Even though it is aware of the debate on the “culture of cancellation”, which is linked to the idea of punishment, and is prevalent, especially in social networks, it is not central to this text. Whether for "cutting or sewing", I prefer a pedagogical elasticity, which may or may not open dialogue, but does not presuppose its closure. But I say, beforehand, that as a black woman I see myself in the legitimate and just position to reject racists as intellectual references, which does not mean that I can do it entirely, or that I have this radicalism as a method, things that, given the historical circumstances are neither technically nor politically possible.
However, it is notable that the racism of enlightened whites usually goes preliminary arrogance to self-fragility through an age-old recourse to the “animalization” of those who react to their explicit, but denied, racism. Along this path, the speeches reactive to the reaction become dwindling and empty and, like the most basic reactionism, it leads us indignation to impatience, but things do not end there and its development is important.
Well, the enlightened, but racist, white intellectuals are those who, even defending justice and social transformation, even though they know history, do not perceive racism as a structure and do not perceive themselves as subjects. Certain that their vision is more democratic and universal because, in theory, it does not need “identity”, they detach themselves their own reality, and here they are simplifying complexities that did not have the vital need to strive to understand. Such neglect would not be feasible for black people with a racial conscience, as this process is the foundation of our own daily and intellectual emancipation, since white models are historically imposed on us, brutally crossing our experience under circumstances managed by their ancestors and d by your heirs.
But we did not shy away studying the references constructed by the whites, what we chose was to “stop the deal” and respect the order of racism throughout this society and we do that, including, regardless of any theoretical form because violence slaughter us and the The pace of survival is faster than that of theoretical and political achievements. So, it is a study and it is a political and social struggle, linked to the reality of the majority of the population, and to the history of a country of slave origins and slave heritage. Now if such intellectuals set out to analyze the world, form an opinion, dialogue politically and influence society, it is in this context that we paired the anti-racist dispute not only for dilettante reasons, but because exactly that scope falls on our daily and political life. The game is heavy, so do not “stick” to theorize a racist basis and resort to common sense when reactions arrive.
The enlightened racist loses a lot in intellectuality, and I do not even speak of generosity or alliance of class and race, but of the necessary questioning of his critical coherence, affirming in front of the same that: if this is the case, she cannot be racist or conform and navigate fageira, alienated its whiteness. The de-legitimation of racism is a minimal basis, with everything you have to learn "inside" it. this point of view, it is not a question of concluding the death of the debate or the cancellation of the subject, but it does mean that racism is not faced without questioning the enlightened racists, who seem to imagine, mistakenly, that this questioning is reduced to the personal and individual, and begin to claim suffering, which is legitimate, but on the other hand they appear to have enormous difficulty in seeing the depth of what we are saying and what is actually the source of that suffering.
So, if it is a torment to be trapped by the pressures of the whistleblower, perhaps it would be important for such intellectuals to rethink what makes them valid to behave in such a despicable way that the reactions of the offended and explain. I sincerely believe that in this area of conflict, a conciliatory equation is difficult, but nothing more innocuous and even ridiculous in this matter, than to crystallize positions and attitudes, and to relegate to suspicion those who ask in such a vital dimension for you, which is the racism and the urgency to face it in a sincere way, and still expect “lightness” in the return. It will not happen, especially, because “at this point in the championship” it is difficult to believe in the innocence of intellectuals, in such a way that their ignorance and neglect revert to a pitiful racist choice.
That is why we are not at the point of welcoming enlightened racists: it is exactly the opposite, we are at a point of collection in practical, discursive, political and methodological depth, hence the revolt with the mismatch, and the impatient and irritating feeling of “how can you be there, after all? ”. But what is really hateful and disgusting is the fact that what matters little to whites and whites, tortures and kills blacks and blacks, and it is in this wound that the racism of the enlightened people throws salt, even when standing beside the working class. , in his view, de-racized. Although it can be said that “after all, to suffer is to suffer” there is no way to situate suffering outside the structures of inequality and injustice and its impact on subjects. If the black reaction to racism can lead whites and whites to the couch or to the “bitter and resentful” search for the renewal of their command and privileges, racism leads us individually, en masse, to poverty and destitution, to torture and to humiliation, to cemeteries and prisons.
Furthermore, it is exhausting to spend precious energies reacting to the enlightened ones, who, whether they want to or not, already have reasonable subsidies in terms of knowledge and social struggle. Fortunately, we are also not at the mercy of its deciphering nor in subservience to its whims, we can finally say to them: "This time you do not speak alone and neither to a single and comfortable audience, or:" Perhaps it is not you who want to hear , or: —Maybe it was reasonable for you to excuse yourself before explaining your absurdities, and finally - I can't stand your abuses, nor can I tolerate your absurdities, because, in this suffocation, I can't breathe.
It may be that, in the dynamics of life, a penalty is seen there, but, except for very exceptional circumstances, full white comfort is strained, and this is central as a methodology and as a result of the struggles against privileges, even though it implies terrible. What is not possible is to transfer the violence to the victims and force the terms of the dialogue to the rule of whiteness, when after all that we have seen and lived, the anti-racist displacement is the only turning point for dialogues and alliances, which, even so, they will not be “sanitized” or exempt conflicts.