Aid without an exit plan doesn’t sound like a great idea to me. It basically allows countries to outsource part of their medical coverage to MSF, and if MSF isn’t building capacity in the country they’re essentially conceding the long-term futility of their work.[quote=“chgoliz, post:35, topic:23204”]
She learned as part of the process that older volunteers with financial experience were routinely sent to former Soviet countries to help them learn how capitalism works. So there is some measure of matching skills to the country/job.
[/quote]
This isn’t a great example. Unless these knowlegable laymen had a pretty good prior understanding of the specific conditions and challenges of the second-world countries they were visiting, their understanding of how capitalism works in the first-world would be of limited use. I mean, as a simple example, unless you understand the bureaucratic and legal obstacles the continue to persist in many former-SSRs, you can’t begin to understand how one should transition to capitalism.
The problem is she’s still attributing all of this to her race. She’s still wrong, it’s not her race it’s her lack of concrete skills and putting herself where she’s not needed. She could be a black woman with no skills and still be just as useless in Africa as a white woman.
Maybe you missed this part, where she specifically addresses your point:
In high school, I travelled to Tanzania as part of a school trip. There were 14 white girls, 1 black girl who, to her frustration, was called white by almost everyone we met in Tanzania, and a few teachers/chaperones.
Whiteness is obviously being interpreted as the social construct it is, and is basically shorthand for "Westerner."The fact that, by the numbers, the overwhelming percentage of the volunteers are actually white in colour probably doesn’t hurt, either.
I keep hearing this… not all whites, but the ones that do x, are ok to talk about that way… I’m familiar with this argument from people who defend the use of racial slurs about black people with the explanation that some are slurs, but not others…
Its a fascinating type of Boing Boing approved bigotry. Racism against minorities… disallowed. Racism against whoever we decide are privileged… go nuts. Because its about keeping score I guess… rather than the fact that judging people based on race is moronic and disgusting… same as judging people based on gender, or other relatively random BS, like what state you are from, or where you went to school.
… except it weakens the arguments against racism towards minorities too… since you all seem to partake when the mood strikes you.
Maybe she was of mixed decent… or ‘black’ via the one drop convention which we love here in the US… because the country is full of racist stupid pricks.
Or maybe she was, you know, black. Which is really the most straightforward interpretation unless the classmate herself was one of the stupid racist pricks who self-identified as black and thought she shouldn’t be called “white.”
First off, using the word “racism” when it’s not someone in a position of power being racist to someone who isn’t diminishes it. “Prejudice” might be more appropriate.
Second, did you read the article I linked? Did you think that (non-white) person was being racist towards white people for calling out some of them on their bullshit? If so, I really don’t know what to say to you.
Third, middle class white people going to third world shitholes with an attitude that amounts to “Oh, I’ll just tell them how middle class white people do this, and that will fix all their problems.” really piss me off, and you calling me, a very white and middle class person, the majority of whose friends, family, and associates are also white and middle class people, none of whom I have any problem with whatsoever, racist against white people for calling attention to the fact that the people who engage in this particular type of obnoxious behavior tend to be overwhelmingly white and middle class, and that attitudes prevalent among white middle class people are fundamental to this behavior, is, not to put too fine a point on it, completely fucking ridiculous. Get over yourself.
I’m calling your statements racist because you can’t find a better manner of referring to people except by their skin color. When you do it its prejudice. When others do it its racist. A self serving distinction. You’d define it as only special categories where some people do it and its wrong, based on some notion of relative power… and once again, ascribed to a skin color. This just perpetuates the ignorant cycle.
There is no white people, black people, etc… etc… its a foolish construct from a despicable time. Its relatively new as well. It wasn’t around 500 years ago, or before then. It only continues to be relevant because of racist bullshit… and can stop as soon as that stops.
That you can’t see it is the completely fucking ridiculous part. I’m not calling you a racist because of your feelings towards a particular group. I’m pointing out how racist your statements are for continuing to lump people into categories based on their skin color… as if it has any bearing into who they are, or aren’t.
Some people have skills that are relevant in the third world, some don’t. Some are misguided and go on a mission to help people and have no conception of what they are getting into. Some get sucked into tourist traps where they hug ‘orphans’ that are really just kids on rent from a local playing the role of orphans. Its not divided into white and black, or male and female, or any of the other categories we can lump people in that have no bearing or relevance here. To continue to insist so is prejudice based on race. Racism. You are being racist… and defending it with pointing out what race you and your friends are. It doesn’t matter.
When we discuss what a particular race can say based on their race, or to another race, based on privilege or some crap… thats a finely nuanced brand of racist bullshit.
Does it change your mind to know the percentage of people who join the peace corps and who are racial minorities is within a percentage point of the national percent of racial minorities in the US?
Or maybe in Tanzania its relative and she was relatively white.
Or maybe its fucking stupid in the first place to identify as a skin color… and leads to racist prickerage.
I wish we could stop perpetuating this myth that skin color matters. Its stupid… but stupidity is real in its effects, so it self perpetuates.
Because many do valuable work when they are there?
I am sure some do. However the comment to which I was responding was about alternative justifications. I agree that those exist. I just think that programs should be honest about who benefits from them and in which way.
I can’t help but agree with that!
[quote=“grimloki, post:49, topic:23204, full:true”]
Or maybe in Tanzania its relative and she was relatively white. [/quote]
Right. I’m sure you know better than the author and the “black” girl in question the circumstances in question. And I’m sure that in Tanzania light-skinned black are widely considered “white” because that’s how it generally works in countries that were colonized by European countries: half-white offspring were given the same privileges and rights as their fully-white siblings. Or not.
This seems about as smart as the line used by the Supreme Court in banning some affirmative action programs: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” While that has a nice logical symmetry to it, it basically ignores the fact that discrimination exists and occurs, and handcuffs those who who want to directly countervail this existing discrimination. And guess what: these sorts of white savior complexes are forms of racism that embody the idea that these needy black people are so useless and helpless that they need the assistance of random white people with no relevant skills or knowledge of the local situation. Because white people know what they’re doing and get things done, while these black people obviously don’t otherwise they wouldn’t need our help. And you’re basically saying that even if these kinds of ideas are racist, we shouldn’t acknowledge that this is a phenomenon afflicting some people in the West who are predominantly white, because this is racist discrimination against whites… as though ignoring this white savior complex will somehow lead to a less racist society.
Of course not in the eyes of the colonizers while the country was a colony. But I think Tanzania would hardly be alone in identifying people primarily with whatever part of their heritage is considered the “other” in their society.
Of course it’s just another anecdote, but I have heard the same from a Peace Corps volunteer who was in Cameroon. There was an African-American volunteer in her group who was dismayed to learn that the locals did not accept her as Black and even became outright hostile when she insisted that she was.
There is no such thing as human races. Its trivial bs. Leave that shit in the burned down south where it belongs.
It doesnt matter that voluntourists are predominantly white… not that I believe that to be the case. Correlation does not equal causation.
Or dont. Continue to make stereotypical statements on along racial lines… but doing so makes you sound like an idiot… and perpetuates racist prickerage.
You still haven’t explained how ignoring all the things that are done in the name of race—whether “race” exists or not—somehow eliminates those things.[quote=“grimloki, post:55, topic:23204”]
It doesnt matter that voluntourists are predominantly white… not that I believe that to be the case. Correlation does not equal causation.
[/quote]
It’s interesting that you have no problem using labels like “white” even though you don’t believe in race. It’s also interesting that you seem to have no trouble defining the boundaries of what these nonexistant concepts of “white” or “black” may be, since you evidently believe that most voluntourists are not “white.” And if you don’t believe most voluntourists are white, what do you think they are, and what is your informed basis for this belief?
Finally, you have conveniently ignored the point made on multiple occasions that “white” is being used as shorthand for “Westerner,” which would a non-racial way of loking at the situation. Indeed, it is you who continues to perpetuate “racial prickerage” by insisting on using “white” in a racial context when I’ve said it is being used in a cultural context (as evidenced by black tourists being called white).
So, was this African-American noticeably lighter in skin tone? Do you think that if she was darker they would have accepted her as black? Or do you think that the “outsider” element is not the shade of skin but the fact that she is a Westerner? I have a friend who is 100% Japanese by ancestry but is not perceived as being Japanese at all when Japanese people discover she is from the US and cannot speak Japanese very well. She taught as an English teacher in the JET program, and as a part of her introduction she told her class she was 100% Japanese. At the end of the year, she had a quiz where one of the questions was what percentage Japanese she was. Nobody picked 100%, and most picked 50%.
I’m aware of the usage of the terms white, black, etc… and know how the concepts work, but they are based on faulty reasoning, and seem to largely be a product of the acceptance of the ideas of this racist prick.
And a whole host of other racist pricks who followed him.
Until this guy
and several others were successful in showing that the differences within the races were far larger than the differences between the races. Might as well classify people based on the whorls on their fingertips, or their blood types, or eyes color… or any other host of stupid trivia. Its just as relevant as skin color.
And then of course we move on into the 1950s with Watson and Crick, and DNA, and soon its obvious that there’s no races, no sub species, stupidly small genetic differences, and a whole lot of cross breeding for as long as people have been around.
But still people identify as a certain color of skin based race, or some other fucking moronic crap, and we all go along with it, and this mass delusion means every once in a while a racist prick does something like…
http://topconservativenews.com/2012/04/university-study-on-iqs-in-sub-saharan-africa/
And its a clarion call for racist pricks to come yammer about their imbecilic conclusions. If you follow the link make sure to scroll down and see the comments.
Its not that dissimilar from talking about a bunch of voluntourists and their whiteness… this social convention where we somehow accept explanations involving a correlation between behavior and skin color.
Which would be innocuous except for the human tragedies that result from this sloppy thinking bullshit that continues to be perpetuated.
Listen, there may not be differences between people based on their skin color, but that doesn’t mean that discrimination based on skin color doesn’t exist. Sticking your head in the sand and refusing to recognize color or the societal power dynamics inherent in color and “race” really isn’t that helpful or productive, nor does it help anyone understand those power dynamics and how they play out in real life.
SO even if it makes no sense, isnt true, is harmful, and uselessly broken I shouldnt mention it and just let people go on ignorantly perpetuating racism?
No. It wasnt always here. Its not inherent in human nature. It stops when we stop It.
Pointing out racism isn’t perpetuating racism. Equating criticism of politically powerful, socially dominant skin tones or groups with criticism of powerless, minority skin tones is a false equivalence, as one is fundamentally more damaging than the other.
You think that those criticizing the white savior complex believe that there are innate differences between people with different skin tones? Really? Or do you think that those who criticize the white savior complex are actually trying to stop racism? Which of those alternatives seems more likely to you?
