Read: white people at TED were worried about being called racist because the black group raised a stink because the proposition of colorblindness would essentially take away the ability to leverage skin-related power and the privileges that lobbied for by DEI associated groups. ColemanтАЩs ideas (which are far less racist than what we have going on now) were dangerous because they indicate that power is for every person as persons, rather than the idea that all power must be ceded to those we decide to call victims. тАЬVictimsтАЭ and the тАЬhurtтАЭ are trying to maintain power through these ironically powerful statuses by any means necessary and itтАЩs not pretty.
Assuming a serious question, a serious response (based on being submerged in social justice and anti-racist culture [and yes perpetuating it, which I deeply regret now] for years):
Since there are examples of inequality of outcome in most parts of society based on race even after over 50 years of equality of law, there must be some other thing to work on (besides the law) to create equal outcomes. Leaving aside the facile arguments about not thinking everyone should be able to play in the NBA, the outcomes in important things like education and poverty and health and imprisonment are stark enough to at least beg the question of what's going on there, and given the racial history of our country, we should wonder if at least some of it is based on racism (against non-whites, and especially black people) that's still kind of baked into all of our institutions, formal and informal.
From that foundation, any explanation that "blames" people of color for the unequal outcomes is dangerous. For one, it gives credence to some really heinous (and still more widely held than most of us acknowledge) beliefs in the inherent inferiority of non-white "races." But for this context (how folks were "genuinely hurt"), it's also about how the "dream" of color-blindness (Dr. King's vision) didn't come true and how a focus on doing more than just changing the laws to not discriminate against blacks would be necessary to achieve true racial "equity" (equality of outcomes in things like housing, income/wealth, jobs, etc., via equality of access to resources, including being made whole for historical wrongs that are believed to be the reason there are current inequalities). Those institutions (formal and informal) would have to change.
And for various reasons (I still am examining this), the focus on institutions got morphed into a hyper-focus on the interpersonal, including "microaggressions." Yes, a black person may be "equal" on paper, but she has to deal with neverending interpersonal racism (anti-blackness, in the latest framing) and THAT (in addition to the historical and institutional stuff) explains racially disparate outcomes. Microaggressions, because they're not LITERAL violence and because the law is equal, are "literal violence" now. I.e., harmful. I.e., "genuinely hurt." Additionally, as a matter of persuasion for progressive whites (especially white women), the call to action in signing onto this ideology and its necessary policy changes is that people of colors, especially black people, are being HARMED by white supremacy on the daily, even if it's not from the law or "the law" (cops).
So I read that comment as the black staff at TED felt that what Coleman advocates for harms them as individual black people for whom their racial identity is very wound up in this particular political position and also harms them because it will be perceived as giving credence to white supremacist ideology (that explains racial differences by "inherent inferiority" of black people) and as giving ammunition to what they perceive as a very real, very dangerous movement to reinstitute (formally and informally) white supremacy (de jure and de facto).
Even if all of this were true, which I do not concede, trying to say that it is because of amorphous "white supremacy" which can only have meaning if there are ""white supremacists" advocating it it deflects accountability for the [perceptions of blacks that they are mistreated] from the entities and individuals who actually are responsible. Like oh say financial entities which financed slavery in that era and imposed redlining in the more modern era. Or insurance and real estate companies that profited from redlining. Or retail establishments that rewarded redlining by building in the favorable locals and profited therefrom. White people, like black people, are not monolithic. There are poor white people who have worked themselves to the bon, and have for generations, and they deserve better than to be told they are white supremacists just because of the color of their skin. Or that they owe black people anything. Those people actually have more in common with you as concerns mistreatment by and grievances against the controlling class - more than a few of whom are brown- and black-skinned at this point.
Oh please......instead of tying yourself in knots trying to argue that the only reason for unequal outcomes must be systemic racism, why not look at the cultural norms that lead many other people of color to succeed or even exceed (east asians) white equality? Immigrant cultures that start at the same line but value hard work, impulse control, personal accountability and education are very successful at pulling themselves out of poverty and realizing the American Dream.
How so can "many people be genuinely hurt" by Coleman's TED talk? I mean genuinely hurt?
Read: white people at TED were worried about being called racist because the black group raised a stink because the proposition of colorblindness would essentially take away the ability to leverage skin-related power and the privileges that lobbied for by DEI associated groups. ColemanтАЩs ideas (which are far less racist than what we have going on now) were dangerous because they indicate that power is for every person as persons, rather than the idea that all power must be ceded to those we decide to call victims. тАЬVictimsтАЭ and the тАЬhurtтАЭ are trying to maintain power through these ironically powerful statuses by any means necessary and itтАЩs not pretty.
Assuming a serious question, a serious response (based on being submerged in social justice and anti-racist culture [and yes perpetuating it, which I deeply regret now] for years):
Since there are examples of inequality of outcome in most parts of society based on race even after over 50 years of equality of law, there must be some other thing to work on (besides the law) to create equal outcomes. Leaving aside the facile arguments about not thinking everyone should be able to play in the NBA, the outcomes in important things like education and poverty and health and imprisonment are stark enough to at least beg the question of what's going on there, and given the racial history of our country, we should wonder if at least some of it is based on racism (against non-whites, and especially black people) that's still kind of baked into all of our institutions, formal and informal.
From that foundation, any explanation that "blames" people of color for the unequal outcomes is dangerous. For one, it gives credence to some really heinous (and still more widely held than most of us acknowledge) beliefs in the inherent inferiority of non-white "races." But for this context (how folks were "genuinely hurt"), it's also about how the "dream" of color-blindness (Dr. King's vision) didn't come true and how a focus on doing more than just changing the laws to not discriminate against blacks would be necessary to achieve true racial "equity" (equality of outcomes in things like housing, income/wealth, jobs, etc., via equality of access to resources, including being made whole for historical wrongs that are believed to be the reason there are current inequalities). Those institutions (formal and informal) would have to change.
And for various reasons (I still am examining this), the focus on institutions got morphed into a hyper-focus on the interpersonal, including "microaggressions." Yes, a black person may be "equal" on paper, but she has to deal with neverending interpersonal racism (anti-blackness, in the latest framing) and THAT (in addition to the historical and institutional stuff) explains racially disparate outcomes. Microaggressions, because they're not LITERAL violence and because the law is equal, are "literal violence" now. I.e., harmful. I.e., "genuinely hurt." Additionally, as a matter of persuasion for progressive whites (especially white women), the call to action in signing onto this ideology and its necessary policy changes is that people of colors, especially black people, are being HARMED by white supremacy on the daily, even if it's not from the law or "the law" (cops).
So I read that comment as the black staff at TED felt that what Coleman advocates for harms them as individual black people for whom their racial identity is very wound up in this particular political position and also harms them because it will be perceived as giving credence to white supremacist ideology (that explains racial differences by "inherent inferiority" of black people) and as giving ammunition to what they perceive as a very real, very dangerous movement to reinstitute (formally and informally) white supremacy (de jure and de facto).
Even if all of this were true, which I do not concede, trying to say that it is because of amorphous "white supremacy" which can only have meaning if there are ""white supremacists" advocating it it deflects accountability for the [perceptions of blacks that they are mistreated] from the entities and individuals who actually are responsible. Like oh say financial entities which financed slavery in that era and imposed redlining in the more modern era. Or insurance and real estate companies that profited from redlining. Or retail establishments that rewarded redlining by building in the favorable locals and profited therefrom. White people, like black people, are not monolithic. There are poor white people who have worked themselves to the bon, and have for generations, and they deserve better than to be told they are white supremacists just because of the color of their skin. Or that they owe black people anything. Those people actually have more in common with you as concerns mistreatment by and grievances against the controlling class - more than a few of whom are brown- and black-skinned at this point.
Oh please......instead of tying yourself in knots trying to argue that the only reason for unequal outcomes must be systemic racism, why not look at the cultural norms that lead many other people of color to succeed or even exceed (east asians) white equality? Immigrant cultures that start at the same line but value hard work, impulse control, personal accountability and education are very successful at pulling themselves out of poverty and realizing the American Dream.
Recent black African immigrants as a group also do very well in the US.
I think when some people say they are hurt it is their reaction to someone disagreeing with them. Oh, the humanity!
In this day and age EVERYONE is offended and hurt. Sigh. People need to toughen up a bit.
Exactly. I predicted this would happen back when "political correctness" was rolled out.
A key point.
I think the closest integer to that would be zero.
They can't. It's baloney,.