/lit/ - Literature

>>18348771
Here's a pretty short clip of John McWhorter criticizing it: https://youtu.be/-tjgXQDyqno

>>18348771

>>18348771
Have you ever read White Fragility? It doesn't have any academic citations. There's nothing to debunk. There's a reason why amazon removed the free preview, because if you could look at the first page you'd see how all its arguments are rooted in feelings.

you're obviously a right winger but the left-wing podcast chapo trap house has a pretty good episode breaking it down. The fails on its own terms and doesn't purport to solve racism so much as to give employers an out when it happens in the workplace. Diangelo is concerned with racism only insofar as people keep bringing it up. Also notice that she gets paid far more than black or male anti-racism speakers. She and her book are really a laboratory-created example of how white women are the lynchpin (eh?) of white supremacy. If you (the reader, probably not the fash op) want an actually treatment on anti-racism check out The Man-Not by Tommy Curry, or the Psychopathic Racial Personality by Bobby Wright

>>18348810
>chapo
neck yourself

>>18348810
>Also notice that she gets paid far more than black or male anti-racism speakers.
She probably shows up on time.

>>18348791
I don't really need to read it to be able to diagnose the book as anti-white. I've read snippets and passages but the whole premise is just straight wrong.

Whites aren't fragile. In fact, they are the least fragile race that has ever existed. In-group bias studies show this. White countries are the most multiracial countries that have ever existed. Whites are simply too pathologically altruistic.

I'd argue whites aren't fragile enough. They are being demographically replaced and most of them don't give a shit.

>>18348815
and yet you made this thread. curious

>>18348810
It reminds me of a lot of the mainstream treatment of environmentalism and climate change, where the emphasis is usually placed on individuals rectifying their behavior and being made to feel guilty for not doing so, rather than going after the corporations actually responsible for the vast majority of pollution, emissions, etc. Books like White Fragility seem to do something similar by emphasizing the responsibility of individual white people to "educate" themselves and "do better" in their interpersonal lives, without focusing on more systemic things that actually matter and negatively affect black people, regarding the justice system for example. It's also why corporations and centrists love it, because it's a way to appear woke and progressive without committing yourself to meaningful change or anything too controversial/radical

>>18348817
I made the thread to get some critiques of the book. The book is obviously retarded but I just want something to send over to someone that actually likes it.

>https://musaalgharbi.com/2020/09/16/diversity-important-related-training-terrible/

It doesn’t debunk it because that’s impossible, no matter how much you say to a relativist that objectively, actually here’s why you’re empirically wrong, they will always respond ‘and that’s your opinion”.

But this shows that it doesn’t work, and actually makes things worse. They’re grifters

>>18348817
Top teir fishbrain post

>>18348828
Under liberalism the individual is both enshrined as a moral agent responsible for his own behavior and also weakened by his dissociation from any tradition, culture, or institution; therefore every minor failing like not sorting the recycling correctly or being aware of racial crime statistics is of grave importance, yet he is powerless to affect systemic change and must be totally dependent on the state to do so for him.

>>18348810
Thanks, but no thanks. I'm not looking for more leftist bullshit that ignores evolutionary biology and ethnocentrism.

>>18348845
lmao

>>18348843
Yeah, but the individual is supposed to be able to, in aggregate, motivate the invisible hand and create forces to abjure detrimental effects. I'll give you the voting as an illusion, but the capital motive places responsibility directly in the hands of consumers in a truly liberal economy; we're far removed from that though. I believe the argument would stand, that by responsible capital allocation, the individual in aggregate does have the power to alter the face of the race. Ultimately, what we see, is that the largely automatic processes driven by the social aggregate is indifferent.

>>18348828
>without focusing on more systemic things that actually matter and negatively affect black people
This is an interesting topic. I've delved into it a little, and from what I've seen the populations of minorities tend to concentrate. Black Americans so happen to be concentrated into regions where there is low pay. I'm under the impression that this generates a lot of perverse statistics. If you take 13% of people and they just so happen to inhabit the poorest parts of the country, naturally you'll have statistics that show poorer people. And there's a lot of cultural factors confounding the whole debate too, last I checked the topic of criminal enterprise and drug use were somewhat debated but favored the "poverty increases crime and drug use incidence" and so now you've got a seriously distorted perspective. This is exacerbated by the media, both news media and popular culture. News media constantly riffing on race, and popular media putting some of the most antisocial and artless content out for consumption which produces a negative stereotype of blacks, and there are plenty of places I've been and just from what I've said, that evince the idea that a lot of Americans seldom have contact with blacks and so this preconception is carried at length possibly to the point of crystallization.

All these misconceptions feedback into one another, blacks are afraid of whites, and whites afraid of blacks. Moving into possibly hostile predominately white communities and leaving behind Detroit for some job you're under the impression the white boss will pull from beneath you loses its appeal pretty quickly. White people who see shithead rappers vomitting up hyperviolent garbage, while the news media reports crime, and highlights the hyperbolic vocal minority (which alienates people), efface any goodwill that they might develop in a natural state. Of course there's countless variances on this from one person to another, but I think the majority of "systemic" racism comes from statistical aberrations found in a concentrated minority and it's leveraged by everything else.

bruh just read it. the arguments are so childish anyone could do it.
>disagreeing with me means im right
its something a toddler would write.

>>18348810
The scary thing is when you consider that most people like this, its only a matter of what culture they inhabit. Just stick them in the right place and anyone is gonna start having a fucking seizure because they heard someone has been saying nigger in private.

>>18349420
Yes its just a intellectual sounding version of saying "u mad"
I don't know how you could talk to someone who is taken in by this about any subject.

>>18348771
It's a Kafka trap. Just sit them down and keep asking them to explain it to you and they will notice how they're contorting themselves into knots and they will feel stupid.

>>18348771
If you engage with this book, you already lost.
It was a bait from the start.
She doesn't need to dictate the opinions that she wants you to hold. It's enough that she dictates the topic that is discussed in the first place.

Transcend it.

>>18348829
>Please spoonfeed me critiques of a book I haven't read so that I can pretend I'm smart for my friends

Link related:

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2020/08/02/review-of-robin-diangelos-white-fragility/

>>18349271
But in practice political changes of the last century have either come from powerful monied individuals (Soros, individuals funding NGOs etc), collective political action or has been a result of productive processes that are animated by forces other than people (women in the workplace). The only one of these that your average guy can partake in requires a level of sacrifice for collective goals (doing boring stuff like phone banking, organising other people etc)

>>18348771
>why it's so hard for white people to talk about racism
For it being so hard I sure see whites talking about racism endlessly in every form of media for the last decade

>>18348771
There's nothing to debunk though. That's the problem. It's just the author projecting her own insecurities and reservations about minorities onto other people. That's all it is. It's weirdly racist against white people in that sense, since it's her just generalizing her own experience of "fragility" onto everybody.

>>18348771
Why do you keep making these type of threads.

>>18348810
>fash
Kys. Go bash the fash somewhere else.

We will never reach the next phase of our evolution if we keep avoiding the elephant in the room, mainly that white people are clearly the master race.

>>18349587
>If you engage with this book, you already lost.
>It was a bait from the start.
>She doesn't need to dictate the opinions that she wants you to hold. It's enough that she dictates the topic that is discussed in the first place.
I have come across this in so many interactions. How do you avoid this?

>>18348810
>She and her book are really a laboratory-created example of how white women are the lynchpin (eh?) of white supremacy
No one is worse than white women when it comes to racism.

>>18348813
keked

>>18350446
No one I know talks about crap like this. Just go somewhere else, bring up another topic, or straight out say you'd rather not discuss the book.

>>18350595
Its not the subject, I've just been around a lot of people who instead of having an honest discussion try to lead it into a place where they can bamboozle you.

So im guessing perhaps your advice still stands: go somewhere else, or express the I want t talk about something else and let that be the change of subject.

I remember when the regime was giving this away for free on Amazon after George Floyd died of an overdose. You're not going to reason with the people who are influenced by this shit. In order to change their mind you must impose your will on them the same way the regime currently does.

>>18350605
>Its not the subject, I've just been around a lot of people who instead of having an honest discussion try to lead it into a place where they can bamboozle you.
Stop talking to them. This is the solution to all your problems. Just stop talking to those people.
>>18350656
>I remember when the regime was giving this away for free on Amazon after George Floyd died of an overdose.
That happened?

>>18350691
>Just stop talking to those people.
Yea

It's funny because this thread is littered with white fragility. She predicts how white folk will react to this information and general conversations about race. You all react the same way every time

>>18350723
Yes, we're very impressed. Who could expect negative reactions from a race you disparage but the most clever among us?

>>18348771
> debunking a mind virus with facts
Anon, are you serious?

Mind viruses can only be combated by weapons-grade memes, not "bunks" and "debunks".

>>18350723
>Predict people will react negatively to random accusations
>People react negatively to random accuration
>Look at me, I was right all along! Checkmate racists!

>>18348771
This is a more general debunking of the idea of 'white privilege' https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/december-2019/no-need-to-plead-guilty/

Also show them this lol https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/30/white-liberals-dumb-themselves-down-when-they-speak-black-people-new-study-contends/

I think the issue with debunking it is that people tend to approach it by claiming that they’re not fragile rather than questioning why this fragility is bad in the first place. It seems to me that what she refers to as fragility is the response of a person who has any sense of dignity or self respect, and that the larger goal of her program is to pathologize what can only be thought of as perfectly healthy behavior.

>>18348771
Can't you come up with any criticism for yourself?