Read on Twitter
The @Our_DA repurposing of “non-racialism” & the side-wink at Martin Luther King misses the paradox that race is. And in so doing their approach is fundamentally flawed.
And the paradox is this: to undo race you have to see race.
A thread... https://twitter.com/Our_DA/status/1309080925347684354
And the paradox is this: to undo race you have to see race.
A thread... https://twitter.com/Our_DA/status/1309080925347684354
The DA’s chosen blindness to race originates in two areas:
1. The claim that race is a false social construct.
2. The idea that society consists only of individuals. That collectives don’t exist.
1. The claim that race is a false social construct.
2. The idea that society consists only of individuals. That collectives don’t exist.
A social construct cannot be “false”. By virtue of it being “social” it means that it’s used widely, that a “collective” applies it.
Is that society correct in doing so? Perhaps no, but that doesn’t render it false.
The NB point is that society (consistently) uses it.
Is that society correct in doing so? Perhaps no, but that doesn’t render it false.
The NB point is that society (consistently) uses it.
Or seen from the other side, what is the converse, what is a “true” social construct?
Age? Gender? Language? Economic means?
How do these differ from race?
Why does race not cut it?
Why is gender then not a false social construct?
Age? Gender? Language? Economic means?
How do these differ from race?
Why does race not cut it?
Why is gender then not a false social construct?
Race = categorization = a data processing tool.
Our brains cannot attend to every data point so we use categories to lump data
And that categorization we get from society (language & culture)
But the categories we inherit/learn also come packaged with meaning = stereotyping
Our brains cannot attend to every data point so we use categories to lump data
And that categorization we get from society (language & culture)
But the categories we inherit/learn also come packaged with meaning = stereotyping
And it’s the negative stereotyping that non-racialism is about.
Both in dealing with its lasting impact (as reflected in the status quo), and in building a future society that doesn’t distribute benefits on the basis of those stereotypes.
Both in dealing with its lasting impact (as reflected in the status quo), and in building a future society that doesn’t distribute benefits on the basis of those stereotypes.
To deal with the lasting impacts of slavery, colonisation & apartheid - in which race was a fundamental construct, a society - in this case specifically SA - must measure those impacts.
And you can’t do that if you don’t see race.
And you can’t do that if you don’t see race.
To teach adults & children how to deal constructively with difference, you have to see difference, you have to see race.
Our identity is determined by how we are both different to -, and the same as others. And that in turn shapes the in & out groups we derive group ID from.
Our identity is determined by how we are both different to -, and the same as others. And that in turn shapes the in & out groups we derive group ID from.
The DA deflects from the non-racialism critique by claiming media bias against the DA, that critics are DA-verskrik.
It’s a good ploy, intentional or not, becoz it means the constitutional-democracy party can avoid confronting its very clear opposition to Sect 9: Equality
It’s a good ploy, intentional or not, becoz it means the constitutional-democracy party can avoid confronting its very clear opposition to Sect 9: Equality
