Right there is a very conflicting statement. Saying you don't "recognize" race, you don't "see" color, is actually denying the reality that entire bloodlines have been adversely affected, generationally, by the color of their skin. Without recognizing that, and the privilege you have had your entire life, without even being conscience of it happening, is ... kinda racist. It's like denying racisms affects and existence.
I don´t agree with this.
I think not seeing race is a defensible position.
It just means that in everyday life when someone is chatting you up, or trying to be friends with you, or in a job interview, the race is not considered. This may be a OK way to be, at least for most people in every day life most of the time. (It may not be a good way to think if you are a politician in the US or someone else with power and influence.)
Black people don´t all want you to see them as a victim of oppression all the time. Perhaps when you are making policies relating to housing yes, but not when you are just having a beer at a party.
It´s not racist to not see colour. It´s not racist to be ignorant of white privilege.
Racist used to be about discriminating, insulting, or treating people differently based on race.
And now racist has been expanded (at least by those on the left) to the point where not being anti-racist is itself supposedly a bit racist. I don´t buy it. And, at least for now, almost all dictionary writers are in agreement with me.
If you´re bigoted to not actively educate yourself and race issues, does it not logically follow that you are also a bigot if you´ve not actually educated yourself about sex/gender, transgender issues, native Americans, LGBT people?
If your answer is that you
must be anti-racist but
not anti a whole host of other positions (which is I think the
implicit position of the US liberal left), then this is an arbitrary distinction. You might say that race is the no 1 issue and greatest injustice because firstly (and this part of the argument may be specific to the US) the amount of injustice in history (slavery, lynching, segregation etc) is greater than for other issues and secondly that discrimination based on race is particularly absurd way to differentiate. However, these arguments to me
do seem to carry enough weight to put race at the top of the social justice agenda, but
not enough to put in a totally different class to other injustices. But I suppose that could be my subjective judgement.
If your answer is no you need to actively educated about all the issues as well - where does that end? Who decides whether we should feel obliged or not to be aware of our cis privilege, and whether or not failing to do so counts as bigoted. What about our privilege of not being asexual or intersex, and therefore fitting more neatly into society as a result? Where does it end? The answer is it doesn´t. It will always be forever arbitrary.
It seems reasonable to suggest to white people (or everyone) that they learn more about the issues and consider being an ally to black people. But it seems going too far to insist on it or to call someone racist.
