Stuff White People Like
October 29, 2009 25 Comments
If you’re a “progressive”, chances are there are certain cities you find extremely desirable and which embody the best in how you think cities should be. You might even make or at least read and approve of Lists Of The Best Cities To Live In, lists that (coincidentally, of course) highly correlate with how “progressive” those cities are.
Chances also are that those cities are extremely white.
In my view this pattern also seems to scale up to the country level (think Sweden and the other standardly Good Socialist Scandinavian Countries – no “progressive” praises, say, some mid-African socialist country in quite the same way) and down to the neighborhood level (“progressives” may like San Francisco but are there lots of e.g. black people where in the particular parts of San Francisco where all the “progressives” actually want to live? do “progressives” want to live in the neighborhoods e.g. 1-2 miles south of China Basin/PacBell Park? Similarly for New York, which “progressives” also like: but are they talking about Harlem? would they even ever go to Harlem in a million years?).
Culturally as well: Do tons of black people watch PBS or listen to NPR? Do “progressives” watch Tyler Perry movies or George Lopez on TV? Are black people as a rule generally highly concerned with “walkable neighborhoods”, high-speed rail, bicycling, recycling? Do “progressives” tend to spend every weekend at family picnics with loud stereos in public parks? How many Hispanics are, like, totally into Radiohead and Coldplay?
I’m starting to wonder: doesn’t “progressive” basically just mean “white”?
HT Steve Sailer.
Now that is a good question.
And that is coming from a white guy who likes Hip-hop, basketball, is a minority in his own family, fucking hates “recylcing”, and bicycling too (especially those weekend motherfuckers who shave their legs and wear the spandex team-bicycle-rider suits).
However, I love Radiohead, and I don’t know any black people who do (not to say that there aren’t any). I hate NPR and PBS. In fact, I think both of them smack of a sickening whiteness that I can’t stand.
I guess I’m a walking contradiction.
P.S. I also like the Grateful Dead, the Art Ensemble of Chicago, the Black Eyed Peas, Morrisey, Seinfeld, George Lopez, Dave Chapelle, and I hate Maya Angeliou, or whatever the fuck her name is.
What does all that make me?
It makes you not whitey-white, like a lot of “progressives” are.
Pastorius is not the only walking contradiction. In fact, I think most of the people if they don’t live in intentional isolation – are too.
Here’s a personal anecdote.
A few days ago I went to my local Korean green-grocery, and was shopping for ingredients for a Asian-style chicken. I had a recipe in mind (but not a list on paper); I put in my basket a)can of coconut milk, b)limes c)vial of curry powder d) vial of cumin…I knew I was missing something but couldn’t remember what. So I went to the register to ask. My Korean proprietors (I’ve been shopping there for years, they know me and are very friendly) couldn’t suggest anything…but a fellow shopper, a black Caribbean guy, said: Ginger! And he was right.
I doubt many blacks will feel at home in all-white neighborhood, and reverse applies to whites, me included. Regardless of political orientation.
I’m tired of Sailer’s simplistic propagandism. I think people who play race card, on either side, are devoid of decency.
I guess I’m “devoid of decency” cuz I’m “playing the race card”. Or at least, one could accuse me of that.
I think it’s an interesting phenomenon that “progressive” has such a huge overlap with and seems to correspond to (a certain type of) whiteness. I also think it’s worth pointing out because “progressives” have been getting away with a posture of racial enlightenment for too long.
“progressive” has such a huge overlap with and seems to correspond to (a certain type of) whiteness
That doesn’t make all whites “progressive”, or all “progressive” – whites. You seem to be, just as Sailer is, fond of equaling the two.
As I said, the Leftism is the culprit, and not the race of the leftist.
And, Pastorius: I don’t agree with you re: “sickening whiteness” of PBS. I am sick of PBS, but not because of their “whiteness”, but rather of their “talking points’ progressive agenda”. They have plenty of mandatory “black history” or “black studies” or “blacks as victims” programs – but try to find a documentary about real problems that Blacks are experiencing – for instance, anti-white policies of South Africa after Mandela’s victory, or culture of crime and dependency in American inner cities, or try to find an interview with Thomas Sowell, or something that promotes an previous-era American ideal of “melting pot” rather than “multiculturism”.
The problem is not racial underrepresentation (or vice-versa), it’s overrepresentation of the Left.
I am sick of PBS, but not because of their “whiteness”, but rather of their “talking points’ progressive agenda”.
But those are closely related. Are they not?
They have plenty of mandatory “black history” or “black studies” or “blacks as victims” programs
Exactly. And what could be more white than that?
You’re making my point for me
No, I am not making your point for you. You point is that “progressive basically means white”.
That’s not very clever, to say the least.
Etat,
You said: Pastorius: I don’t agree with you re: “sickening whiteness” of PBS. I am sick of PBS, but not because of their “whiteness” …
I say: I read that back, and it looks like a gross generalization, or, as you said of Sailer, a “simplistic propagandism”.
However, here is what I mean.
PBS and NPR both trade in pseudo-high-brow culture. NPR plays Bach in between brutal news stories, and that tends to flatten out the brutality they discuss and make it palatable, mellowed like a fine wine.
That disgusts me.
Why not play some damned Public Enemy, Sex Pistols, or Slayer, when you just did a story about a Palestinian suicide bomber killing 40 Jews in a market?
And PBS, don’t get me started… Ah, but you did. PBS plays British productions of Jane Austen. And, they play symphonies, the BBC News, and the McNeil-Lehrer Report. They also play oldies concerts, featuring people like the guy who sang “Eve of Destruction.” Who could remember him? PBS contributors. That’s who?
Have you ever seen any modern day avant garde culture on PBS? For instance, have you ever seen the music of Joshua Redman featured on PBS? Hell, he’s not even far out? How about Carl Denson?
Have you ever seen Rage Against the Machine on PBS?
Have you ever seen a special on Lucien Freud?
Have you ever seen an interview with David Horowitz or with Jean Baudrillard?
Have you ever seen Walid Phares on PBS?
Have you ever seen Dave Chapelle on PBS?
Have you ever seen Arvo Part on PBS?
The answer to all these questions is a Mighty and Decisive “No”!!!
PBS doesn’t know shit about culture. It only plays at culture, and all the culture it plays at is what white people regarded as high culture 30-40 years ago.
Do you dispute me? Hey, maybe I’m wrong.
I hate NPR and PBS. They make me sick.
By the way, sorry for my overwrought passion, but I really, really hate NPR and PBS.
Pastorius, that’s nice to see a young man (you are a man, right? one is never sure, online) being so far from “indifferent”.
But why do you think I should debate you on the statement that “PBS know shit about culture”?
“Culture”* was not the subject of your comment to which I replied, addressing you. It was “whiteness”. I responded to this word and what it represent – but you seem not to understand my comment, or decided not to pursue this [logical] line of dialogue and introduce something irrelevant instead.
* I don’t consider Dave Chapelle a contributor to culture – unlike Parv; even juxtaposing these two people is…strange. Some of the names you referred to I had to google – and still didn’t form an opinion of them. I don’t think even if PBS would feature the names you mention I would watch.
Wow, I didn’t realize PBS/NPR would (or even could) stir such passion
Thing is, I don’t really even dislike either one that much per se. Although yes I do roll my eyes when I see the ‘Eve Of Destruction’ guy during the telethons. To me, that’s more representative of having an aging/nostalgic audience –
An aging/nostalgic white audience, when you think about it.
And as for NPR, in grad school I had an officemate (a black guy, as it turns out) who listened to it every afternoon. I found it sometimes interesting, always soporific.
I don’t have huge negative opinions of these things (other than wishing I weren’t paying for them). That is not my point here. My point here is that the culture that has evolved and developed to surround the word “progressive” has a reputation for being oh so multiracial, postracial, enlightened, mixed, integrated – but when you actually look at the details, all of that is the opposite of the truth and in a way it’s clear from what they demand (e.g. cool city neighborhoods, and housing projects for the blacks, with plenty of buffer in between..”healthcare”..) that “progressives” seek a world/culture that is coddled and sheltered from, among other things, real, live actual nonwhite people (other than, like, Asians).
“Progressives” talk the talk but they don’t walk the walk. Their feel-good integration words are all talk (and PBS specials, and bumper stickers…). When push comes to shove, your typical “progressive” college kid – typically a white kid from an upper middle class family – in the end will him/herself get a good, fairly high-paying job in some (largely white/Asian) computer/net company, marry another white person (or possibly an Asian), buy a house in the (largely white, or possibly Asian) suburbs, send their kids to coddled (largely white, or possibly Asian) schools, and participate largely in fairly white activities. But because they checked a box marked “Obama” they get to go around looking down their noses at everyone who is supposedly more racially unenlightened.
I think it’s fair to call them on this, that’s all.
That doesn’t make all whites “progressive”, or all “progressive” – whites.
Never said it did. I am speaking in generalizations, just as are the studies that find Portland to be the most ‘livable’ city, or whatever.
Obviously I don’t think all whites are “progressive”. Nor do I think all “progressives” are whites (though part of what I’m saying is that most “progressives” are being culturally “white”, in some ways…you don’t have to actually be white to go around praising Sweden but if you do that it is fair to observe that you’re emulating, well, whites – right?)
You seem to be, just as Sailer is, fond of equaling the two.
Yes, I am fond of comparing the two, because I think it’s an interesting, unique, and important insight.
As I said, the Leftism is the culprit, and not the race of the leftist.
Well I never said race was any kind of “culprit”, for anything. I have nothing against whites or the white race! I am just observing that “progressive” attitudes correlate with whiteness, white concerns, white preferences. This is not widely understood and perhaps it should be.
No, I am not making your point for you. You point is that “progressive basically means white”.
That’s not very clever, to say the least.
Well I think it’s pretty darned clever. So it seems, we are at an impasse.
Nothing’s clever or particularly unique in being a racist – and as far as I can judge your genetic composition, being racially prejudiced against your own race is a very un-unique quality, very popular with “White Progressives” whom you criticize. If I’m mistaken, and you are not white, than this quality – raging against “whiteness” by non-whites – is even less unique.
So when non-whites displays Leftist mindset you still accuse them of “whiteness” – this time it’s by “emulating whites”. Tell me, then, what human activity that blacks perform, would be not “emulating whites”? Using computer? Establishing political system of a country? Reading/writing/using arithmetic? Designing roads? Carrying a child in carriage, not tied to the mother’s back as it’s customary in African backwater? Wearing clothes? All this is “emulating whites”, since all of this is achievements of civilization of whites. And where would you place Thomas Sowell, for instance, or other rightwing/libertarian of non-white race? Apparently, it could be said they too are “emulating whites”, but that doesn’t make them a brand of “whiteness” you are against.
“Stuff white people like” is as useless, or imprecise, a qualifier as “stuff non-white like”. Your and Sailer’s characterizations is deliberate shifting of the problem into racial relations area, and will result only in more racial discord. But what’s more important, it is surface-deep. Hell, even Marxists are cleverer than this barely-slapped-together notion: at least they have noticed a unifying system, throughout races, ages and customs: class.
It is a very simplistic, crude and alltogether primitive categorization, to say that if a person likes clean, crime-free, convenient to live in city like Portland, he is either white (meaning, “progressive”) or emulates “whites”. A person with a well-formed habit of logical deduction like you surely knows that correlation is not causation.
And this is even not correlation!
I am white, Jewish, a city-dweller (before and after moving to US) – and I’m not a Leftist. In your system I must be an oddity.
You remind me of people on conservative blogs, who told me that it is my upbringing in ex-USSR that makes me an atheist and therefore a godless communist; never mind that a)huge masses of people who were raised in teh same conditions as I was are believers in deities b) that being an atheist does not automatically makes one a communist. No, they are dismiss my objections – what’s facts if they already know the Truth? – and they too, consider themselves “pretty damn clever”.
Nothing’s clever or particularly unique in being a racist – and as far as I can judge your genetic composition, being racially prejudiced against your own race is a very un-unique quality, very popular with “White Progressives” whom you criticize. If I’m mistaken, and you are not white, than this quality – raging against “whiteness” by non-whites – is even less unique.
I don’t think I was “raging against” whiteness, or even criticizing whiteness at all. Why do you think I was?
Tell me, then, what human activity that blacks perform, would be not “emulating whites”? Using computer? Establishing political system of a country? Reading/writing/using arithmetic? Designing roads? Carrying a child in carriage, not tied to the mother’s back as it’s customary in African backwater? Wearing clothes? All this is “emulating whites”, since all of this is achievements of civilization of whites.
Pretty sure that politics, reading/writing/arithmetic, roads, clothing are not achievements that can be claimed by “whites” per se.
And where would you place Thomas Sowell, for instance, or other rightwing/libertarian of non-white race? Apparently, it could be said they too are “emulating whites”,
No, Sowell does not strike me as “emulating whites”.
“Stuff white people like” is as useless, or imprecise, a qualifier as “stuff non-white like”.
Well surely it’s more precise (because “white people” is more specific than “non-white people”). Whether it’s useful is up to the beholder. I find it useful – it is useful to label patterns that people previously hadn’t noticed. The correlation between “progressivism” and various white-people hangups and cultural obsessions is one such pattern.
Your and Sailer’s characterizations is deliberate shifting of the problem into racial relations area, and will result only in more racial discord.
I’m pretty sure I’m not important enough to cause racial discord even if I tried….
It is a very simplistic, crude and alltogether primitive categorization, to say that if a person likes clean, crime-free, convenient to live in city like Portland, he is either white (meaning, “progressive”) or emulates “whites”.
“clean” and “crime-free” are pretty universal wishes, granted. but how are things kept clean and crime-free there? evidently by housing policies that have the effect of keeping the city fairly white – for one thing.
As for “convenient to live in”, what’s “convenient to live in” depends on one’s preferences. Which correlates with culture.
A person with a well-formed habit of logical deduction like you surely knows that correlation is not causation.
What causation do you think I was trying to point out? I was identifying an interesting correlation, nothing more.
I am white, Jewish, a city-dweller (before and after moving to US) – and I’m not a Leftist. In your system I must be an oddity.
Of course you are. As you know, the vast majority of Jews in your city are Leftist, even more so than in the country at large, probably.
You remind me of people on conservative blogs,
Well, this is a fairly conservative blog, I would say…the shoe fits I guess….
-Of course you are raging against whiteness – to conclude it it’s enough to read your post and subsequent comments.
-I said “establishing a political system of a country”, not “politics”, which is imprecise and open for interpretation. And yes, it (as everything else I listed) IS invention and achievement of “white” civilization. [to prevent you from referring to China, etc: the contest of your and Sailer’s post is here (USA) and now (post-modern society)
-Of course Sowell “emulating” whites – per your logic. Because if the only characteristic of him that you see is a “black man”, not “conservative”, “capitalist economist & politologist”, “Right-wing scientist, follower of theories of M. Friedman and Austrian School of economics”, etc etc, and when you see that all the theories he defends were NOT invented by black people, than every thing he states could be attributed to his “emulating” somebody else – in this case, whites.
-”patterns people previously haven’t noticed”? really? Starting with uncle Thom, every black man who adopts principles of western civilization he’s a part of, is accused of being lackey of whites. Btw, this accusation was thrown at Sowell, too. Apparently, you think it’s fair. “Whites” as a qualifier is misleading, because, to say it very, very simply, there are a lot of differences between whites. Not just genetical/ethnic, but political, cultural, ethical, intellectual, etc. Much better qualifier is “progressive”, because it points to a certain common to a said group set of values, actions, logical conclusions and predictable behavior. As I said – these people could be and are of various races. Yes, whites are prevalent in “progressives”- by the reason that whites are majority in the population, in general.
Re:”vast majority of Jews are leftist” – see this. Once again, this doesn’t mean that all Jews are leftists (or even socialists, or even Democrats – who, do you think in this case, are people with Jewish last names hatefully called “neocons”?), or that all leftists are Jews. But you say a similar thing – that “whiteness” is a sign of a “progressive”.
That’s the attempted causation I pointed to.
The shoe fits – how? Do you also share these people’s logic I just described? If yes, I have nothing common with you, Sir, and will consider you an enemy from now on. Whatever you call yourself – conservative, white, orange, striped or libertarian – for me you’ll be a racist anti-Semitic bigoted idiot.
Of course you are raging against whiteness – to conclude it it’s enough to read your post and subsequent comments.
Well, you’ve evidently done the latter and concluded the former. But this doesn’t mean that’s what I was actually doing. For the record I’d rather watch PBS than a Tyler Perry movie any day.
I said “establishing a political system of a country”, not “politics”,
Kinda hard to have one without the other. Anyway, so is it really your (bizarre) claim that White People were the first to Establish A Political System Of A Country?
Of course Sowell “emulating” whites – per your logic.
I say precisely the opposite but you think that ‘per my logic’ I’m saying the opposite of what I said? Huh?
Because if the only characteristic of him that you see is a “black man”, not “conservative”, “capitalist economist & politologist”, “Right-wing scientist, follower of theories of M. Friedman and Austrian School of economics”, etc etc,
And if pigs had wings…where are you getting any of this? I know Thomas Sowell primarily from some books and essay collections of his that I’ve read. I’m not even sure I know what he looks like. How did you make up this notion that ‘the only characteristic of him that I see is a black man’.
”patterns people previously haven’t noticed”? really? Starting with uncle Thom, every black man who adopts principles of western civilization he’s a part of, is accused of being lackey of whites.
But that is not the pattern I was even talking about. How did we even get from Whole Foods-shopping “progressives” to black uncle toms?
“Whites” as a qualifier is misleading, because, to say it very, very simply, there are a lot of differences between whites.
No duh. Again: generalizing.
Yes, whites are prevalent in “progressives”- by the reason that whites are majority in the population, in general.
Well, I think there can be and are additional reasons.
Re:”vast majority of Jews are leftist” – see this.
I saw it. It’s neo-neocon talking about Podhoretz’s book about the fact that…the vast majority of Jews are leftists.
Ok then. And?
Once again, this doesn’t mean that all Jews are leftists
Of course it doesn’t. “Vast majority” and “all” have different meanings. And?
But you say a similar thing – that “whiteness” is a sign of a “progressive”.
Heh. Actually, I said the opposite: that “progressive” is a sign of whiteness.
The shoe fits – how? Do you also share these people’s logic I just described? If yes, I have nothing common with you, Sir, and will consider you an enemy from now on.
This is so dramatic! I love it
Now that I, Sir, am your enemy, what will happen? Can’t wait to find out…
Whatever you call yourself – conservative, white, orange, striped or libertarian – for me you’ll be a racist anti-Semitic bigoted idiot.
Wow, now I’m “anti-Semitic” too. Oh boy.
Demagogue.
The hell with you.
Um, you ok?
Wait!
Did Etat just call you a “Demagogue”?
Are you sure this isn’t just another one of them satire blogs?
By the way, dude, I can’t even begin to understand how you can’t hate NPR and PBS if you feel the way you do about Progressives.
NPR and PBS are the mouthpieces of hypocritical Progressivism. They are the incarnation of the ideology. They embody all the bullshit. That’s why that McGuire guy is still singing Eve of Destruction.
That’s why in the next ten years they’ll start “celebrating” Sting, Paul Simon, and Peter Gabriel on their telethon funding drives.
Think about it? Who has been more “Progressive” in music history than Paul Simon, Peter Gabriel, and Sting? They wrote the same old songs, surrounded themselves with black African musicians, and voila, they were “Progressive.”
It’s plantation music.
Just you watch. You’ll be seeing 25 year retrospectives of “Graceland”, “Dreams of Blue Turtles”, and “So” any year now.
You know it’s gonna happen.
By the way, have you ever seen Milton Nascimento or Richard Bona on PBS?
No?
I didn’t think so.
But, you’ve seen ‘em on my blog.
And, I’m a Conservative.
All I said was I didn’t dislike either that much. Not a very strong vote of confidence.
Pretty sure I’ve already seen “celebrations” of those three dudes on PBS. Or on “Austin City Limits” or something.
But yeah I’m sure at some point you’ll be able to “Graceland” for a $30 donation…you’re totally right.
PBS might show Black Adder, The Prisoner, or Fawlty Towers or something. NPR might have news read by correspondents with British accents, reminding one of BBC Radio. Sometimes. (Even lowbrow stuff that’s British tends to impress PBS/NPR types.) So you see, not 100% bad.
Who are Milton Nascimento and Richard Bona? I’d be happy just to see (old-school) Mission: Impossible reruns or something on PBS. Actually I wouldn’t care what these things showed if I weren’t compelled to pay for them…
Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Chris Hansen-Approved Edition « In Mala Fide
Richard Bona:
Milton Nascimento: