The "Giddy Multitude"

In the Takaki reading, The “Giddy Multitude,” the author’s thesis is that blacks and whites were once both able to be slaves and often joined together as one force to fight against such a practice.

This piece of writing explains how the Tempest’s Caliban was reconsidered to be a black man instead of a Native American. He was dark in complexion, brutish, belonged to a vile race, and a beast…just as Africans were described at the time. He was also known as a slave and a monster, and appeared at a time when there began to be associations between apes and Africans. However, although many people are unaware, white people were also considered servants when slavery was first introduced in the Americas. This equal treatment of slaves did not last long and soon white servants were not treated as harshly as those that were black. If they would runaway, their punishment would not be as severe as that of a black servant that did the same. Those Africans that did runaway often received punishment of being named a slave for life, having to labor for the rest of their natural life. Whites, on the other hand, were merely sentenced to one more year of enslavement or some punishment of the sort. Many unhappy white and black slaves, as well as those who were unsatisfied with the open promises of the New World, ended up joining together, known as the ‘giddy multitude,’ that ended up even organizing a revolt against such treatment. While blacks were punished for the revolt, whites ended up being excused from this treatment. After this unsuccessful rebellion, organized by landowner Nathaniel Bacon, slavery took a turn for the worse.

One question I have about the piece is why how those like Thomas Jefferson could be so hypocritical in what their motives were. He was a slave-owner himself and continued to profit off his land and production. However, he also admitted to wanting to abolish slavery sometime in his life, promising that as soon as his debts were paid off (by way of the work of slaves), he would work on freeing his slaves and returning to a sense of justice for everyone. While he practiced such means, he also claimed to believe that slavery deprived black of their liberty and should be abolished. It is hard to understand how someone practicing slavery and treating his own slaves with extreme cruelty, could at the same time convince people that slavery needed to end.

While quite lengthy for the information it presented, I enjoyed this reading. I particularly liked how Takaki explained the occurrences of whites in slavery when the practice first began. I was never aware that whites were once treated the same while they were servants and how abruptly the idea was turned around to be focused more on blacks.

"Getting Off the Hook: Denial and Resistance"

In “Getting Off the Hook: Denial and Resistance,” Allan Johnson’s thesis is that we as a society are in denial that we have anything to do with any past or present problems that are affecting our world, especially in relation to the treatment of certain social classes.

Johnson explains that with this denial, people of privileged groups often make themselves seem as if they are worse off than thos of other subordinate groups. While they hardly know what they are talking about in the first place because they don’t know what it is like to be part of the other class, they are once again using their privilege to get themselves off of the hook. Another way that people of privileged groups attempt to get themselves off the hook is by blaming the victim. A popular assumption is that if the other group was more like themselves, then they wouldn’t be in the position that they are in today. In addition, it is common for this privileged group to think that the other group would prefer the situation the way it is, that they want to be segregated so that they are with their own kind or prefer the way they are treated because it is all they know. We also tend to make up excuses for ourselves, making it seem as if we “didn’t mean something” we say if it offends someone of another group or class. Or we use the excuse that we won’t want to worry about it or, as Johnson explains, “If we use an individualistic model of the world, the answer is that people are callous or uncaring or prejudiced or too busy to bother with paying attention to their actions.” According to the article, these are just a few of the ways that people in privileged, more fortunate groups are trying to not take the blame for actions of their kind that they may very well have had an influence on, either by their actions or lack of action.

I think that Johnson is a little strong in his opinions in this article. It seems as if he is blaming everyone for trying to hide the fact that they have anything to do with prejudices or poor treatment of others. He says that “we don’t know what we are talking about” and that we cannot judge how much of a role we play in the lives of the oppressed because we have never lived as them. However, not everyone know enough to do something about such problems or has the resources to do so. In addition, not everyone will deny the fact that they are part of the problem because of their lack of participation in fixing the problem. We therefore cannot judge those of the privileged groups even more just because they are part of that group.

This article was an interesting one in that it explained the various ways people try and get off the hook for the actions of themselves or of the group that they belong to in their society. However, some of Johnson’s opinions were a little too strong and he did not seem open-minded to how individuals of a group might feel. He made it seem as if we all should feel horrible for how groups opposite or lower than us are treated since we aren’t treated the same way and have to go through the same things. While he has a good point to an extent, he shouldn’t judge each person based on the actions of the group.

"What it All Has to Do with Us"

In “What it All Has to Do with Us,” Allan Johnson’s thesis is that individualistic thinking causes a lot of problems that lead to the trouble surrounding privilege, power, and difference.

Accoding to this reading many people are often even afraid to talk about problems involving racism and unfair treatment because they dread the blame and anger that often come with these topics. For instance, a white person may feel uncomfortable talking to a black person about slavery due to there being an underlying blame from occurrences of slavery that the white person had absolutely nothing to do with many years ago. Since “We live in a society that encourages us to think that the social world begins and ends with individuals,” we are also bound to be blind to the mere existence of privilege, because it has nothing to do with individuals, but with the social categories we end up in. Contrary to this belief, social life occurs only as we participate in social systems, by learning to participate in social life from families, schools, religion, etc. that make up our personal identity as well as by participating in these systems to make them occur in the first place. Also discussed is the idea that we choose to take paths of least resistance in our everyday lives to avoid being looked at as abnormal by the rest of society. For example, when standing in an elevator, a person would not normally stand with their back facing the door because this would be a path of greater resistance and he or she may be afraid of what would happen if they did. “What we experience as social life happens through ha complex dynamic between systems…and the choices people make as they participate in them and helpt make them happen.”

I agree with Johnson in that we often think of ourselves in an individualistic way, instead of the social causes of the problems in the world today. For example, women often think that since men have a name for themselves as being “sexist pigs,” then all men must be this way. This is the same with aspects of slavery as well as racism and religions. Just because of a few bad decisions by people of a certain group does not mean that everyone else in that particular group behave or think the same way. This individualistic way of thinking splits the world up into different kinds of people (good and bad) and, in effect, allows us to categorize people unfairly.

This article was a commendable one in that it pointed out many important concepts regarding the individualistic thinking of people in our society. People are afraid to be different than the rest of society because of the treatment they may experience if they go out of their normal boundaries. Instead, we choose to take the “path of least resistance” when it comes to making decisions and stay in the realms of what society deems to be normal. I think Johnson states it perfectly when he says that the “trouble around privilege and oppression is so pervasive, so long-standing, so huge in its consequences for so many millions of people that it can’t be written off as the misguided doings of a small percentage of people with personality problems.” Instead of blaming the few people who have caused such misleading stereotypes, we choose to blame the group as a whole.

Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination

In “Capitalism, Class, and the Matrix of Domination,” Allan Johnson’s thesis is that the economy and capitalism have much to do with white racism and the repercussions of such a concept.

Johnson explains that white racism appeared along with the expansion of capitalism as an economic system, playing a major role in white privilege. The main goal of capitalism has always been to turn money into more money. Many are willing to do whatever it takes to reach this goal, including anything from causing pollution, increases of tobacco and alcohol usage, or using slavery. Since capitalists today have to pay their workers for their time and production, they often look to hire those in minority groups. Those who are in these minority groups or of a lower class end up having to work for such capitalists because they have no other choice. The fact is that they work for low pay and earn as much of a living as they can or just do not work at all. Capitalists have no problem with this, as they aim to have a higher production without paying as much. In addition, another new strategy to improve production is to move it to outside countries in which people are willing to work for less. With 10% of the American population holding more than two-thirds of the wealth, these “patterns of inequality result from and perpetuate a class system based on widening gaps in income, wealth, and power between those on top and everyone below them.” This fact causes a form of racism (and sexism) that is hard to ignore when it’s all around us in our economy, both in the past and in the present.

I agree with Johnson in that whites seem to have “developed the idea of whiteness to define a privileged social category elevated above everyone who wasn’t included in it” in order to justify their oppression of lower classes. We feel as though we are superior to other classes and that we will prosper above them in the working world. This is evident in the world today as well as everyday life. Although it is not allowable to hire based on race, we see such occurrences all the time. Not only are whites more commonly hired for higher positioned jobs, but lower classes are hired for jobs that come with less pay. As Johnson states, “The oppressed condition of blacks and other racial minorities encourages them to work for wages that are lower than what most whites will accept.” We think that just because we are white means that we are above the rest in standards, no matter our income.

I think this article was a reputable one in that it explains what many of us are afraid to admit. We don’t see the reality that we are able to acquire better jobs and lifestyles merely because of the fact that our skin is white. This has been embedded in our heads from past generations and seems to be all we know. And since this racism had much to do with other means of oppression, it may never be erased. As Johnson ends his piece, “We won’t get rid of racism, in other words, without doing something about sexism and classism, because the system that produces the one also produces the others and connects them.”

Privilege, Oppression, and Difference

In “Privilege, Oppression, and Difference,” Allan G. Johnson’s thesis is that the “trouble that surrounds difference is really about privilege and power.

This reading explains how we are so focused on difference as being the problem of the existence of unfair treatment of certain groups in our world today. The author explains that the problem is not of difference, but of privilege and the power that comes along with that privilege. There is a natural assumption that people are afraid of what they do not know or understand about a group of people while, in reality, we are afraid of only what we think we know about that particular group. In addition, we characterize others by their outer characteristics, most of the time ones they cannot change. Examples of such are their ethnicity, race, age, and gender. The social reality is that we are organized in ways to encourage people to use differences as a way to include and exclude, or reward or punish. These perceptions are so difficult to control because it is what we are taught and therefore form quick impressions of one’s status. For instance, in our culture, if a baby is born with a mixture of gender characteristics, they are surgically altered to fit in with the notion of male or female. In contrast, Native Americans in such a situation would just place the baby in another category, called nadle, or would be able to pick their gender. Also, the author reinforces the fact that the idea of people being black and white is falsified, that there is really no such thing. For instance, in Africa, a man or woman would not think of themselves as black, but African. They do not understand the meaning of being black and everything that comes with it until they are placed in an environment like America where we use these labels. The treatment people receive based on such labels is a great example of how some are more privileged than others.

I agree with the author when he states that “When people heard that they belong to a privileged group or benefit from something like ‘white privilege’ or ‘male privilege,’ they don’t get it, or they feel angry and defensive about what they do get.” It is true that we have a bad habit of being ignorant to the fact that we are more privileged than others due mainly to those characteristics of ourselves that are unearned. We are still blind to the fact that being white is looked at as being pure and that we have privileges that come along with such a title. As Johnson says, “white privilege gives whites little reason to pay attention to African Americans or how white privilege affects them.” The same is true with being male and female and any other social categories—that we are born with differences and automatically accept the stereotypes that come with them.

I think that this article had a lot of good points in it, especially with the idea of people being blind to the realization of how privileged they really are and for what reasons. It makes sense that “The ease of not being aware of privilege is an aspect of privilege itself, what some call ‘the luxury of obliviousness.’” We gain advantage over others for unfair reasons and are often not even thankful for this privilege. People need to be more accepting of the many differences we hold and not place judgment on those who are in fact different than themselves.

"Race: The Power of an Illusion: The Difference Between Us

In the video screening, “Race: The Power of an Illusion: The House We Live In,” the creator’s thesis is that race is not based on one’s physical appearance and characteristics, but on the laws and practices that affect their life based on the differences between themselves and people of other backgrounds.

The producer of this screening explains the notion that people think that race is based on one’s physical features and these characteristics are what differentiates them from other people. The average person thinks that by looking at a person’s outside appearance, they are also able to understand more about that person. However, according to the video, “Race is not a level of biological division that we find in anatomically modern humans.” It is not something you see for the fact that there are no subspecies of human beings. People of other races, different from what we categorize as whites, are looked at as inferior, such as those who are Mexican, African, or of Chinese descent. People of such backgrounds are those who often hold the worst jobs with the lowest pay. This is not because they can not handle a better job, but because sometimes they are not offered or able to get a job that is of higher standards due to their race. Those immigrants who enter America, in the past and to this date, were thought of as different because of biology, that it was a destiny for them to be of lower class. Even white people who practiced uncommon or frowned-upon religions were thought of as “in-between” people, that they weren’t quite the same as whites. These thoughts, while not as profound as in the past, are still common today and seen in our society in many ways.

One question to think about when it comes to the argument of there still being prejudices revolving around race today as in the past is, will these thoughts and inequalities ever disappear? Sadly, I do not think that they will. As the screening discusses how unfair life has been in the past for races of inferiority, this will probably be the case in the future as well. Although these thoughts have somewhat improved over the years, I don’t think it is possible that they may altogether be erased. The unfair categorization of people of different races is in our ancestry and has been past down from generation to generation, and will continue to do so to generations in the future.

I think this was a great screening in that it provided a good look of how people have been treated in America for years past. It did not only give details of one race or group of people, but of many. It was beneficial how the producer explained the unfair conditions for people of inferior races or different religions and the gradual, yet not significant, improvements over the years. I also enjoyed the way the producer included the idea of the melting pot and how, according to sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, people of different races “could be used as wood to start the fire to heat the pot, but could not be used as material to be melted into the pot,” due to their inferior status.