Re: denny's

[kelley <kcwalker@xxxxxxx>]

katha,

i certainly agree that it's not just about economics.  but the problem that
i'm having with the discussion, even after andy's examples, is that these
are still not examples of structural racism.  there's a difference.  as i
learned more yesterday from a friend of mine who's subbed to m-fem, denny's
was *organizationally* racist--it had an organizational culture through and
through from what i understood--but that's not the same thing as structural
racism.  all the examples given thus far are about individuals consciously
acting out on their assumptions that, for whatever reasons, blacks are less
qualified for g&t programs, can be mistreated with impugnity in favor of
whites waiting for medical treatment because somehow less deserving of
decent treatment, and so forth.

the example i gave about my employers at the rest. i worked was trying to
get at that, though i'm still unhappy with that example, but it just
happened to fit w/ the topic at hand.  structural racism is hidden, less
overt and is concealed in the taken-for-granted assumptions about, for
example, norms of what constitutes the 'good' employee.  among the managers
i interviewed, for ex, part of being a 'good' mgr has to do with
comportment, dress, speech, and possessing cultural capital in so far as
they have discussions of art, opera, literature, broadway shows, etc.  so,
anyone lacking that cultural capital or appearing to, lacking comfort with
modes of bodily comportment and speech won't advance.  those managers who
felt lacking in those respects confided to doing a lot of homework b/c they
felt like imposters.

the point is that there is no obvious racism in the above.  indeed, the
folks perpetuating the above kinds of structural racism can't even see what
they're doing it is so completely natural to them and concealed from their
consciousness.  this, of course, relates to the ebonics thread at lbo, as
well.  norms of what constitutes standard english, correct grammar, speech,
and style are structurally racist.  and i'll bet a nice crisp twenty that,
those of us who are academics on this list, would struggle with that one!
is correcting the work of my black students who often capitalize certain
words for no apparent reason or who use different verb conjugations a form
of cultural imperialism?  of course it is. but the question i'd raise is
this:  "where do we focus our efforts?"  some forms of cultural imperialism
are easier to deal with and yet may well be less significant in the long
run.  others are more difficult to undermine and yet they are the very ones
that are important, in my view.

and this is also the impetus behind the argument for the use of the concept
of racialization which focuses our attention on the source of racism as
emanating from the dominant group.  this is an important shift, i think.
and yet, as i understand it, such a concept can be deployed so as to
understand how poor whites are "racialized" in similar ways which, in my
mind, undermines the potential power of conceptualizing this as a process
of racialization because it moves us away from cultural essentialism but so
much so that it seems to lack rigor.

some thoughts.

kelley