終極問題的困擾 終極問題的困擾 自佛洛依德事件以來，美國社會關(guān)于種族的爭議不斷。最近又有一個熱點，來自于一位叫Karida Leigh Brown的社會學(xué)學(xué)者，現(xiàn)任加州大學(xué)洛杉磯分校的社會學(xué)助理教授。她是一位黑人，同時也是2017年美國社會學(xué)協(xié)會最佳博士論文的獲得者。我們可以在美國社會學(xué)協(xié)會的官網(wǎng)上查到這篇論文的獲獎記錄。 Karida Leigh Brown 2016年從布朗大學(xué)畢業(yè)，這篇論文是她的畢業(yè)論文。論文關(guān)注的是一個在大遷徙期間從阿拉巴馬州遷移到肯塔基州的非洲裔美國人社區(qū)。她運用復(fù)雜的歷史分析和口述史方法，運用種族、移居和文化創(chuàng)傷的理論來揭示種族隔離和公民權(quán)利背景下的黑人移民主體性。 ASA在給這篇論文的頒獎辭中提到“布朗博士的杰出論文為我們的領(lǐng)域做出了獨特的貢獻。” 然后，Karida Leigh Brown卻在6月8日發(fā)推特揭露了一樁陳年舊事：當(dāng)年這篇論文答辯時卻被系里的白人教員指責(zé)為“not sociology”，因為brown不愿意更改主題最后被迫更換了論文答辯主席。 在眾多的評論中，有人提出了問題的核心在于“白人脆弱性”（White Fragility）。這個詞出現(xiàn)在2017年，來源于羅賓·迪安吉洛（Robin DiAngelo）出版的《白人的脆弱性：為什么白人很難談?wù)摲N族主義》（White Fragility：WHY IT'S SO HARD FOR WHITE PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT RACISM），意指“當(dāng)接觸到涉及種族不平等和不公正的信息時，一名白人會感到不自在并帶有防衛(wèi)情緒”。 作者是一位白人女性，常年從事關(guān)于種族問題的“培訓(xùn)”，應(yīng)邀到各種企業(yè)，幫助他們提高員工的種族問題意識。該書基于作者二十年經(jīng)驗的總結(jié)和觀察，發(fā)現(xiàn)，終極問題是，大多數(shù)白人拒絕把種族歧視看成是自己的問題。 在本次弗洛伊德事件之后，該書成為了熱門暢銷價書，一度在美國亞馬遜圖書銷售榜中排名第一。這本書當(dāng)年剛出版后，《紐約客》雜志就發(fā)表了一篇長篇書評，此次事件后《紐約客》也在推特上再次轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)這篇書評。我們把這篇書評翻譯出來，以饗讀者。 凱蒂·沃爾德曼，《紐約客》，2018年7月23日 羅賓·迪安吉洛（Robin DiAngelo） （燈塔出版社，2018） 白人的脆弱性： 為什么白人不愿談起種族主義 在為美國公司舉辦多元化培訓(xùn)和文化能力工作坊的20多年中，學(xué)者和教育家羅賓·迪安基洛（Robin DiAngelo）注意到白人不擅于談?wù)摲N族主義，這一點出人意料又頗具戲劇性。2011年，迪安吉洛（DiAngelo）杜撰了“白人脆弱性”一詞，用以描述白人在種族和種族主義觀念受到挑戰(zhàn)尤其是當(dāng)他們感到被牽涉入白人至上問題時所表現(xiàn)出的令人難以置信的防御性。 迪安吉洛在新書《白人脆弱性》中指出，我們這個高度隔離的社會是為了使白人免受種族尷尬的影響而建立起來的，以至于他們一遭受壓力就會崩潰。 本身是白人的迪安吉洛強調(diào)構(gòu)成“白人脆弱性”的觀點是“站得住腳的”， 迪安吉洛解釋說，“特別是在他們擊退挑戰(zhàn)的同時，恢復(fù)白人均衡和我們的種族舒適感，并保持我們在種族等級體系中的主導(dǎo)地位?！?她發(fā)現(xiàn)，事實證明對于黑人來說喚醒“白人脆弱”這一沉睡巨龍的社會成本往往太高，以至于許多黑人在看到歧視時不會冒險指出這一點。而對“白人團結(jié)”的期望——白人不會糾正彼此的種族錯誤，以維護和平——也使得真正的盟友關(guān)系難以實現(xiàn)?！鞍兹舜嗳跣浴笔狗N族主義這一話題被避而不談。 迪安吉洛在她的書中主要針對白人，她對像她自己（和我一樣）這樣的白人自由主義者保留了最嚴(yán)厲的批評，她認(rèn)為他們拒絕承認(rèn)自己參與了種族主義體系。她寫道：“我相信，白人激進分子每天都在給有色人種造成傷害。”這些人不僅沒有認(rèn)識到自己也是同謀，而且對正在進行的反種族主義運動抱著自私的態(tài)度：“以至于達到了這樣的程度，白人進步分子認(rèn)為我們已經(jīng)達成目標(biāo)了，我們就會竭盡全力確保其他人也認(rèn)為我們已經(jīng)達成目標(biāo)。”甚至那些看上去真實可信且出于善意的種族觀念和回應(yīng)也可能是白人至上主義的產(chǎn)物，以使白人至上主義永存。白人從美國的政治和經(jīng)濟體系中獲利，這種體系使種族“贏家”獲得優(yōu)勢，也使種族“輸家”受到壓迫。然而，迪安吉洛寫道，白人堅持種族清白的概念，這無疑是一種把概念武器化的否認(rèn)，將黑人定位為種族概念的“持有者”和種族知識的守護者。相反，白人卻是不顯眼的，默認(rèn)的，即一種無種族狀態(tài)。而“色盲”即種族無所謂的觀點，也阻止我們?nèi)?yīng)對解決種族差異其實還是有所謂的這一問題。 《白人脆弱性》一書致力于揭開這些所謂白人支柱的面紗：那些在我們沒有意識到的情況下支持種族主義信仰的假設(shè)。這些思想（意識形態(tài)）包括個人主義，或者說是認(rèn)為一個人自身命運要靠自己來書寫的顯而易見的美國白人夢，以及客觀態(tài)度——一個人可以讓自己完全擺脫偏見的信心。她指出，作為一個個體而不因你的膚色而與任何負面的東西相關(guān)聯(lián)，這大多只是白人的特權(quán)；盡管在美國，大多數(shù)學(xué)校槍手、國內(nèi)暴恐分子和強奸犯都是白人，但街上的白人很少會淪為負面的刻板印象。 當(dāng)人們決定不再容忍偏見時，偏見也不會消失。它只是在尋找避免被發(fā)現(xiàn)的方法。迪安吉洛聲稱：“隨著時間的推移，對種族主義最有效的適應(yīng)方式，就是認(rèn)為種族主義是卑鄙之人所持有的有意識的偏見。”這種“好/壞二元對立”構(gòu)造了一個由邪惡的種族主義者和有同情心的非種族主義者組成的世界，它本身就是以種族主義為架構(gòu)，消除了系統(tǒng)性的不公正，并給種族主義灌輸了如此具有破壞性的道德意義，以至于白人，特別是進步人士，無法忍受他們在其中的共謀。（暫停一下，白人讀者。您可能潛意識里對種族主義產(chǎn)生了強烈的負面情緒以避免不得不幫助消除種族主義。。）在打破黑人男性是充滿危險和暴力的幻覺時，她并不滿足于簡單的事實核查；她向白人展示了這個神話的用武之地——去掩蓋歷史上對非裔美國人的暴行，并為持續(xù)的虐待提供正當(dāng)理由。 在書里，迪安吉洛時而會對白人讀者采取一種舒緩的撫慰式語氣，就好像在安撫一個快要發(fā)脾氣的孩子。她寫道：“如果你認(rèn)為種族主義就是有人有意識的因為種族問題而討厭別人，那么我同意，在我不認(rèn)識你的情況下，把你看作種族主義者是非常冒犯的行為?！薄拔乙餐?，如果這是你對種族主義的定義，而你又反對種族主義，那么你就不是種族主義者?，F(xiàn)在讓我們深呼吸。我不是在利用種族主義這個定義，也不是說你不道德。如果你能在我闡述觀點的時候保持開放姿態(tài)，那么你很快就會發(fā)現(xiàn)我說的有道理。” “自以為是”成為《白人脆弱性》的誘人補充，就像杜松子酒之于神秘小說一樣。（當(dāng)?shù)习布迕枋鏊囊粋€朋友對一個以黑人為主的社區(qū)不屑一顧，說它“糟糕”，不安全時，我心里想“我永遠不會”。）然而，這本書的重點在于每個白人都認(rèn)為自己是個例外，是為數(shù)不多的能神奇地在他們的人生中有幸擺脫種族歧主義預(yù)設(shè)的人。 《白人脆弱性》的價值在于它系統(tǒng)性地、無可辯駁地揭露了思想和行動上方面的種族主義，并且呼吁人們時刻保持謙遜和警惕。與個人內(nèi)心深處不易察覺的，有時具有無法抵制的說服力的種族偏見做斗爭，是一個人要為之畢生努力的事。 附原文： White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism by Robin DiAngelo (Beacon Press, 2018) In more than twenty years of running diversity-training and cultural-competency workshops for American companies, the academic and educator Robin DiAngelo has noticed that white people are sensationally, histrionically bad at discussing racism. In 2011, DiAngelo coined the term “white fragility” to describe the disbelieving defensiveness that white people exhibit when their ideas about race and racism are challenged — and particularly when they feel implicated in white supremacy. In a new book, “White Fragility,” DiAngelo {snip} argues that our largely segregated society is set up to insulate whites from racial discomfort, so that they fall to pieces at the first application of stress. DiAngelo, who is white, emphasizes that the stances that make up white fragility {snip} “work,” DiAngelo explains, “to reinstate white equilibrium as they repel the challenge, return our racial comfort, and maintain our dominance within the racial hierarchy.” She finds that the social costs for a black person in awakening the sleeping dragon of white fragility often prove so high that many black people don’t risk pointing out discrimination when they see it. And the expectation of “white solidarity” — white people will forbear from correcting each other’s racial missteps, to preserve the peace — makes genuine allyship elusive. White fragility holds racism in place. DiAngelo addresses her book mostly to white people, and she reserves her harshest criticism for white liberals like herself (and like me), whom she sees as refusing to acknowledge their own participation in racist systems. “I believe,” she writes, “that white progressives cause the most daily damage to people of color.” Not only do these people fail to see their complicity, but they take a self-serving approach to ongoing anti-racism efforts: “To the degree that white progressives think we have arrived, we will put our energy into making sure that others see us as having arrived.” Even the racial beliefs and responses that feel authentic or well-intentioned have likely been programmed by white supremacy, to perpetuate white supremacy. Whites profit off of an American political and economic system that showers advantages on racial “winners” and oppresses racial “l(fā)osers.” Yet, DiAngelo writes, white people cling to the notion of racial innocence, a form of weaponized denial that positions black people as the “havers” of race and the guardians of racial knowledge. Whiteness, on the other hand, scans as invisible, default, a form of racelessness. “Color blindness,” the argument that race shouldn’t matter, prevents us from grappling with how it does. Much of “White Fragility” is dedicated to pulling back the veil on these so-called pillars of whiteness: assumptions that prop up racist beliefs without our realizing it. Such ideologies include individualism, or the distinctly white-American dream that one writes one’s own destiny, and objectivity, the confidence that one can free oneself entirely from bias. To be perceived as an individual, to not be associated with anything negative because of your skin color, she notes, is a privilege largely afforded to white people; although most school shooters, domestic terrorists, and rapists in the United States are white, it is rare to see a white man on the street reduced to a stereotype. {snip} Nor does prejudice disappear when people decide that they will no longer tolerate it. It just looks for ways to avoid detection. “The most effective adaptation of racism over time,” DiAngelo claims, “is the idea that racism is conscious bias held by mean people.” This “good/bad binary,” positing a world of evil racists and compassionate non-racists, is itself a racist construct, eliding systemic injustice and imbuing racism with such shattering moral meaning that white people, especially progressives, cannot bear to face their collusion in it. (Pause on that, white reader. You may have subconsciously developed your strong negative feelings about racism in order to escape having to help dismantle it.) Unpacking the fantasy of black men as dangerous and violent, she does not simply fact-check it; she shows the myth’s usefulness to white people — to obscure the historical brutality against African-Americans, and to justify continued abuse. DiAngelo sometimes adopts a soothing, conciliatory tone toward white readers, as if she were appeasing a child on the verge of a tantrum. “If your definition of a racist is someone who holds conscious dislike of people because of race, then I agree that it is offensive for me to suggest that you are racist when I don’t know you,” she writes. “I also agree that if this is your definition of racism, and you are against racism, then you are not racist. Now breathe. I am not using this definition of racism, and I am not saying that you are immoral. If you can remain open as I lay out my argument, it should soon begin to make sense.” Self-righteousness becomes a seductive complement to “White Fragility,” as gin is to a mystery novel. (“I would never,” I thought, when DiAngelo described the conversation in which her friend dismissed a predominantly black neighborhood as “bad,” unsafe.) Yet the point of the book is that each white person believes herself the exception, one of very few souls magically exempt from a lifetime of racist conditioning. {snip} The value in “White Fragility” lies in its methodical, irrefutable exposure of racism in thought and action, and its call for humility and vigilance. Combatting one’s inner voices of racial prejudice, sneaky and, at times, irresistibly persuasive, is a life’s work. 
聯(lián)系客服
