The Smithsonian's Take on "White Culture" Begs the Question: When Does "Wokeness" Start to Resemble Racism?

My initial plan was to write on this week's ten-year anniversary of Dodd-Frank, which is the complex bill created in response to the Great Recession that enacted multiple regulations of the finance industry. But then I remembered that I wrote on Dodd-Frank a couple years ago, so if you are interested in my scrutinizing of Dodd-Frank, here you go! Today, I am going to write on a different topic.

Last week, the Smithsonian National Museum of African-American History and Culture (SNMAAHC) included an infographic on its online portal about racism in the United States. The infographic was especially controversial because it outlined what "whiteness" and "white culture" are. As you see below, it includes such features as individualism, work ethic, politeness, and "objective, linear thinking." 

SNMAAHC subsequently apologized for the infographic, but if you look at SNMAAHC's website on whiteness, it is unlikely that they reject the basic underlying premise of the infographic they later retracted. Let's get into some of the reasons what is wrong with this infographic. 

1. Overgeneralizing white people is factually inaccurate. Thinking that a heterogeneous group of people spread over hundreds of miles and that encompasses multiple ethnic and religious groups acts or thinks the same way is ridiculous. Your typical Swede is culturally, ethnically, and linguistically different than an Italian or a Greek. Spanish and French culture are different than British culture. Anyone who has had any exposure to anthropology or sociology would realize this basic truth. Even with some similarities across European-based nations and cultures, it still does not negate the fact that "white culture" is not a thing because there are multiple ethnicities that are predominantly Caucasian. 

2. Overgeneralizing white people is racist. If we are to take this infographic at face value, the people at the Smithsonian believe that being white means being competitive, eating bland food, emphasizing aggressiveness and extroversion (while somehow managing to be polite), obsessing about being timely, thinking that wealth is the key to social status or happiness, delaying gratification, and valuing self-reliance. The infographic from the Smithsonian paints some very broad strokes without a) allowing for any nuance, b) recognizing that not all white people are the same, or c) acknowledging that skin color does not define the entirety of a person. I have met plenty of white people who do not have drive to succeed, would rather rely on others for their well-being, or are habitually late. If anyone were to use this line of arguing against a minority group (e.g., "Those [fill in the blank with minority group] act like this or are incapable of doing that", "They are all the same"), it would be immediately construed as racist, and rightfully so. The question is whether it would be racist if the comment is targeted towards white people. Let us take a look at what Merriam-Webster has for a definition.

This past June, Merriam-Webster updated the definition of racism. Fact-checking site Snopes points out that Webster's did not change it so much as they contemporized the definition to make it relevant for modern times. The dictionary definition does recognize institutional and systemic racism (Definition #2), but it also acknowledges individual racism (Definitions #1 and #3). Per what is in Merriam-Webster, it is possible to be prejudiced against white people, least of all because there is not an exemption for a racial majority. Here are some real-life examples of pejorative terms used towards white people:

• Literally meaning "albino," the Indonesian word bule is a derogatory word for white person.
• The Chinese also have a phrase: guilao (鬼佬). This terms means "white ghost." It is used as a pejorative term for white people. In Singapore and Taiwan, they use the term ang mo (紅毛).
• There are some derogatory terms for white people used in the United States, including "cracker" and "honky", "whitey," and "peckerwood." 
• In Afrikaans, japie is a mildly offensive term for "white person" or "farm boy." 
• The Spanish language, particularly in Mexican Spanish, also has a term for white foreigners that assumes the white foreigner is monolinguistic and does not appreciate Latino culture: gringo or gringa.
• Farang (ฝรั่ง) is the Thai word for white people. Based off this word, the Thai phrase farang khi nok (ฝรั่งขี้นก) means "white trash."

This list is not meant to minimize or ignore ethnic or racial slurs used against minorities. Since minorities on average go through more hardship in life, what a typical minority undergoes in terms of discrimination and prejudice is of greater magnitude than what someone of the majority race or religion goes through. At the same time, it does not exclude the fact that people can also be prejudiced against white people. The ability to be prejudiced is not confined to one racial group or a certain political persuasion. Having biases and prejudices is part of the human condition.    

3. The values in question are not specific to white people. Individualism has been increasing globally (Santos et al., 2017). Working hard is not unique to the United States: the Protestant work ethic exists in much of Europe, not to mention that China and Japan are also known for high work ethic. Christianity is a religion practiced by millions of non-white people throughout the world, including Africans, Latinos, and Asian people. Nuclear families exist in many non-Western cultures, including the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and East Asia. I can go on, but the point remains the same: so many of these values extend beyond the United States or Caucasians. 

4. Implications of taking issue with these values. If you look at the language used by the SNMAAHC on their website about whiteness, it does not take much to infer that they take issue with the "white-dominant culture." They point out how whiteness includes individuality, the nuclear family, "objective, rational linear thinking," the scientific method, jurisprudence based on British common law (which includes "innocent until proven guilty," a cornerstone of the U.S. legal system), and politeness. Does this mean that racial minorities that show up on time, use logic, or take personal responsibility for their lives are "acting white?" Were Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman internalizing whiteness when they emphasized freedom and "rugged individualism" in their lives? Was George Washington Carver acting "less black" when he used the scientific method to make his discoveries? Does the infographic imply that the people at the Smithsonian do not expect minorities to be on time or to work hard? I am sure that Muhammad Ali and Jesse Owens worked tirelessly when they made their way towards competing in the Olympics. Isn't it possible, indeed probable, that hard work, timeliness, logical thinking, and wanting to be the best one can be are values that are not simply for "the white folk," but indeed values that all people can and should strive for, regardless of race or ethnicity? 

Conclusion

It might be alluring to think of the Smithsonian debacle as an isolated incident, but viewing the predominance of "white culture" through this lens has become more prominent in U.S. society, particularly of those who consider themselves "woke." Although it is most commonly associated with the Far Left, the idea of being "woke" started off to simply mean "awareness of racial and political justice." It is one thing to want to fight inequities in society or to make the world a better place than you found it. After all, it can help bring us closer to that ideal of "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" for all citizens of the United States. 

Comedian Ryan Long covers this in a sketch (see below), but I do have to wonder at what point does acting "woke" mimic or parallel the views or behaviors of racists. Do you reach that point when you call advocating for a color-blind world a microagression because it collides with your worldview? Is it when you think racial identity is one of the most important, if not the most important, things there is? Is it when you look at others primarily or solely through the lens of race? How about when you make sweeping generalizations about an individual because they belong to a certain racial or ethnic group? Or is it when you see someone appreciating other ethnicities or partaking in other cultural activities and end up calling it cultural appropriation, thereby de facto calling for a form of cultural segregation (see here, here, here, here)? 

Regardless of the color of one's skin, we should all be willing to have conversations about race, even if it makes us feel uncomfortable. We should be able to talk about policies that help minimize racial inequality. Earlier this year, I have discussed on my blog eliminating police unions and qualified immunity, both of which would mitigate racial disparities in policing. We need to address issues affecting African-American citizens because the American Dream should be accessible to every citizen. At the same time, treating all white people as if they were the same or to view whiteness as a secular version of "Original Sin" is no way to bring people closer together or build broad coalitions. As Abraham Lincoln once said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."