Holding the Tension: Whiteness vs. European Cultural Identity

I recently attended a fundraiser event for Oyate Nipi Kte, an organization dedicated to the recovery of “Dakota traditional knowledge, including Dakota language, spirituality, ecology, oral tradition and life ways.”  At the event, Waziyatawin, Ph.D, called on White settlers who live on occupied Indigenous land to consider what it means to participate in resistance to White supremacy and continued colonization.

During a small group conversation, my friend Lex said something that has stuck with me, running through my mind daily since: “As White people, it’s important that we do the work to figure out who our people were before we were colonizers.”

It’s notable that Lex said this the day before St. Patrick’s day, during a weekend when countless people of all ethnic backgrounds donned green and drank green beer until they puked a verdant mess.

For me, reclaiming who my people were before we were colonizers means understanding my Irish, German, and Dutch heritage, yet I know next to nothing about my people and the cultures from whence they came.  Why?  Well, because they became White.

Whiteness as a Construct

Despite the way it’s often discussed, race is not a biological concept, and it sure as hell isn’t static.  First, “Whiteness” didn’t exist when Europeans first came to North and South America.  There were simply European landholders who held tight to power.  Over time, though, these European landowners needed a way to stave off slave and proletariat rebellions, so they invented this common “race” for some Europeans.

As laid out in Nell Irvin Painter’s “The History of White People,” at first, only certain Europeans (read wealthy men from north-western Europe) were considered worthy of being in the club.  In the early-to-mid 19th century, though, the wealthy “White” folks realized they needed more allies who could serve in slave patrols and in menial labor positions, so groups like the Irish were slowly allowed to become “White” in order to offer these European immigrants/colonizers a pittance that would keep them from uniting with enslaved African people and Indigenous people.

From there, Whiteness was expanded again in the early-to-mid-20th century to include most Europeans and even to include Jews who, no matter where in Europe they were from, had been traditionally excluded from the “White” label.

The Wages of Whiteness

What this label offered was access: access to land (through things like the Land Grant Acts which was almost totally denied to anyone not considered White), access to education (both through better-funded public schools and the G.I. Bill, which was systematically denied to soldiers of Color), access to jobs (though anti-Irish and anti-Italian job discrimination did exist, it didn’t have the widespread impact that policies like Jim Crow did), and access to countless other little and big legs up in American life.

IrishNeedNotApply

Despite common refrains from modern White people of Irish descent, these signs were rare.

But Whiteness came with a cost.  Becoming White meant leaving behind the cultural heritage of our people so that we could access the economic benefits, sometimes ones desperately needed, of the “American Dream” (aka the “Dream of White Supremacy”).

There’s a reason that I don’t speak a word of Gaelic, Dutch, or German.  There’s a reason that I know next to nothing about the cultures from which my people came.  There’s a reason that I don’t know the true reasons for why my people fled the land they always knew to see opportunities as colonizers in North America.

That reason is Whiteness.

When we look at race through this context, it is easier to understand Whiteness as more than a racial identity: it’s a system of privilege and oppression better known and understood as White Supremacy.

Continue Reading

Advertisements

Lord “The Help” Me

Man . . . White people LOVE The Help.  I mean, I am sure some folks of Color also like the movie, but White folks are perhaps more kookoo for cocoa puffs over this movie as they were for The Blind Side.

And since the film has recently been released on DVD and is likely to be on a few Christmas lists, I thought I would offer my thoughts.

For a while I was overtly critical of The Help, but I hadn’t even seen the film, and I don’t think that’s too fair, so (like with the recent Breaking Dawn extravaganza), I saw The Help so that I could offer some critical analysis.

Now, my objections started before I even saw the film based on the author and her process. As a white woman, she did not overtly consult any women of color in the writing process, something I find extremely problematic considering she is trying (from a white perspective) to write from the perspective of black women in the 1960s. Further, she allegedly based one of her main characters (and presumably many of the others) on observation of her brother’s black maid and is now being sued for doing so.

If that is even remotely true, there is a tremendous irony considering that the main character, “Skeeter,” shares her profits from the book with the women who helped her create the book, yet Stockett has thus far refused to do so.  Stockett even justifies herself! “‘Southern women wear guilt like a piece of clothing we can’t do without. I don’t think I’ve apologized…for being White, but I very much have an apology on the tip of my tongue…whenever I think about what I’ve done. That I have written in in the voice of, really, our housekeeper Demetrie and that Ive tried to step into her shoes and imagine what she must’ve been feeling all those years. On one hand, i want to apologize for doing that and being so presumptive, but gosh, it’s so important that we do this in whatever manner.”

However, in the face of all this, I wanted to give the film a fair shake, so I went to see it.

For 146 minutes, I felt like I was taking crazy pills.

Continue Reading