Study: Whites Must Not Be Civil To Non-Whites (really!)

White Civility is Racist, Promoting White Supremacy and Whiteness
Evil, Evil, Evil)

Civility and White Institutional Presence: An Exploration of White Students' Understanding of Race-Talk at a Traditionally White Institution

ABSTRACT

In this study, the authors draw upon critical whiteness studies to explore how White students' understanding of race-talk within higher education (re)produces whiteness. Through an analysis of interview data, they generated 3 categories describing whiteness-informed civility (WIC): (a) WIC functions to create a good White identity, (b) WIC functions to erase racial identity, and (c) WIC functions to assert control of space. These thematic concepts show how WIC is characterized by logics of race-evasion, avoidance of race-talk, and exclusion of people of color. The authors conclude by offering ways for instructors to interrogate WIC through classroom practices informed by critical communication pedagogy.

…"Civility within higher education is a racialized, rather than universal, norm."

The authors (both white) have defined 3 categories of "civility" describing whiteness-informed civility (WIC):

(a) WIC functions to create a good White identity: I.e., treat with courtesy. This is bad because it promotes “Good Whiteness” and thus White Supremacy.

(b) WIC functions to erase racial identity: “I don’t see race; I see a person”. This is race-talk evasion, and that is Whiteness and White Supremacy.

(c) WIC functions to assert control of space. Segregation.

Civility is therefore a racist tactic used by whites to suppress/oppress non-whites. Apparently what is desired by these two white authors is blunt race-talk, which is not civil.

It is interesting that in all Leftist attacks on Whites and Whiteness, the criticisms leave no alternative for the white person to use. For example, if courtesy is not allowed, and ignoring race is not allowed, then the resulting “race-talk” when encountering a non-white must be non-courteous, and race-oriented.

Think about that the next time you encounter a POC (person of color). You must be rude and address that person’s race and zis/zer place in the hierarchy of man, based on skin tone (the only marker of race for the Left). Now that would certainly be an event to observe from a safe distance.

Now this: …"Civility within higher education is a racialized, rather than universal, norm."

As a white potentially encountering a non-white, I imagine that this is quite valid; at least within current cultural social connections race is hard to ignore. And perhaps civility is always “racialized” in that context. It certainly will be under the direction of these authors.

But whose fault is the perpetual class war between races? Class war is not a white value; class war is a Leftist value, and has been since the days of Democrat-dominated Slavery. And this entire “study” is following the skeletal Leftist narrative which demands that there be conflict engendered by whites against non-whites, and never peaceful community with non-whites. This study, by virtue of prejudicing the inputs, intends to show that there is no way around it; racism is a first principle of Whiteness, a Leftist condemnation of the souls of whites everywhere.

The rational error here is obvious: The original premise goes against the larger observation, which is that it is not – NOT – necessary to have “race-talk” with every “not my race” person, every time one meets one. In fact, this would be a disaster of the first order, especially given the conditions which the authors place on such race-talk contacts.

Further, the three “types of civility” are fully bogus. Types (a) and (b) are pegged as actual, genuine civility between the white and the non-white, which is condemned out-of-hand as promoting the white as a “good” white, which immediately connects imaginarily to White Supremacy.

So being a civil, “good” person is damned as a racist act of suppression/oppression by the white, against the beleaguered non-white.

As is all too common with Leftist projections, the unreasonable presuppositions are in place in order for the Left to place class condemnation on the selected Oppressor Class. In this instance, the whites have no recourse. Any and everything they do within the boundaries of this set of presuppositions is declared officially racist. Further, the consequential, if unmentioned, choice – rude race-talk – with all People of Color, in every encounter, is also racist.

Finally, it is apparent that rude race-talk is, in fact, what many campus radicals want: except they want to be the rude party, screaming "shut up and listen" while they spit expletives and hate in the faces of their victims. When one does listen, what one hears is eliminationist Marxist rhetoric in full hate mode, which cannot be hate speech because only whites can do that.

If the POC actually obtain their desire to eliminate or at least completely nullify the White race and Whiteness in general, what will remain is visible in the blue cities - Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore - where Leftism has ruled for decades. And of course in the No Go Zones of France, Germany, Sweden, Britain. Under Leftism, no options are pretty.