win a political conflict through numbers or fists. It has no other rational use that I can see. It doesn’t focus on any actual relevant social problems, it doesn’t help me figure out who a good person or a bad person is, it seems to have nothing but the social conflict.

The color doesn’t exist in the human population. There are no white people. There’s a range of pigmentation in there.
If the lack of literal examples in a political label isn’t good enough there’s the fact that plenty of light skinned people were said to not be white. The Irish (the same comparison with monkeys in political images at the link) are one example, and today you can see complications over if Jews are white.

Am I missing something? This looks like a huge waste of time and social effort because people need to box themselves into “whiteness” and make adversaries. Think about what it was before “whiteness”. Nation. City-state. City, down to the people on the other side of the “geographical feature”.

If the lack of actual whiteness and the behavior of people obsessed with who is and isn’t white isn’t enough there’s the fact that the term originated in a “need” to separate people (here’s a PDF) for ownership and denial of rights purposes.

The first examples of “white race/people” in the Oxford English Dictionary are no earlier than the 1600s, when Europeans were deeply involved in African slave-trading; the same seems to be true of the corresponding terms in the major European languages. At that point, the use of what was by then a powerfully stigmatizing form of polarized terminology must have seemed comfortingly appropriate.

The reference to “polarized terminology” referrs to the way society (western in my experience) uses “white” and “black” as replacements for “good” and “bad”. Unless you are a bigot “whiteness” looks like a broken social tool if you care about more than base group conflict.

When I point these things out to people I get a couple of responses. This is what I remember so far. Some people agree with the connections and brokenness of “whiteness”. One person demanded to know what I’m going to give them to replace “whiteness”, interestingly they didn’t tell me what they needed but I pointed out the tool is broken if I have a replacement or not.
Another was more explicit about their concerns, “What about blackness? Black people need to stop using blackness!”.

How very interesting.

Instead of being concerned about the label that applies to themselves and some form of group organization that solves problems facing our nations, this person was concerned about the label “they” (black people) are using on “themselves”. Group conflict related fear.
I wonder how conscious this was? It’s happened more than once and it’s a useful way to spot irrational racial group conflict related fear.

But as I wrap this up I need to point out another group conflict related fear, a rational one, the one black people have regarding white people. When Europeans assumed whiteness in order to dominate and enslave they chose blackness and forced it on black people. We took their culture away. What gets done with blackness is black people’s business. It looks like the same kind of attempt to socially control as complaints about baggy pants and rap music.

People who discover the brokenness or offensiveness of whiteness as a political organization tool can’t simply disavow it and ignore it. There are people out there speaking for you. When they say “white people” they mean you. They are implicitly trying to speak for you too. They have to make this assumption so they can’t deny your challenge.
You get to criticize them. If you want to fix society you will critisize them if you safely can. I won’t tell someone to do something risky but I do encourage it, especially with the climate change problems. This shit is fucking our societies up, it’s not based on solving problems. I’m comfortable spending the rest of my life watching for what white people say.

When someone publicly makes claims about people and/or groups and doesn’t support them I see that as politically pissing on fences.

For example the Trump fans who simply post “Trump2020!” in articles about anything considered politically “left” in the US, or in places they consider liberal, or articles about the election…

It’s on the “left” too, but this is my example. I need a political label of disgust having to do with political dominance displays that have no actual substance. Racists have made primate related insults a challenging problem. I’ve no problem respecting that strategic political reality, I’m just making it explicit (the blog name is an experiment and I welcome opinions) . So dogs are the implication, sorry dogs.

The last person I used it on said I didn’t support my argument and had to point out that it was a label for political behavior. From there I overtly meet them at that level, their behavior let met do it. Their comment nothing but the basest expression of personal politics lets you be personal right back.
Do unto others as they give you licence to do unto them (I call it “the inverse golden rule”).

Bigot in cheif.

Irrational, illogical, incompetent, ignoramus… incumbent? No. That needs work. But the alliteration is catchy. Irrational, illogical, incompetent, ignoramus, and I repeat myself.

Trump is a cheat, a cheater, and you shouldn’t let him cheat you even if you voted for him.

Somehow my brand of tourette syndrome has come with personal insult resistance. I’m more sensitive to people insulting one another and I often treat personal insults as a challenge.

Maybe it needs work, I’m going to practice this. There’s social symmetry in there because Trump makes insults for people. There’s an argument for overtly openly reflecting Trump’s bad behavior (not just insults) on his supporters and only stopping with specific supporters when they start critisizing Trump’s awful personal behavior.

With the insulting language it has to beliefs, manner of thought, or behavior. Not face. Not body. Personal behavior relevant to his awfulness. If you go for the irrelevant personal characteristics you’re not focused on the problem, you’re helping to propagate the problem.

You don’t have to worry about letting go of bigoted, irrational, and irrelevant insults. Have you noticed how “ignorant” and “incompetent” and “bigot” or it’s flavors like “racist” and “sexist” are treated as if they’re just insults and not characteristics? You’re not losing anything and you gain focus on social problems. Sure you have to do the work of making sure you can competently use them yourself but it’s worth it.

Just make sure the sting they feel isn’t why you’re doing it or you’re likely to mess things up.

And what is this? This is bigger than me. I’m practicing behavior associated with tourette syndrome phenomena, boundary crossing, insults, finding places where politics justifies me using this, instincts? Personality?