|
Worship of the written word shows up as:
|
|
Antidotes to worship of the written word include:
|
|
I want to acknowledge that this characteristic is one that angers many people who believe that I am saying that worship of the written word is the same as the ability to write well. They claim I am implying that BIPOC people and communities cannot achieve a high standard of written expression (whatever standard of "high" might be in the reader's mind). They believe I am suggesting that if worshipping the written word is a white supremacy culture value, then only white people are capable of writing well. This is not what I mean. This characteristic has to do with how white supremacy culture requires things to be written down, on its own terms, in order to preserve power.
For example: The U.S. invaded Mexico in 1846 to start what would become known as the Mexican-American War; the War ended with the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo two years later. The treaty transferred over 55% of Mexican land to the U.S. (present-day Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas, and parts of Colorado, Nevada, and Utah). The treaty promised to protect the lands, language and culture of the Mexican people and communities living in the ceded territory, but Congress substituted a “Protocol,” which required people of Mexican heritage to prove "legitimate" title to their lands in court. Unable to provide proof in a culture that did not record land transactions, the “Protocol” became the legal basis for white settlers to claim rights to and seize land from Mexicans in these territories. Our history is replete with the theft of land, of bodies, of culture, of skin and blood and ancestry through manipulation of the written word. For another example: In order for any of us to access resources, and particularly for those who are poor or working class, we are required to fill out endless forms that we did not design and did not have any say in designing. These forms do not reflect the complexity and richness of who we are. Yet we are constantly told that if we do not provide information on the forms, then we will not be able to access the resources that may or may not be available to us. Whoever and whatever we might actually want to share about ourselves does not matter (or even exist). The wealthier and whiter and more cisgender male we are, the less we have to account for ourselves on other peoples' terms, in writing (or at all). The wealthier and whiter and more cisgender male we are, the more we can count on legally written words to protect our interests, in large part because we have more power to determine what the legally written words will be. A final example: I am often asked to cite the sources that I used to write the article on which this website is based. The request often comes from people with less power who are trying to use the article to generate conversation and action towards a racial equity commitment in their organizations or communities. They want to know if I can provide citations or sources so the article will have more legitimacy to those in power. I get this request so often that I have created a one-pager (see below) to send in response. The underlying assumption is that if a written piece reflects some level of wisdom, lived experience, or "other" world view that is not "properly" vetted, then that piece has little or no value to those who consider themselves the gatekeepers of legitimate knowledge. There are so many ways of knowing; writing them down according to a single grammatical standard with a singular set of rules about what makes that knowledge "legitimate" is one of many ways to erase and control information, culture, wisdom, knowing, insight, intuition. Worship of the written word has nothing to do with the ability to write well and writing well comes in a wide range of approaches, styles, languages. Those who engage in repeated code switching understand this very well. |
|
|
I wrote the White Supremacy Characteristics article in 1999 after a series of serendipitous events. I had just attended a dismantling racism workshop sponsored by The Peoples’ Institute for Survival and Beyond, a collaborative of brilliant educators who had been offering anti-racism teaching and training for many years at that point. I was a teacher and trainer myself and excited for the opportunity to sit in on another of The Peoples’ Institute workshops because every time I do I inevitably learn something new and deeper.
On the night I wrote the first draft, I arrived back to my apartment in a frustrated lather about a meeting I had just attended, a meeting where many of the characteristics named in the article kept showing up. I sat at my computer in a quiet rage. The words poured out. This is the one and only time I can claim to understand the idea of something “writing itself.” I operated mostly as a vessel and the words came through me rather than from me. I then began to share what I had written with some of my mentors and colleagues; their names are credited at the beginning of the article. In particular, Daniel Buford, a Peoples’ Institute trainer, influenced a lot of what was written with his profound lecture on linguistic racism at the workshop. Because the first drafts named only the characteristics, my mentor Sharon Martinas, who was then running the Challenging White Supremacy workshops in the Bay area, urged me to offer antidotes. She is the reason I offer those. I then thought about the reading and research that had played a role in my understanding of what I was writing and those sources are listed at the end of the article. This article was not the result of research. This article came through me as the result of my years of work as an anti-racism teacher and trainer, my collaboration with brilliant and wise colleagues, the serendipity of being in the right place at the right time, and whatever forces moved me to put the words on the page. If you need a highly researched article to believe what you are reading, I will simply suggest there are now literally hundreds if not thousands of researched sources that support the truth of the toxicity of white supremacy culture. I will also say that the article has proven its value in its wide and prevalent use, which suggests that it is speaking to many of us who are navigating this culture. I will also add that many, many people have taken the article, adapted it, revised it, added to it, made a zine out of it, applied it specifically to their field or community, and made it their own. I am absolutely thrilled about this and some of those adaptations, revisions, and creative manifestations of the original work are offered on the AND ... page on this website. There are many ways to know. Cited research is not the only source of wisdom. I am not claiming to be wise so much as I am claiming that we benefit when we open ourselves to the idea that our wisdom can come from many sources and in many ways. May you find the article of benefit. |
|
|
One of the ways that the written word is used to perpetuate and reproduce white supremacy and racism is through use of the passive voice. Paul Kivel, in his groundbreaking work Living in the Shadow of the Cross, talks about how dominant western Christianity employed and employs the passive voice to strip people of power and agency.
He writes (Living in the Shadow of the Cross, p. 18-19): Dominant Western Christianity uses another major linguistic device to cover its violence and preserve its seemingly benevolent stature: the passive voice, used in two different ways to mask power relationships and agency. In the first way, language hides or obscures actual histories of violence through the use of such phrases as "Native American populations declined" (obscuring the US government's role, with its vigorous policy of ridding the land of Indians, even, at times, offering bounties for Indians killed).... Just as the use of the passive voice to obscure agency is part of the grammar of dominance, the enhancement of agency is its complement. Positive actions are usually attributed to white Christian men. Columbus discovered. Lewis and Clark explored, Eli Whitney invented. In the same vein, white supremacy culture comes up with descriptors that shape the way we think about whole groups of people who we are overtly and covertly encouraged to think of as deficient, which is a subtle way of normalizing or assigning humanity to the dominant group or person. This can be simply done by only giving racial descriptors to characters in a story if their race is other than white while assuming the reader knows any character without such an identity is the white default and norm. This can show up as mainstream use of the term “minority” to designate Black, Indigenous, and People and Communities of Color, as well as women, even when those people and groups are in the numerical majority. My colleagues and I do not use the term "minority" on this website or in life. During my years at ChangeWork, we made the decision to no longer use this word when cofounder Kenneth Jones noticed that news anchors were referring to the indigenous people of South Africa during the apartheid struggle in the 1980s as “minorities.” During that period, Webster's dictionary defined minority as “the lesser part or smaller number” and its use in referencing indigenous South Africans obviously carried a cultural significance beyond counting. Because language is important in shaping how we think, we chose at that time to use the term “People of Color” as an organizing device to indicate, as Kenneth used to say, “all those who catch hell from racism.” While few individuals tend to identify specifically as People of Color, preferring usually to name themselves based on a specific racial or ethnic identity (Black, African American, Cherokee, Occanneechi Band of the Saponi Nation, Chinese, Taiwanese, Filipino, Mexican, Puerto Rican, etc.), the term was and can be useful to designate all those pushed to the margins when referring to race and racism. More current in the year 2021 is the term BIPOC to reference Black, Indigenous, and People of Color as both a collective reference to all who catch hell from racism while also distinguishing how the white power elite have over generations systemically violated Black communities and people (the "B" in BIPOC) and Indigenous communities and people (the "I" in BIPOC) while also targeting other Communities and People of Color (the "POC" in BIPOC) with variations of these honed violations since the time of first contact. Another example is how mainstream dominant culture uses terms like "underprivileged" or "under-represented" to signify communities and people targeted by systemic racism and other oppressions. Notice how these are passive voice terms and are very rarely if ever accompanied by their counterparts - overprivileged and over-represented when talking about those who hold disproportionate power. Language and how we use it shapes the way we think, often in subtle ways that we don't even notice. One antidote to worship of the written word is to begin paying attention to our language. |
|
The racial equity principles of honoring and building power with and in the margins, acting with transparency, and choosing connection keep us grounded in how we can respect all the different ways we share information, communicate with each other, and be with each other.
As referenced elsewhere on this website, the idea that we should prioritize relationship over being right (thank you Tami Forte-Logan) and, in this case, prioritize relationship over what we write, is key. So, for example, are we referencing communities and people in grant proposals when we don't actually have authentic relationship with those communities and people? If we have authentic relationship, does that include transparency about our role, who controls the money that might come, and how the money will be spent? Are we insuring that communities and people get to tell their own stories on their own terms? Are we transparent about the ways in which we are using our power as well as the ways in which those we are serving or in community with are using theirs (important when we are outsiders and even when we are insiders). Are we prioritizing what is written on a piece of paper over the quality of the relationship? In some cases, when we are on the receiving end of power abuse and misuse, the written word can be our ally. I am not suggesting that the written word is always an instrument of oppression; I am suggesting that it has been used historically and currently as an instrument of oppression by those whose mission is power and profit. Liberation has always been accompanied by powerful written words that reflect our struggle, our pain, our joy, our love, words that have speak truth to power, push for our rights, and help us understand what is happening to us. We are beneficiaries of the legacies of writers such as Toni Morrison, Dorothy Allison, Leslie Feinberg, James Baldwin, Pauli Murray, Sitting Bull, ... the list is beautifully endless. And we are fortunate to be among many and multiple contemporary genius writers that support us, reflect us back to ourselves, tell our stories, and nurture us on this freedom path. |
|
|
White Supremacy Culture | Offered by Tema Okun
first published 2021 | last update 11.2024 |