In the column “Western perspective is not culture,” (ODE, March 2) the author — whom it is not my intention to disparage — made the argument that education at the University is perpetuated through academic media that assume a “Caucasian perspective.”
The author states that, “College should be a place where students learn to identify with and understand many different people; only looking at the world from the Caucasian point of view (my emphasis) doesn’t challenge them enough to achieve this.”
He also states that, “Caucasians will receive a multitude of lectures telling them how to avoid being racist and how to cope with guilt, but the African-Americans, harbored by feelings of anger and oppression, the Latinos, tired of political alienation, or the Native Americans, demoralized by the near-depletion of their people, most likely will never receive any first-person acknowledgment or advice.”
In both of these supplied quotes, the author demonstrates a mentality that is simultaneously racist and frankly somewhat offensive in its audacity. I would like to posit a simple question: What is a “Caucasian perspective?” Is the author truly asserting that by virtue of a shared skin color, the University student born and raised in Oregon shares a common, inherent “perspective” with the University student born and raised in South Chicago? Is this not a racist assertion?
To maintain that skin color in and of itself bestows a “perspective” upon those who bear it is not only utterly fallacious and nonsensical, it is racist. The same is true for ethnicity. The author does not only imply this connection for Caucasians, he also audaciously groups African-Americans, Latinos and Native Americans together, assuming that, for example, the fact of being African-American means a student must be “harbored by feelings of anger and oppression.”
To think in such ways dissolves the uniqueness of the individual. It in fact alienates the African-American who may have always been respected by his white contemporaries and who does not harbor feelings of “anger and oppression.” It alienates the Caucasian who, having grown up in South Chicago, became intimately acquainted with racism directed at him, and who, by virtue of this background, may actually understand the effects of racism better than his African-American contemporaries. There is no such thing as a “Caucasian perspective,” and to posit the existence of one is an offense to white students who do not wish to be lumped together with all other whites in society simply because of something as trivial as their skin color.
Respect for the uniqueness of the individual is the essence of diversity. While the author seems to take issue with teaching styles that are executed with a “Caucasian” or “majority” perspective, I find myself at a loss to understand what exactly these perspectives are. Would he care to explain what he thinks is the “Caucasian perspective?” Does he deny that this is racist terminology?
I write a response to the article because, as a citizen of society, it pains me to see such thoughts expressed without challenge. Mankind is not composed of arbitrary groups whose superficial similarities connote inherent “perspectives” or world views. Mankind is composed of individuals; though some think alike, it is certainly not true that all who share certain physical characteristics can accurately be said to have a common “perspective.” Thinking of this type is virulent and ironically gives rise to a dampening of diversity, rather than amplification of and respect for the concept. I hope students will continue to write in and challenge views expressed that are offensive, even if they are espoused under the guise of liberalism and tolerance.
38 comments
White Pacifica Forum Members
Adolf Hitler
Bono
White anarchists
Johannes Brahms
Charles Manson
Thomas Jefferson
Glenn Beck
Pope John Paul IINeed I go on? You all seem to take it as a given that there is a 'perspective' that unites everyone on that list. Explain it. Spell it out. What are the assumptions shared by all those people, and by me?
The fact that you deny the existence of a white perspective towards society as a whole, which includes education, is proving that there IS a white perspective! It proves that everything you have been saying is a part of this white perspective. You are continuously defining it by denying its existence. WE ARE ALL CONDITIONED BY OUR ENVIRONMENT TO ACCEPT DIFFERENT NORMS AND VALUES AND BIASES! Our individual experiences are subject to the society in which they occur. I just don't understand how you can deny that white American society has a certain viewpoint, while I accept that Black American, Asian American, Hispanic American, Native American and White American society has a certain viewpoint on life and the issues associated with it? Yes we SHOULD without hesitation be judged by each other on an individual character basis. But that is not how it is, no matter how much you want or need to deny this reality. It is a fact of life. Again, can you really deny that we are not judged by the things that we cannot change about ourselves? Can you really deny that these born traits when in consideration with each groups past and present condition does not influence how they see the world? How they view their society, community, school, education? The majority always has the luxury of ignoring their own perspective, because more often than not, they write the rules. And when the rules are dictated by that group's norms and values and biases and traditions, that amenity of ignorance is used far too often. If you take for example the case of South Africa, where whites are at an extreme disadvantage because of their population proportion to blacks, you see them experiencing the same oppression and feelings of marginalization and lack of understanding of their situation. They feel unsafe in a country they have come to call their home. The government which is comprised of black politicians just tell them, well you can go somewhere else. But they can't because of immigration laws of other countries. They cannot vote in laws or new politicians to help their situation. Their situation which is exacerbated by the groupthink of the black majority.They are experiencing a role reversal from what Blacks experienced there and here. The point of this example is to say that I do not harbor any ill feelings towards Whites, that I don't think it is only Blacks who are oppressed. It is just that I have a problem with any person that denies that society has conditioned them in such a way to share the same points of veiw (whether conscious or sub conscious) with the rest of the group that they are a part of. People do come from different backgrounds, as is the case with people of African descent. But even if a black person knows what ethnic group their heritage derives, it is irrelevant in America because that person is still Black. The same is the case with white people. The same is true of Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans. Look at a college application or national survey. Do they ask, 'oh, are you from Japan or Vietnam or Mongolia?" NO. Do they care what tribe a Native American is from? Do they care if a hispanic person, white or non - white, is from Spain or Honduras or Mexico? No, they do not. It is because we generalize in the United States when dealing with racial and ethnic issues, truly. Maybe you are the rare exception to this. But again and please, do not deny that a white/caucasian perspective exists within the context of American society. Because that is what you are arguing after all right? And America is the context which Tyree is providing, correct?
THIS IS NOT ABOUT EUROPE! This is a discussion about universities in the UNITED STATES. NOT EUROPE. Consider the context. Also, White americans (This is probably different for 1st -2nd generation) by coming to America have become disconnected from their European ancestory. That is to say, white americans still claim their heritage, but more often than not, do not identify with the culture of that country intimately. So a person in the United States who is of German ancestry, is not going to have issues with a person who is of French ancestry because they are French. THIS IS NOT EUROPE.
In no way was I ever trying to make the struggle of Jewish people seem negligible. Nor was I saying that the struggle of Irish people in Britain and 19th century United States was easy, for example. What I urge you to consider is, what is being discussed is an American issue. Again, not to detract from the atrocities that happened in Europe, Jewish people and Irish people were never enslaved against their will ( not against their will because many Irish came over as indentured servants) like Black people. Jewish people were never lynched just because they were Jewish. This is only to say that what the original article was citing was the case of the United States. Jewish people and Irish people (for the sake of maintaining another example) were allowed to integrate in a much smoother fashion than Blacks. This, I think cannot be denied. Further, I do not consider you to be racist, just ignorant of other perspectives. I mentioned earlier that I am a Black man who grew up in a largely white city. However, what I did not mention was that I am half - white. I understand when it is said, can't we all just be judged on the individual basis? Wouldn't that solve the problems of intolerance? As it is so that I understand this point of view, I also know that it is flawed to assume that people can solely be judged on an individual basis. The reality is, human beings are social creatures defined by their societies' norms, traditions, values, etc. When a person looks at another person, many times they make assumptions about how the person looks, and then deduces how they might behave based on the attached cultural stereotypes. What I think Tyree is getting at with his article, and what I didn't really articulate in my previous post is that all races have a perspective and all races and all ethnic groups have different cultures. What is important is that we embrace those cultures and create a confidence in each culture to exist proudly within and without American borders. What often happens with the "caucasian perspective" is that it is almost a norm to expect every other culture to live by the standards of that point of view. That is, it is easy for a person who is white in America to say, hey lets judge each other on who we are, like Dr. King said, because society allows that person that luxury. While we can certainly all be judged by the content of our character, that content comes along with each person's cultural heritage. Again, this heritage may abide by different standards than the white American's standards. There is nothing wrong with the "caucasian perspective" other than it assumes everyone lives by the same standards culturally. What I urge is that you consider this. In my opinion, Tyree was not trying to demonize any white person, or make them feel guilty. I certainly wasn't attempting that. But we cannot forget about our past. These things (slavery, jim crow, etc) are going to be engrained in our culture for generations, just like the suffering of Jewish people has been. We can try to move on, but as the past defines each individual, it also defines a whole community, culture and society. Be considerate of the past, do not feel guilty, just be considerate. It is okay that the University has classes that teach from the "caucasian perspective", but it also needs to offer courses that consider other cultural viewpoints. I feel like you missed that completely.