"... out of a desire to join the civil rights struggle in a time when the problems are so much more abstract than they once were. The true fault here lies with the school’s administration, whose deer tails popped up as they bolted into the forest, out of a fear of going against the commandments of what we today call antiracism, which apparently includes treating Black people as simpletons and thinking of it as reckoning.
True wokeness would have been to awaken to the tricky but urgent civic responsibility of, when necessary, calling out Black people on nonsense. Yes, even Black people can be wrong.... To pretend this is never the case where racism is concerned is not to reckon but to dehumanize.... Likely: the authorities caved in so that students wouldn’t call them racists on social media. This entailed a basic dismissal of these students’ mental and moral capacity: Having the rock removed showed that these people apparently didn’t expect that Black kids were capable of distinguishing, reflection, sense..... [T]he rock episode was... performance art... it’s fake, it’s self-involved, and it helps no one. Yes, racism persists in our society in many ways, and administrators serving up craven condescension as antiracism are fine examples of it."
Interestingly, the NYT prints out the word "n***erhead," which I won't spell out here. The rock was known to have been called that ONCE, back in the 1920s, in the Wisconsin State Journal, and that was the basis for removing the rock. So it's very bold for the NYT to print the word. I presume McWhorter insisted on it, and perhaps he will write about that.
More importantly, McWhorter accused the University of Wisconsin administration of racism. It was racism, he says, to behave as if the students were making sense when they were not.
Posts
43 comments:
Checking the NYT archive for prior appearances of ""n***erhead" (written out), I see 8 articles from 2011. That was when Rick Perry was running for President and an issue was made out of a hunting camp in West Texas with that name — "a phrase so commonplace around the South that it was used as a brand name for oysters, soap, tobacco and even golf tees.": "When Gov. Rick Perry’s family took over the lease for the camp in 1983, it could have demanded that the name be changed. It could have destroyed the rock on which the name was painted. It could have broken with an era when vicious racism was so casual that officials put such a word on maps around the country. Instead, Mr. Perry’s father simply painted over the name, although not very thoroughly."
Moving the rock was what parents would call "humoring the children," which usually means treating them as children. Fine for kids, not so much for college students who are supposed to be adults.
If I were a member of a group that demanded a rock be moved because it had once been called an ugly word, I would find other folks to hang out with. Because: embarrassing!
"Writes John McWhorter, in "The Performative Antiracism of Black Students at the U. of Wisconsin" (NYT)."
Is there any antiracism that is not "performative"?
"It was racism, he says, to behave as if the students were making sense when they were not."
But then, all coddling of minorities involves soft and hard bigotry.
But the left is scared, and of course spineless university administrators the most scared of all--when they are not true believers.
What would happen if one lefty one time stood up to the nonsense? Not counting McW.
As I recall, the blm student activist who led the rock hating was also named McWhorter. A distant relative? I agree that demanding the rock be removed is childish and an indication that the students are less than smart.
"More importantly, McWhorter accused the University of Wisconsin administration of racism. It was racism, he says, to behave as if the students were making sense when they were not."
Of course it's racism. All of this submission theater is racism.
Is it hyperbole to say that treating black college students as if they have the reasoning skills of infants counts as “racism “?
Nothing soft about that bigotry of low expectations.
And of course there's no way that Madison rock will be resurrected, but perhaps the U of W admin will have learned a lesson and be a bit more stalwart in the future. One can hope.
i STILL don't even get this one.
Intro:
An Innocent rock, is pushed 100's of miles by uncaring unfeeling glaciers
But, the rock struggles to find a home, and fit into college life.
Things go pretty well; many co-eds use the rock as a meeting place for them and their beaus
THEN!
a racist, bigotted, Nasty paper; the Wisconsin State Journal calls our poor little rock a nasty name
Our rock suffers in silence... At least the Co-eds still like him (And their beaus)
Years Pass...
So, the powers that be; decide ENOUGH IS ENOUGH; Something Has To Be Done
And, the powers that be kick the racist bigotted Wisconsin State Journal out of college life?
NO!
They kick out our poor little rock! The kick him out, and KEEP the paper that used the mean word
NOW!
Yet ANOTHER paper is boastfully using that same mean word; And THAT paper gets to stay on campus too!
At the University of Wisconsin, if someone calls you a racist name; NOTHING happens to Them,
But, you'll be expelled!!!
That's Wisconsin Justice!!!
Their parents and grandparents won the civil rights battle. They are looking for some sort of righteous fight, but they're 30 years too late...
I think that's why there is so much chatter re: trans issues. It hasn't been fought yet. Even if the cause is questionable, at least it's something.
There's ever been a time since WW2 where the elites and the well-to-do have been more insulated and more indifferent to the lives and problems of the average American? This was actually predicted by Charles Murray in the Bell Curve. Exhibit One has to be this NYT article. Think of all the problems and challenges facing the average American Black, White, or whatever.
Now what does the insulated NYT care about? A Rock. In Winsconsin. We had to get rid of a Big rock because it was too black. And someone called the Rock a bad name 100 years ago. This isn't played for Laughs. The NYT and its readers think this is super important. Unlike the problems facing the Average American.
Note: I"m NOT attacking people in UW or in Madison caring about the rock because its a part of their college history. But the NYT making an issue of this is emblematic of what is wrong with our insanely out of touch media elite.
McWhorter is consistently brilliant. The attitude that "these black people are so stupid/unreasonable/easily offended/nescient about history that we have to humor them like children is indeed racist.
[T]he rock episode was... performance art... it’s fake, it’s self-involved, and it helps no one. Yes, racism persists in our society in many ways, and administrators serving up craven condescension as antiracism are fine examples of it."
McWhorter is wrong.
The administrators didn't cave. They are the primary pushers of this. There are administrators talking the students into this. These "administrators" are pushing the racism hustle and they need these "victories" to keep the the "racism" industry active and funded.
Their job is to keep racism alive.
Having the rock removed showed that these people apparently didn’t expect that Black kids were capable of distinguishing, reflection, sense.....
With all the examples of people being fired and cancelled and attacked for things just as stupid, who could blame "these people?" Not I.
Blessings on Mr. McWhorter and all the people willing to speak truth.
I like the more passionate, less cautious McWhorter of the last year or so. Pretty cool to see him in the NYT: last summer he was popping up more often in lower tiered Reason, and the Atlantic was refusing multiple of his pieces. He’s done putting up with bullshit, and he’s got independence now. Should be fun.
Mcwhorter is leaving Substack to work for the NYT. Interesting.
https://johnmcwhorter.substack.com/p/goodbye-for-now?
Big thumbs up to gilbar for the send up.
Let me add a little more perspective. What was accomplished in removing the rock?
1. We have it demonstrated that the UW administrators are feckless.
... Um that is it.
What has not been accomplished?
1. No race relations will have been improved.
2. No healing will have been accomplished.
3. No racism will have been reduced.
4. And some unknown amount of good will not have been done in the spending 10's of thousands of dollars to move a rock that resulted in no social or economic benefit.
Fir that kind of money I could adopt another child with a bit extra to spare for the medical bills I would incur. Heck, I would even allow you to name the rock in honor of the child pulled out of misery and despair. Repurpose the rock and make it a lasting legacy of how it represents the coming together of people to change a life.
Maybe a few wells could have been drilled in a poor village in, say... Africa, where real people could have had real change in their wellbeing and could care less what someone called a rock 100 years ago.
As I said a few days ago. We waste so much energy and money on pointless things when we could affect real change in the world.
good on ya John McWhorter :
Two notes
First, rcocean completely misunderstands the point that was made in the NYTimes article, presumably because rcocean believes anything in the NYTimes must be woke? McWhorter's NYTimes essay is about how utterly stupid and craven removing the rock was; precisely the opposite of what rceocean thought (perhaps because he or she did not read the article).
Second, it is not just that the UW administration was craven, it is that the UW wasted $40K or more in tax-deductible donations to move the rock. Obviously, that money could have been better spent on library books or student scholarships. (Or alternatively, it could have been wasted buying a speech or faculty re-education session from the likes of Kendi or DiAngelo.)
I like the more passionate, less cautious McWhorter of the last year or so. Pretty cool to see him in the NYT: last summer he was popping up more often in lower tiered Reason, and the Atlantic was refusing multiple of his pieces. He’s done putting up with bullshit, and he’s got independence now. Should be fun.
Maybe it's more McCluhan than McWhorter. When something becomes obsolete, it becomes an art form. It's not acting out, it's kabuki: A stylized and artistic expression of the civil rights movement. Everyone one knows their expected roles and performs them with exaggerated movements to make up for their lack of authenticity. (I guess this includes my harumphing in the comments section to go meta on the meta.)....I don't think the students were sincerely offended. I don't think the administration was genuinely apologetic. But the show went on. The show can't go on. The show must go on.
althouse, thanks for making your point that NYTimes spelled out the offending word.
Thank Goodness their print version is not sold in Starbucks all across the country as it was every morning for years, spewing their Pol Pot Elitism into every little outpost that relentless roaster built.
Even so, the mind reels to consider there are plenty of printed copies of this in the world now -- all updating 2021 with those several abstract black shapes on white newsprint that together spell out the abominable word no others are allowed.
the civilized mind reels.
G*dspeed, america
So problematic you can almost taste it:
https://voila.cd/dessert-francais-tete-de-negre/
Anything you want to get rid of, just claim that people used to call it n****r something, something. Easy peasy. This could be fun!
McWhorter announced in his Substack newsletter today that he is suspending his the newsletter because he has signed up with the New York Times to write two essays/week for the Times. I couldn't tell from his announcement whether those essays will be published on the Times's Op-Ed page or in a NYT newsletter.
Why stop with the rock? These same attitudes are destroying a once great city in Chicago.
What do you think we ought to do about crews of young black men invading neighborhoods where they don’t live to prey on residents? What Chicago has done is abandon preventative policing and re-elect a prosecutor who apparently doesn’t believe gun crime is serious.
Let me add a little more perspective. What was accomplished in removing the rock?
1. We have it demonstrated that the UW administrators are feckless.
... Um that is it.
A company made $50,000 to move the rock. I'm sure they feel they accomplished making money off the university's virtue signaling.
thank you - Assistant Village Idiot taught me a new word said.../ nescient /
... McWhorter is consistently brilliant. The attitude that "these black people are so stupid/unreasonable/easily offended/nescient about history
"The University of Wisconsin has removed a 70-ton boulder..." NY POST Aug. 9
"The University of Wisconsin has removed a 42-ton boulder..." CNN Aug 9
Racist rock reveals weight loss secret!
Rebecca West in her "The New Meaning of Treason" mused about the most privileged of the UK's youth, whose position had only been matched by the wealthier of the ancients when the winds of war blew elsewhere. Who relaxed unthreatened in the lee of the Royal Navy, and their insistence on betraying their country to the Soviet Union/Communism.
She thought all the good press, the fighting for things like old age pensions, labor improvements [see Tonypandy] had been done, plaudits fairly earned distributed fairly.
And what was left for the present generation?
Nearly 60 years since MLK’s Dream speech and NYT still judging students by the color of their skin.
Mr. Forward said...
"The University of Wisconsin has removed a 70-ton boulder..." NY POST Aug. 9
"The University of Wisconsin has removed a 42-ton boulder..." CNN Aug 9
Racist rock reveals weight loss secret!
It's a Large Boulder, the size of of a small boulder
Achilles has it right, I think. The Diversity Inclusion & Equity (DIE) mafia need problems to solve. The university bureaucracy teems with sub-assistant nobodies with degrees in Grievance Studies who, like junior faculty, must publish or perish. Here the “publication” consists of stoking a huge fake fire over less than nothing, over a word that was reportedly used (once!?!) a century ago —by nameless people now long dead, and allegedly associated with a…rock. This is the textbook example of primitive thinking; of animism; of a world whose every feature is inhabited by a genius loci. Magical thinking, that must be indulged, spare no expense.
I am surprised that the University didn’t do the job properly. It’s not enough to *move* the rock. Wherever it goes, its evil taint goes with it, ready to poison any unsuspecting soul who encounters it. The only safe and responsible course would be to break it up; crush it down to sand, preferably by hand, by an army of tearful white supremacists repenting of their poisonous ways.
A reasonable compromise position would have been to leave a lot of hammers next to the Rock and tell the students that the administration has withdrawn its racist protection of the Rock; have at it! It is now a designated area for emotional release and racial healing.
The only real question about moving the rock should be whether the university used a minority owned and operated business to do the job.
Sadly, we'll never realize the MLK dream till we stop judging rocks by the color of their surface. Remember, just because a rock is black doesn't make it bad. Just because Black Rock is made up of greedy bastards doesn't make all black rocks greedy.
No one is more deserving than John McWhorter of the exposure a NYT column gives, nor better skilled to use it to best effect in exploding the nonsense that passes for thought regarding race relations in America, most notably at the NYT.
In one brilliant aside, McWhorter illuminates a common fallacy of woke culture, observing that the anti-rock faction is mistakenly ascribing significance according to literary conventions to a real object in non-fictional, everyday life. But, as with the innocent rock, whatever the former racist associations of, for example, watermelon, does it make sense to say that liking watermelon makes one racist, or that the watermelon fields must be plowed under lest they give offense?
Considering McWhorter’s ability and inclination to employ good sense to, in H.L. Mencken’s formulation, “stir up the animals,” how long before the newsroom zealots that brought down James Bennett and Donald McNeil come for McWhorter?
If I were a UWM alum I would consider what the U was doing with $40,000 of their budget before I decided to give them $500 a year.
I live in Madison Wi, where said rock used to exist. I went to school there too. The rock has never had a racist connotation. Few even knew of it's existence. The Black Student Union and Wunk Sheek (Native American Student group), presented a list of demands to the University and the University caved to just one, moving the rock. I believe that they did this because they could and to show the students that they were serious about racism. One of the other demands was to remove the statue of Abraham Lincoln. Since they clearly were not going to do that, they moved the rock. No, moving the rock makes no difference to the racist climate on campus.Here's the complete list:
1.) Remove the Abraham Lincoln monument located at the top of Bascom Hill and replace it with someone who stands for the justice of all people.
2.) Remove the Chamberlain Rock, formally known as “N*ggerhead Rock”, located on Observatory drive.
3.) Enact a “Moral Restart”— not a “Smart Restart”. (https://taa-madison.org/safe-restart-for-fall-2020/
4.) Defund and subsequently abolish the University of Wisconsin Police Department.
5.) Reopen discussion on how the University can meet the 1969 / 2020 demands with student groups such as the Student Inclusion Coalition and the Wisconsin Black Student Union.
6.) Recognize the educational value of marginalized identity-based student affinity groups.
7.) Implement a permanent funding structure for the student organizations that primarily serve and include predominantly marginalized groups, with funding allocated through the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs or Deputy Vice Chancellor for Diversity and Inclusion.
8.) Improve the support system for marginalized students on campus.
9.) Create a coordinated infrastructure to respond to acts of structural oppression.
10.) Further action from Chancellor Rebecca Blank regarding the meetings between leaders and the general body of the Wisconsin Black Student Union regarding their experiences and recommendations in making this a truly diverse and inclusive campus.
And a rock feels no pain
And an island never cries.
- Simon and Garfunkel
As I commented on the original post about this story, a sensible university president would have told the offended students to have at the rock, and provided sledgehammers for their use, as a direct measure of their level of offense. If the kids weren't invested in their protest enough to provide "sweat equity" in the resolution of the issue, they were playacting. Demanding other people pay good money to support your playacting is wrong, unless of course the playacting is good enough to be supported by ticket sales.
Blacks used to be called the Nword. Maybe the university should have removed them also. They're reminders of a racist past.
I like McWhorter. But he plays both sides. Since the advent of affirmative action, there sure has been racism in America — institutionalized racism against all whites. He’s an academic. He knows that. But he goes on and on, always subverting an insight with a bone thrown to the other side.
Let’s be honest. If anyone really wanted to correct historical instances of racism, every single non-black college and university professor, administrator or president hired prior to 1965 (more like 1975, as it took some time for federal enforcement to gear up) would have to resign, return their titles and tenure and any salary increases accrued from them, and apply for their jobs again under the increasingly psychotic affirmative action regime they imposed on their white sons and daughters and students.
McWhorter knows where his bread is buttered, so he would never suggest that. The real issue is the burden of long-ago racism imposed nearly exclusively on non-minority people born after affirmative action and the craziness it spawned. This is why university presidents shriek so loudly about their racial enlightenment and stomp so hard on their inferiors who dare to dissent: they remember who was in the room — and who wasn’t — when they were hired. Better to performatively sacrifice their own children than lose all the actual privileges they slipped by with while loudly gasbagging about being personally woke. I’m referring to academia and the arts and media here. Exhibit A happens to be the burgeoning NYTimes purges. I wish McWhorter luck there. He won’t last long, not if he refuses the David Brooks lobotomy.
Post a Comment