The Responsibility of Language
Saying that Black people are OD'ing on racism is irresponsible and dangerous
My conversation last evening with Dr. John McWhorter, the University of British Columbia’s The School of Public Policy and Global Affairs was challenging for so many reasons. Watch the full video and interview (34:10) here.
While there were many times John and I agreed and disagreed, I found myself wanting to push his thinking more. However, that was not my job as moderator. So, I will use this opportunity to express some challenges I had with the conversation.
We did not find common ground related to the creation of space on university campuses for students from historically marginalized or banned communities (i.e Black and Indigenous learner). I think such spaces are critical and important. John disagreed. However, in that disagreement he described learners as being melodramatic in asking for the space. His language is highly problematic. There is a responsibility that comes with the power and privilege to use our voices in various structures. We should choose our words wisely.
In describing the centering of racism and white supremacy in conversations about making systemic change in institutions, John said that Black people are OD’ing (overdosing) on racism. What the actual fuck? If the systems that we operate in were built on racism and other forms of discrimination, and continue to operate on the legacy of the racism and discrimination, which result in poorer health outcomes (stemming from the racist “research” of people like Samuel Cartwright or Marion Simms), over incarceration of Black and Indigenous people (stemming from share-cropping systems, the War on Crime, and the War on Drugs) , and the inability to build intergenerational wealth (stemming from policies like redlining etc.), shouldn’t we talk about racism when we talk about the harms these systems continue to place on Black, Indigenous and other communities of colour? John, if we are overdosing on racism (the drug), it is because the systems that we operate in are the biggest drug dealers of all time.
John also utilizes a useless analogy when describing the history of racism as akin to a community that only built buildings with two-stories. Irrespective of the increase in population size, the residents of the community refused to build taller buildings to accommodate the growth. Of course, he stated, there would be disease, infestations etc. that would occur. Then if someone went to the hospital because of wounds developed because of living in those conditions, he indicated that people (like those who talk about racism all the time) will point to the altitude as the problem (i.e. the low buildings), instead of the current situation related to the infestation. This oversimplification and poorly thought through analogy was met with some cheers from four people in the crowd. However, I would challenge John to understand that while people may say that “altitude” or “infestation” is the problem, those with the responsibility to diagnose the problem of the wounds, should not only be assessing the wound itself (which is the symptom), but exploring where it came from, and treating the disease. Otherwise the wounds will continue to appear. We must understand the disease, and where it came from, in order to root it out, and prevent further symptoms.
So while I thank John for expressing his candid thoughts, using his words to further disenfranchise learners and others, who are vulnerable in these spaces, is irresponsible. Moreover, emboldening the four people (I don’t care how small that number is), in the crowd who clapped at his responses, is dangerous.
In summary, it's the incomplete understanding of racism, gentrification, redlining and the overload of the prison pipeline; which systems are based on forced enslavement and lacking the ability to see the true picture. And by those who should be able to redefine a broken, biased and dated operation that is worthless.