Red Light Politics
Welcome to my short form Tumblr blog. My name is Flavia Tamara Dzodan, I am a business developer, writer, public speaker, ideas instigator, content creator, media facilitator and trend watcher living in Amsterdam.
This Tumblr is about the spaces and intersections between politics, culture, race and gender matters with some humor and pop culture thrown in the mix.
My long reads blog is Red Light Politics.
I also blog at Tiger Beatdown.
If you would like to know more about me, visit this page .
Search
The person behind this blog
I am on Twitter, you can follow me
Loading Tweet...
Find me on...
Noted Elsewhere
-
“There is no such thing as a single-issue struggle because we do not live single-issue lives.”— Audre Lorde in Sister Outsider.
-
I’d be very upset if I worked at Fage USA and had to drive every (Monday) morning to:
1 Opportunity Drive.I suppose that neighbourhood has...
-
“Prison relieves us of the responsibility of seriously engaging with the problems of our society, especially those produced by racism and,...”
-
When the Lesser Of Two Evils Isn't Enough
by Mia McKenzie
Yesterday, I wrote a post called Michelle Obama...
-
Try not to forget why they came to the United States of America, and though the specific circumstances may differ, you’ll find that hundreds of...
-
-
Taken with Instagram
-
Haarlem, Netherlands (by Epicantus)
Tag Results
13 posts tagged white supremacy
“I have a personal interest in this story because Jason Richwine was awarded a fellowship from my employer, the American Enterprise Institute, in 2008–09, and I reviewed the draft of his dissertation. A rereading of the dissertation last weekend confirmed my recollection that Richwine had meticulously assembled and analyzed the test-score data, which showed exactly what he said they showed: mean IQ-score differences between Latinos and non-Latino whites, found consistently across many datasets and across time after taking factors such as language proficiency and cultural bias into account. I had disagreements then and now about his policy recommendations, but not about the empirical accuracy of his research or the scholarly integrity of the interpretations with which I disagreed.”
In Defense of Jason Richwine | National Review Online
Remember when last week the guy behind the Heritage Foundation report against immigration reform in the US was found to be a proponent of eugenics? For those who might not be familiar, The Heritage Foundation released a report claiming that the currently discussed reform would cost the State trillions (I love hyperbolic figures pulled out of white rich dude’s asses, by the way… QUADRILLIONS! QUINTILLIONS! The tomato pickers that have been barely surviving with exploitative labor and yet pumping money into our economy will cost us QUINTILLIONS if we give them dignity in the form of a residence card! IMAGINE THE SOCIAL UPHEAVAL! etc). Anyway, I digress…
Turns out that the author of the inflammatory report was found to be a proponent of eugenics, claiming that non Whites have lower IQs than the White American population. His proposition was that Latin@s should have their IQs tested before being granted any residency status (of course, “discarding” those who are below a certain IQ). In 2009, in his Harvard dissertation he wrote:
The statistical construct known as IQ can reliably estimate general mental ability, or intelligence. The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations. The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market. Selecting high-IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S., while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.
I won’t waste a second of my time trying to rebuke eugenics ideologies that personally implicate me (after all, I am one of those Latin@s with supposedly low IQs that is about to bring down the demise of the purity of Western White civilization… and you know what? I hope my “stupid” is contagious and I indeed ruin their purity with my presence but again, I digress). So, rather than trying to unpack his statements which do not deserve an ounce of consideration, I wanted to point out the beginning of the “polite right wing” circling of the wagons. This is not some Tea Party uncouth histrionics, this is the rich right wing claiming that eugenics deserve to be taken into account and that attacks on these ideas are based on misguided political correctness. The National Review, of course, enlists the apologists who begin the above mentioned circling of wagons:
I have a personal interest in this story because Jason Richwine was awarded a fellowship from my employer, the American Enterprise Institute, in 2008–09, and I reviewed the draft of his dissertation. A rereading of the dissertation last weekend confirmed my recollection that Richwine had meticulously assembled and analyzed the test-score data, which showed exactly what he said they showed: mean IQ-score differences between Latinos and non-Latino whites, found consistently across many datasets and across time after taking factors such as language proficiency and cultural bias into account. I had disagreements then and now about his policy recommendations, but not about the empirical accuracy of his research or the scholarly integrity of the interpretations with which I disagreed.
The data sets are correct! These people are indeed stupid! Incidentally, The National Review seems more equal opportunity White Supremacist and brings up the claim that Blacks have even lower IQs so, why miss the opportunity to single out one minority when you can also highlight everyone else’s supposed racial deficiencies in the process?
To my fellow Latin@s living in the US, I can only offer my sympathy. Here in The Netherlands, the notion that we are deficient and have lower IQs has gained mainstream momentum (Ha! we are ahead of the curve in White Supremacist eugenics! talk about being trendsetters). Pretty much like The National Review, in The Netherlands, the claims of lower IQ were also “backed with scientific data”. We don’t need to look too far away into history to know the kind of people who took a similar approach and made analogous “scientific” claims to create policy.
“Let me get this out of the way: I don’t like Adria Richards. I think I have good reason to not like Adria Richards. So I should be feeling some major Schadenfreude right now. Instead, though, I think what’s unfolded in the developer community in recent days has been a tragedy.”
Adria Richards, PyCon, and How We All Lost | Amanda Blum
Notice how almost all the comments, even those in favor of Adria Richards, many of them (as the one I am quoting here), from White women defending Richards are all about disciplining the uppity Black woman.
They don’t like her tone. Her vocal antics are improper. She didn’t deserve to be fired but… It always boils down to it: the misbehaved Black woman should have known better. Even ostensibly feminist blogs are giving space to such opinions.
This is what happens when WoC do not play by the rules of patriarchal White Supremacy: the racist version of “slut had it coming”. If only she had not been so outspoken, if only she didn’t expose stuff she doesn’t like… if only she had been docile.
Anyone trying to unpack this disaster from the perspective of sexism in the tech industry, I’m afraid they are missing the point entirely; as usual, it is about the racist sexism in the tech (and non tech) world. Adria Richards is now its latest victim.
I blame Schwyzer for the ineffectual, whitewashed, lukewarm feminism that is incapable of producing substantial change
A while ago, everyone was talking about Anne Marie Slaugher’s piece “Why women can’t have it all”. Back then I wrote that the reason why women cannot have it all is because feminism has stopped being about dreams and utopia and revolution and instead, it has become a movement set to compromise with patriarchy. We are supposed to want to have better positions at capitalist exploitation (women should aspire to be CEOs, earn more even at the expense of other women who are subjugated across racist poverty, exploitation of resources in the Global South, etc.). And now, of course, I have also spoken out about Schwyzer’s attempt to silence me (which as it is rightfully noted here, is not the first time he does to a Latina blogger).
Meanwhile, Schwyzer continues to have a place on the feminist table. He continues to be interviewed, his “side of the story” is made to matter, he is allowed to continue forcing himself into feminist spaces, he gets paid to write about women’s issues, for women, in mainstream media publications, etc. AND THEN WE WONDER WHY PATRIARCHAL POLITICIANS A LA ROMNEY DO NOT TAKE FEMINISM SERIOUSLY?! Then we wonder why the erosion of women’s rights across all the Western world continues unabated? Then we have round tables, talks, conferences, dissertations, seminars, paid writing gigs, debates, to discuss why women’s rights are on the first line of attack when racist, heteronormative patriarchy needs to be enforced? How can we even dare to wonder about the root cause of this when the most mainstream form of feminism allows a guy like Schwyzer to “represent” women? Have we been made so submissive by virtue of capitalist consumer culture that we misguidedly believe we need to “negotiate” our own fucking spaces with a guy like Hugo Schwyzer? Have we been collectively beaten into compliance that a White, cisgender, American man is “approved” to speak on our behalf and then we wonder why our interests are not well represented?
And while Schwyzer, individually, cannot be held accountable for the complete demise of feminism, I believe him to be a very good metonymical representation of the movement’s failures. The failures represented by compromise, lukewarm attempts at “change” that only serve to further subjugate women, that continue to keep Women of Color “in their place”, boxed in an asphyxiating structure of White Supremacy, relegated to the role of “trouble maker” to be silenced, to be demanded “proof of her own oppression”. Schwyzer, allowed to be the executing arm of this White Supremacy, in the name of the very same ideology that is supposed to “liberate” women.
For as long as a man like Hugo Schwyzer can silence Women of Color and “groom” White women to act as his shields against our “mean anger”, no woman will be allowed to have it all. We have gotten to a point where the most revolutionary thing feminism can do is say NO. Just that. No. A white, cisgender American man can never have a woman’s best interests in mind. A feminism that gives Schwyzer the benefit of the doubt while he demands that we “prove” our oppression, is nothing but a sham. When white, cisgender, male politicians come for our rights, let’s not forget who kept the door open for them.
I scanned this page out of the summer edition of Dutch magazine OpZij. This is hands down, the most popular feminist magazine in the country. They devote two news items to Women of Color in this edition. Both are in this page. The top item explains how Muslim women “cook themselves silly and are attacked during Ramadan” and the second one, with the disembodied brown, Mexican hand illustrating the item, is about women who participate in drug cartels.
With feminism like OpZij, who needs white supremacy?!
“White supremacist Shaun Patrick Winkler, a convicted batterer who once worked for an Aryan Nations leader, wants to add an unlikely notch to his spotty resume — sheriff of Idaho’s Bonner County.”
White supremacist runs for sheriff in Idaho, raising hackles | Reuters
Eh, not to be trite but this one’s at least in the open about his ideology. I am much more terrified of the undercover racists because I cannot see them coming. I expect this guy won’t even pretend to care. You’ll be on your own from the get go.
Mainstream media reporting on DSK
I am amazed by the fact that mainstream media is throwing all the moral outrage over the fact that Dominique Strauss Kahn had sex with women who, so far seem to be consenting sex workers, however, they won’t touch this tidbit of information from a few weeks ago with a ten foot pole:
All of the women, who are mainly French and Belgians from immigrant backgrounds
Granted, the above is from a couple of weeks ago but no other outlet has since mentioned the ethnicity of most of these sex workers. For me, in the context of the rape allegations in New York, where the victim is also an immigrant, the quote above is much, much more powerful. It speaks volumes of DSK’s mindset and, in view of his role as Chief of the IMF, to me, this also reflects on how he thought of the people in the countries of the Global South where his institution was imposing policies that led to further poverty and exploitation.
Instead, we are getting moral outrage because OMG SEX WORKERS! Please, that alone does not tell a story. Moreover, that is not even the newsworthy part of the story. Because truly, I am much more interested in the details of his racism and how he was part of an institution that played a large role to establish these racial categories globally than in an old guy being called a “libertine”.
Media Complicit in Rise of Xenophobia
EUROPE: Media Complicit in Rise of Xenophobia
As European leaders increasingly question the concept of Europe without borders and follow each other in announcing the end of multiculturalism, the media response has been mostly to present migrants as destabilising Europe’s labour markets and welfare states.
The role of the media in the worsening image of migrants in Europe was debated in Budapest at a conference titled “Promoting Migrant Integration through Media and Intercultural Dialogue”.
The conference, organised by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the Hungarian Presidency of the European Union, ran from May 16-18, and was aimed at helping media representatives provide fair and balanced coverage of migration issues.
With far-right, anti-immigration parties gaining strength throghout Europe, journalists have been signalled as frequent accomplices to rising xenophobia:
“European public opinion is being pressed with the threat of a migration wave. Both politicians and journalists should recognise their mistakes,” Czech sociologist Ivan Gabal told participants.
More at the link above.
However, I am sitting here giving these folks the side eye because, really, they needed a trade conference to come to that conclusion? Even a run of the mill media analyst like myself noticed this a good ten years ago (right when they started beating the Islamophobe drum after 9/11). It’s not like they discovered some ground breaking media truth here, is it?
Also, another media non-truth from the article:
Yet some questioned why journalists would even begin by approaching officials and not give voice to those who remain mostly voiceless: “Migrants and their organisations should speak for migrants, not government officials,” White said.
What? And end a centuries long European tradition of speaking about migrants and not to them? We should have a “European Colonial Journalist Dodo” meme to say it better with an animal GIF. Because it is more likely for a dodo to come back from extinction than for European media to stop thinking that they are still the news outlet of an 18th century empire.
Repeat Offender: Satoshi Kanazawa’s Other Greatest Misses
Coincidentally, Racialicious just posted a roundup of Kanazawa’s racism throughout the years (published by Psychology Today as well).
From eugenics to theories of intelligence based on race, it’s all there. And I insist, Psychology Today provided him the platform to publish those ideas. It also offered him a kind of institutional validation.
On Privilege, White Supremacy and Accountability
It is no news that there are individual racists. That many people are deeply prejudiced and generally awful. And while I keep highlighting individual acts of racism, there is a kind of behavior that worries me even more than the act of individuals: the kind that is institutional and never accountable.
Because Satoshi Kanazawa’s article on Psychology Today is (was as it has been removed now) a disgusting piece of drivel reminiscent of times we thought gone. But we can easily point fingers at him and disarm each and every argument he makes. Sure that doesn’t remedy the pain he has caused and it certainly doesn’t do anything to heal the people he hurt but his article and the contents are something tangible to attack.
However, I am incensed by the chain of command that allowed the publication. Editor in Chief Kaja Perina, Senior Web Producer Aaron Deutsch, Deputy Editor Lybi Ma, Features Editor Carlin Flora, even the company’s CEO Jo Colman, all of them have a degree of responsibility in the publication. I would venture that, with the exception of the CEO, all of them read the article prior to publication and thought it was OK to post it!
When an individual acts in reprehensible ways, we can say “There, that’s an ass”. Now, when an entire corporate institution sees fit to publish an article that reeks of racism, we should point and say “That is White Supremacy at work”. Because certainly I cannot think of any other way to describe it.
I just don’t understand
If we are going to point fingers re: racism and dialogue, it makes THE MOST SENSE OF ALL to point fingers at white people, at whiteness, at white privilege. It’s not about pointing fingers at individual people but at systems and technologies of oppression. I mean, pointing fingers is actually a pretty good tactic and it doesn’t have to violent/aggressive/etc. It can be gentle, firm, and on-point without backing down.
Why would I point fingers at Asians or Blacks or [insert minority group here] when the context of the discussion is about racism and oppression? It makes no sense to point fingers at the oppressed and tell them that they caused the problem so the burden is on them. But that’s what defensive people do, which brings us full circle about why Ramou is advocating for more nuanced discussion about race. And there are things that she mentions that are helpful for everyone, not just white people: namely, shutting the hell up and listening (she said it more eloquently than I just did, but the point is the same), and being vigilant in questioning your privilege and how that influences your re/actions, contexts, and opinions. That doesn’t even have to be about race, that’s just good advice.
To me, the phenomenon goes hand in hand with slut shaming as well. All of what you said is not just accurate and true, but also on a macro level, part of the same dominant culture that promotes the “slut had it coming” way of thinking.
We live in a culture of victim blaming (blame minorities, blame women, and even more so, blame minority women if you can, blame LGBTQ folks, victims of bullying, etc, etc, et-fucking-cetera ad infinitum). That’s why when discussing racism, the members of the hegemonic culture (Whites) would like the attention deflected on the members of [people who belongs to minority]. It’s always a tactic so that the structures that make oppression possible (racism, patriarchal paradigms, etc.) remain untouched and unquestioned.
“From the beginning we have spoken of the special Viennese qualities, of the way music is made here. The way we make music here is not only a technical ability, but also something that has a lot to do with the soul. The soul does not let itself be separated from the cultural roots that we have here in central Europe. And it also doesn’t allow itself to be separated from gender. So if one thinks that the world should function by quota regulations,then it is naturally irritating that we are a group of white skinned male musicians, that perform exclusively the music of white skinned male composers. It is a racist and sexist irritation. I believe one must put it that way. If one establishes superficial egalitarianism, one will lose something very significant. Therefore, I am convinced that it is worthwhile to accept this racist and sexist irritation, because something produced by a superficial understanding of human rights would not have the same standards.”
Dieter Flury, a solo-flutist in the Vienna Philharmonic who believes that only central Europeans should be members because they have qualities that are intrinsically different from other races.
The Wiener Philharmoniker, a democratically self-administered orchestra regularly considered one of the finest in the world, has 112 members. Four of them are women. One of the men is half-Asian. Found via.
Also, from the same Philharmonic, Otto Strasser, the former chairman had this to say:
I hold it incorrect that today the applicants play behind a screen; an arrangement that was brought in after the Second World War in order to assure objective judgments. I continuously fought against it, especially after I became Chairman of the Philharmonic, because I am convinced that to the artist also belongs the person, that one must not only hear, but also see, in order to judge him in his entire personality. […] Even a grotesque situation that played itself out after my retirement was not able to change the situation. An applicant qualified himself as the best, and as the screen was raised, there stood a Japanese before the stunned jury. He was, however, not engaged, because his face did not fit with the ‘Pizzicato-Polka’ of the New Year’s Concert.
bell hooks examines popular culture in the context of patriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalism.
I need inspiration today so, I share with you all, bell hooks talking (because, honestly, her quotes do not reflect her general awesomeness).
