Don’t Oppress My People With The Way You Walk
From the world of campus wokescolds, where innovation never ends:
The opinion editor of the Northwestern University’s student newspaper recently published an article asserting that white people walk awkwardly on sidewalks because of their internalised racism.
The editor, Kenny Allen, who is black, is quite confident on this point.
Laying out the claims by University of Richmond sociologist Bedelia Richards for determining “whether one’s university is racist” — such as which groups feel most “at home,” whose “norms, values and perspectives” are legitimated, and “who inhabits positions of power” — Allen concluded that “White people” meet most of the criteria.
A shocking twist. Feel free to gasp.
People at this predominantly White school would not move out of our way on the sidewalk. This was one of many reminders that diversity does not mean inclusion at NU.
Sadly, and perhaps oddly, no particulars or examples are offered to support this claim. Despite the alleged ubiquity, Mr Allen shares no damning anecdotes of obstinate white people failing to accommodate the brown and downtrodden-by-default. Apparently, we are to accept as obvious, as beyond question, that any such failures of politeness and spatial reciprocation are exclusively the fault of white people, on account of their being white, and therefore oppressive. Indeed, we’re told that pavement users of pallor are actually re-enacting “the rules of Jim Crow,” which “required Black people to yield to White people whenever possible.”
Many White people walk around campus having unknowingly absorbed this particular facet of White supremacy, and the leaders of the institution do little to make us believe that White supremacy is something worth challenging in the first place.
That the cultivation of a chippy, racially paranoid attitude may itself increase the likelihood of pavement collisions and general frustration, and be a self-reinforcing phenomenon, is a possibility that has seemingly eluded Mr Allen, who instead directs his energies to bemoaning the “violent feedback” to his pronouncements. A violence that includes gentle mockery and, it would appear, demurral of any kind.
Readers who now feel an urge to rethink how they walk on pavements – in order to inhibit their seething racism and dreams of racial dominion – should, however, temper any hope of overcoming their innate wickedness:
This is not to say that giving people space in public is a way to be anti-racist;
But of course. Damnation is eternal.
the sidewalk question is just one way in which Black people are made to feel unwelcome. This is to say that essentially every aspect of our society, including the way we physically move through space, has been shaped by a racist legacy. Uprooting that White supremacy requires both recognising its scale and disrupting it however it shows up.
Yes, first we must disrupt walking, and then everything else.
Update, via the comments:
Readers may wish to ponder the ways in which victimhood, even laughably pretentious victimhood, can be flattering and seductive to a certain kind of person. For instance, the temptations of victimhood as a ready-made identity, an all-purpose excuse, not least for the young and credulous on a modern campus. Say, on a campus where tuition is a mere $78,000 a year, where those sufficiently brown are favoured in admissions, and where a pantomime of being oppressed confers a certain leverage and unearned deference, albeit from those equally pretentious.
Having been mocked for his unargued assertions and casual racism, Mr Allen is now complaining that people, presumably white ones, “don’t want to engage” with his unargued assertions and casual racism. The truth of his claims is, he says, “obvious.” An attitude that would, I suppose, explain the lack of evidence or any reciprocal standard, and the apparent disregard for any expectation of such. However, perhaps a few atoms of sympathy are in order. It occurs to me that if your immediate environment is one in which race-based claims aren’t subject to challenge or scepticism, even when sweeping and rather dubious, it must be quite unnerving to encounter these things for the first time. 
That the cultivation of a chippy, racially paranoid attitude may itself increase the likelihood of pavement collisions and general frustration, and be a self-reinforcing phenomenon, is a possibility that has seemingly eluded Mr Allen,
That.
Maybe a trip to see some African countries would afford enlightenment as to the most racially-conscious method of pavement usage?
Who yields to whom, and on what basis?
That.
Well, Mr Allen doesn’t offer any evidence, even anecdotal, to support his claim – none whatsoever – but assuming the phenomenon has any basis in reality, one might want to consider the attitudes of all parties, including those of Mr Allen.
For some reason, this came to mind.
Mr Allen’s Twitter feed is pretty much what you’d expect.
For instance, he reminds his followers that the collective term “blacks” is not to be used – I sentiment I share, incidentally, albeit mildly, much as I avoid the term “gays” – but he then happily uses the term “yts” when referring to white people. Again, as so often, our woke-ling seems unburdened by expectations of reciprocation. Which may have some bearing on his claims about pavement use.
And later, crossing to the other side of the street on seeing a person of politically preferred pigmentation approaching will also be condemned as racist.
It occurs to me that the white devils’ “awkward” and clearly racist use of the pavement may be related to the fact that “whiteness” is “an energetic imbalance caused by a loss of spinal fluidity and awareness of the lower body.”
As noted here.
”This is to say that essentially every aspect of our society, including the way we physically move through space, has been shaped by a racist legacy.”
We are all guilty!
(NB: The Meringue, Éclair and Profiterole Authority was rebranded as Patisserie.UK in 2016, in order to promote inclusivity.)
The substance for Mr. Allen’s claim is that when he, as an activist, deliberately and aggressively impeded white students on the sidewalk they did not step aside and kneel to allow his passage.
I have very low confidence that I am making this up.
Recall being on the pavements of SF and intrigued by the habits of some brown folk to lie across the sidewalks. They appeared either dead or in a deep slumber. Rather than step over them, I walked around these prone impediments. I am now confused as to which action would be considered as the least racist.
Previously, racist pedestrian crossing lights.
If Mr Allen insists on referring to white people as ‘yts’, perhaps white people should return the compliment and use the term ‘blx’, or would that be racist?
Those racist wypipo need to learn to walk on the sidewalk with the same degree of courtesy and consideration of others that Black people display.
Nuts.
Previously, racist pedestrian crossing lights.
LOL. Tip jar pinged.
That the cultivation of a chippy, racially paranoid attitude may itself increase the likelihood of pavement collisions and general frustration, and be a self-reinforcing phenomenon, is a possibility that has seemingly eluded Mr Allen
This. “Racially paranoid” explains his delusions.
The substance for Mr. Allen’s claim is that when he, as an activist, deliberately and aggressively impeded white students on the sidewalk they did not step aside and kneel to allow his passage.
I have very low confidence that I am making this up.
You are not making it up: I have personally encountered black people who intentionally moved so as to block my path: I’d be walking along the extreme right of the sidewalk (walk/drive on the right here in the States) and a black person would, while staring coldly at me, move across the sidewalk to be directly in front of my path. Sometimes they would say something hostile afterwards.
Tip jar pinged.
Bless you, sir. May keys never wear a hole in your pocket lining.
For some reason, this came to mind.
Yes indeed.
crossing to the other side of the street on seeing a person of politically preferred pigmentation approaching will also be condemned as racist.
That has also been condemned as racist, going back to the Jesse Jackson days. They keep changing the rules or adding new, contradictory, ones such that even if you were to drop to the ground in abject obeisance, prepared to lick the boots of your betters should you be required to, they’d find something racist in that too. Like the guy with the frock and the scruffy beard a couple posts ago, who took offense that some people using his preferred pronouns might not actually believe he was female. The only way to win is to not play, and that option is slowly being taken away.
Having worked at and attended a few universities, I’ve noticed the younger generations tend to be wrapped up in their own personal worlds, or their phones, and are completely unaware of their surroundings, such that they don’t give way to oncoming pedestrian traffic regardless of pigmentation. The assumption seems to be that the other person will move around them.
Having worked at and attended a few universities, I’ve noticed the younger generations tend to be wrapped up in their own personal worlds, or their phones, and are completely unaware of their surroundings, such that they don’t give way to oncoming pedestrian traffic regardless of pigmentation.
Semisocialized kids being, well, semisocialized kids. But a paranoid black racist will never notice or admit that.
Yes indeed.
I suppose it’s largely a question of whether you think Northwestern University – annual tuition $78,000, and with its extensive list of “diversity and inclusion” departments and facilities, and endless blather about “equity” – is actually a seething hotbed of racism against black students, who are, as so often, favoured in admissions. Or whether it’s more likely that Mr Allen is just another self-flattering conformist who’s learned that pretentious victimhood equals status and leverage.
Or whether it’s more likely that Mr Allen is just another self-flattering conformist who’s learned that pretentious victimhood equals status and leverage.
Or it’s worse than that: Many black Americans are racists. And they suffer little or no social consequences from other blacks for being racists.
For some reason, this came to mind.
Just reading through the comments there I got distracted by an OT discussion twixt Darleen, Sam, (maybe) Squid, others(?) and I with mr. Ten. Quite the doozy of obfuscation that was.
Remember… “They was kangs…”!
And they’re right.
…re-enacting “the rules of Jim Crow,” which “required Black people to yield to White people whenever possible.”
Narcissists project.
Let’s play a game! Is the following statement more, or less accurate than the original?
Many people walk around campus having unknowingly absorbed many facets of anti-White racism, and the leaders of the institution do little to make us believe that anti-White racism is something worth challenging in the first place.
he reminds his followers that the collective term “blacks” is not to be used – I sentiment I share, incidentally, albeit mildly, much as I avoid the term “gays” –
I try to avoid this myself and yet every so often I fall into it and cringe if I come across it later. It’s kind of like misuse of their/there/they’re to/too/two then/than. No matter how much I know better and am annoyed when others do it, I find myself falling into it. The misuse and ignorance is so commonplace anymore. I call it ignorance by osmosis. While generally speaking, I’m no great speller nor wordsmith, years ago I still never would have misused such terms/terminology that is logically discernible. Now effect/affect OTOH…
And they’re right.
I suppose victimhood, even laughably pretentious victimhood, can be flattering and seductive. To a certain kind of person. It’s a ready-made identity, an all-purpose excuse, for the young and credulous. And in many environments, especially on a modern campus, it confers leverage and unearned deference, albeit from equally pretentious pinheads.
For instance, he reminds his followers that the collective term “blacks” is not to be used…
What terms does he think should be used?
…a sentiment I share, incidentally, albeit mildly, much as I avoid the term “gays”
I think of you more as whimsical, David.
Thinking of buying a powered wheelchair with tasers attached to both handles. Move over, my brother. Or else.
*queues up “Walk This Way”. With Run-DMC*
I’ll ponder this deep thinking from Kenny next time I’m sitting at a green light waiting for some deliberately slow walking incoherently “rapping” black kid with his pants 3/4 of the way down his ass to finish crossing the street in front of my car.
The search for something, anything to be offended by is become risible.
Preaching diversity while imposing conformity is how I believe Theodore Dalrymple put it.
I was sincerely hoping that our racist way of walking could be illustrated in some way, so with Kenny Allen falling short of the mark, I enter this into evidence as Exhibit 1:
https://youtu.be/HHFuTpVvRCI
If a white person were to step aside/out of the way, wouldn’t that then be construed as “avoiding blacks” or “unreasonable fear of blacks”? It’s a no-win scenario; whatever you do, if someone *wants* to do so your action/inaction can be viewed as offensive (which is obviously true here).
As a white man I JUMP at the opportunity to avoid meeting a black man on the sidewalks. I not only “get out of the way” but actually cross the street as well. I feel better knowing it’s what the black man wants too. Now, locking the car doors….
I’m reasonably sure I recall this blog mentioning a run of the mill feminist and her less than stunning and brave resistance to oppression by means of deliberately walking into men on the pavement.
We can now therefore add “walking while white” to the previously established hate-crime of “walking while male”.
Please ignore as our host has already linked to it (rather early in this thread TBH).
I’ll get my coat.
I’ll get my coat.
It’s in the alleyway. On fire.
Well I guess I now know whether or not David will ever forgive me my italics.
Posts like Mr. Allen’s are appearing more frequently. I am not sure if this is because black twitter and preceding social spaces were always full of similar content and it is now bubbling up as our moral betters hire more (apologies to our host) blacks, or if that increased hiring coincides with their severe education in racial animus.
I am similarly curious about the recent publicizing of anti-(east)asian violence in the US. Personally, I believe this is not a new phenomenon and people of all races have long been abused by the significant portion of irrationally and impulsively violent african descendants living among us. That seems the simplest explanation for the countless crimes in the last several decades as well as many events further in the past. But politicians and broadcasters are very insistent that this is a recent problem caused by the Orange Man hating on poor, meek China. Well, I guess San Francisco is MAGA Country now!
which groups feel most “at home,” whose “norms, values and perspectives” are legitimated, and “who inhabits positions of power”
If some people feel at home, that means that some people will feel more at home in a given place than others. And for those not at home, so much will be an uphill struggle, so many routine transactions fraught with unforeseen complexities, so many social norms needing to be explicitly explained and still not grasped as well as the envied majority who implicitly understand them.
Minority complaints about being structurally oppressed are a shout from the rooftops that assimilation is impossible – that our civilization is more difficult for outsiders than we can ever comprehend, that being tolerated as a minority is a rebuff to their esteem, that their inclusion in majority spaces leads not to contented adjustment but to the heaping up of envy and the spiteful wish that if I can’t feel at home then nobody should feel at home.
Sad stories about the lived minority experience where nobody can pronounce your name or recommend a suitable hair product are an argument for separate countries and separate institutions so that whoever is unhappy being a minority (which is most people most of the time, especially when the novelty wears off) has a place to go where they can be at home and in the majority.
I do have one more comment more specific to Mr. Allen and his… ilk. What is the status of our relations with Liberia? Are they still accepting our expatriates? Maybe we could arrange a swap with S. Africa?
If people insist the country is so terrible then the most peaceful solution is they should be helped to leave. We should similarly deal with those who are the source of this education. They want to play the “America is a bunch of ideas” game then people who disagree with the ideas should be banished.
I am similarly curious about the recent publicizing of anti-(east)asian violence in the US.
The moral contortions have been routinely grotesque.
@ JE: “If people insist the country is so terrible then the most peaceful solution is they should be helped to leave.”
Intellectual giants such as Kenny “and his … ilk” remind me ever so much of fools floating in a life boat after their ship has sunk in the open ocean and then drilling holes in the bottom of the boat on whose integrity their lives depend.
remind me ever so much of fools floating in a life boat after their ship has sunk in the open ocean and then drilling holes in the bottom of the boat on whose integrity their lives depend.
Yeah. With the rest of us sitting in the same boat too chicken shit to try and stop them. Or even so much as speak up about it.
Via Ann Althouse, an obvious truth: “The facts are plain: the idea that ‘acting white’ is a myth is, itself, a myth.”
“Acting white” was an obviously real problem when I was a teen, 50 years ago. Liberals have loudly, and endlessly, denied that it is a real phenomenon, because to admit its existence would force them to admit that not every problem can be blamed on racism and “the system” and that some problems can be solved only when black people change how they think and act.
In the immortal words of the Brothers Gibb,
Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk
I’m a woman’s man, no time to talk
“The facts are plain: the idea that ‘acting white’ is a myth is, itself, a myth.”
Thank you for that. A well reasoned, interesting piece. And yes, please can we get rid of the words “systemic-racism”.
I went to high school in Canada in the 70s. When I started there were less than 10 black students. When I left after 5 years (we had grade 13) there were perhaps 40 or 50 kids. The early years were kids who were born in Canada. In the later years they were mostly immigrants from the Caribbean. So most of these kids had their founding experience somewher outside of Canada. I’m not saying there wasn’t racism–there was–but it wasn’t systemic and certainly hadn’t shaped these kids. Still I heard more than once in my years at that school a black kid say to the teacher when something hadn’t gone his way, “it’s because I’m black.”