Please forgive, what I guess is, my naive perhaps nonchalant answer but I think there is such a thing as “white culture”. At least white American. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. There’s crossover with “black culture” but I think it’s in the music, the attire, the food, the dialect. It’s discernible. Same with black American culture.
I mean, just as a superficial example, I’m black, I grew up in a predominantly black neighborhood but it used to be predominantly Italian and Jewish. I went to a decent neighborhood school with lots of white American teachers. Every time we had events at the school, whether catered or not, you could taste the difference in the potato and macaroni salads. Not a problem at all but no matter what, you could tell if we got macaroni salads from the white American owned spot up the block, or if one of the black parents brought it in. It’s not merely a difference in recipe, it’s ideas behind food and traditions passed down. And if we take that a step further, there’s a difference in when a white American, black Trinidadian, black Jamaican, a black Dominican, and a black American make baked mac n cheese. It’s all in the culture and traditions.
Again, excuse my naivety but what’s the problem in acknowledging and even embracing it? Is it wrong to acknowledge these things or are we just tired of woke identity politics?
Since coming a long time ago from the Soviet Union, I have often wondered whether the whiteness and the blackness descriptors in American life are not racial at all. I grew up in a setting with numerous ethnic groups, the dominant being Russian, where everyone knew which tribe they belonged to through history or heritage or language or culture; this was so without any reference to skin color or marked physical characteristics. So many people coming to US in the past either wanted to erase their past or had their cultural tribal identities erased, which is unnatural for humans historically. This violent self erasure or erasure by others generates these meaningless homogenized Borg-like entities that describe so little of those who they claim as their members. We naturally look for a tribe/kin. If none is available we come up with something. Just think of the complexity of Africa’s complex ethnic collage. How meaningful would it be to call them African or black? But bring them to a culture where cultural identity is translated mostly as food and most people can’t identify countries on the map of the same continent, and they become black or white.
There is no such thing as white culture even if Kendi thinks it exists. There are American values, like valuing education, hard work, law abiding, speaking English, and self-reliance and manybe this is confused with culture. I do think there may be a case for Black culture only because so many Blacks seem to say they identify with Black culture, and to be proud of black culture (which you won't find with whites because there is no white culture). I'm not familiar with the term Blackness but I am familiar with the term whiteness andI hope it has nothing to do with blackness. Whiteness is a slur against white people. If you are unfamiliar with the term it means whites are committed to perpetually subodinating Blacks.
After a recent change by the Trump administration, the federal government no longer explicitly prohibits contractors from having segregated restaurants, waiting rooms and drinking fountains.
The segregation clause is one of several identified in a public memo issued by the General Services Administration last month, affecting all civil federal agencies. The memo explains that it is making changes prompted by President Trump's executive order on diversity, equity and inclusion, which repealed an executive order signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 regarding federal contractors and nondiscrimination.
This is the Conservative wet dream Glenn refuses to address
Edit to add:
Conservatives are consistent. Current Conservatives want Jackie Robinson’s military service erased. When he was alive, Jackie Robinson had to confront the Trump of his day, Barry Goldwater
With the globalization of the tech workplace, I gave up on classification a long time ago. I do make a bit of a game of it in trying to guess somebody's background from their name, but visual appearance is definitely problematic. Lots of South Asians are darker than many African Americans, and many middle easterners are darker than lighter African Americans. It is easy to pass / assume a presumed background. And the Africans themselves are widely divergent, not surprising given that Africa has the widest genetic diversity. But the Ibo/Igbo differ considerably from the Bantu/Zulu group which is quite different from, say the population of Ethopia / Northern Sudan. If it were not for the name, on some calls I would mistake some of the Central African individuals for French workers, their accent can be essentially identical.
I do not believe in 'Black' or 'White' culture. There are lots of differnt subcultures. Growing up I preferred Mozart to the Beatles or the Rolling Stones, and I do remember the Beach Boys.
I think this comes down to the imperative to make clear distinctions between race and culture, and issue I've discussed with Glenn several times publicly; John participated in one of those conversations.
Here are two related quotes by Ralph Ellison on this topic:
In 1958, Ellison said in an interview that, “As for the term ‘culture’ . . . I know of no valid demonstration that culture is transmitted through the genes. . . . Nor should the existence of a specifically ‘Negro’ idiom in any way be confused with the vague, racist terms ‘white culture or ‘black culture’; rather, it is a matter of diversity within unity.”
In a 1979 address at Brown University titled “Portrait of Inman Page: A Dedication Speech,” Ellison spoke of Page, one of the first Afro-American graduates of Brown during the Reconstruction period, and of his experience as a young man at Douglass High School in Oklahoma when Dr. Page was its principal. Ellison spoke of the early New England tradition of education of which both he and Dr. Page were heirs because of the “young graduates of New England colleges who went south to teach newly freed slaves.”
Ellison continued: “I think it a good idea to keep this historical circumstance in mind when we hear glib talk of a ‘white culture’ and a ‘black culture’ in the United States. Because the truth of the matter is that between the two racial groups there has always been a constant exchange of cultural and stylistic elements. Whether in the arts, education, athletics, or in certain conceptions and misconceptions of democratic justice, interchange, appropriation and integration (not segregation) have been the constants of our developing nation.
“So, at this particular moment of our history,” Ellison reasoned, “I think it important that we keep in mind that the culture of the United States is a composite, pluralistic culture-of-cultures, and that all of its diverse elements have been to some extent inspirited by those ideals which were enshrined during the founding of this nation. In our embrace of these ideals, we are one and yet many, and never more so than after they led to the Civil War, the Emancipation and the Reconstruction.”
Ellison was truly a great American. Genius gets thrown around quite a bit, but it's a useful concept re: Ellison. I wonder how many black Americans under 50 yrs old even know who he is? (Same for white Americans).
I hear you. Unfortunately, the miseducation of Americans continues a la Carter G. Woodson. Fortunately, with Invisible Man, Ellison's star continues to shine, but today, more are likely familiar with James Baldwin and Toni Morrison's work than Ellison's.
Nah! There is no such thing as 'Blackness' in so far as culture goes... just as there is no such thing as 'Whiteness'.
Rather there is a collection of categories of likes/dislike, preferences, tendencies, behaviors, dialects, fashions, etc. which -- to John's point -- are stereotypically perceived as usually wearing a Black face....or a White face....or the face of a teenager or young adult....or or or or.
Glenn references Marvin Gaye as a kind of touchstone, saying that the people he grew-up with, there on the southside of Chicago, 'knew who Marvin Gaye was'.... but what that observation more truly reveals is not 'Blackness', per se, but the parochial nature of Glenn's own upbringing. Everyone knew who Marvin was! If you grew-up listening to major AM Rock Stations (WLS out of Chicago, CKLW out of Detroit) you heard Motown ALL the time. Gaye's music, the Supremes, the Temptations, Smokey Robinson, et al -- their music filled the airwaves as much as the Beatles, the Stones, the Monkees, the Mamas & the Papas, etc.
If we liked Thriller, by Michael Jackson, does that make us a part of 'Blackness'? Is Thriller even considered a part of 'Blackness'? Is Charlie Pride 'Blackness'...or Shaboozey? Is Eminem? And if Glenn or John enjoy Beethoven, does that mean they're somehow not as Black? If I hate Rap & HipHop does that make me a racist?
Stereotypes are simply oversimplified, 2-dimensional, easy-to-digest codifiers. It's easy to think only in caricature. It's lazy; it's quick, and sometimes it's even right...but many times it's absolutely wrong.
Does 'Whiteness' not have rhythm; is it incapable of jumping? Is 'Blackness' unable to appreciate Michelangelo, Bernini, Turner, Tolstoy, Shakespeare, or Dryden? Does skin color & associated sterotypical categorical associations determine how we think, how we feel, how we live?
The truth is -- as Glenn noted -- all this IS just seasoning (and a mild seasoning at that). We like what we like, we enjoy & appreciate what we enjoy NOT because of our skin color but because we are who we are as individuals...who we have become as thinking, rational, responsible adults. I would think I have vastly more in common with both Glenn & John than I have with a 20 something White kid from the Bronx. So what?
Terence, this is stupid stuff.
(and what Blackness, Whiteness, or Other-ness do we inhabit if we recognize that reference?)
This is an interesting topic that I rarely get to discuss. I grew up (60s-70s) in a multicultural lower middle-class neighborhood (Glenn might know the south side of Maywood) that experienced both white flight and black flight (including my best friend's family) as west side Chicago families moved in, escaping but also bringing poverty, violence, and drugs. We ended up being the only white family for over a mile.
I absorbed all the culture - yes, Marvin Gaye and Gladys Knight, but also Proviso East basketball, natural hair, Adventist church, friends correcting their parents saying "Colored" and their grandparents saying "Negro." My friends said that I walked black, and my brother became the soloist in a gospel choir. I got the head nod of acknowledgement from black friends, but only if they were with other people I knew. I also saw how mixed families and especially black kids with red hair and/or freckles were treated horribly, and kids who were academically inclined were called "acting-white" and "Oreos."
So, I was immersed in a culture that might be called "blackness," but that's just a name. I had the benefit of attending a high school that was 45% white, 35% black, and 20% Hispanic. There was even a class division among "whites" between north Maywood (mostly German ancestry from 1800s), Melrose Park (mostly 2nd-3rd generation Italian), and lower-class folks like me. There were cliques based on these observable traits, but not nearly as much as groups that cut across these lines. I was most comfortable in academics, sports, and music, whose groups were very diverse.
In college and beyond, I lost the "in-group" black recognition because there was no one to vouch for me, and I did not keep up with the evolving culture. I have black friends and they know about my background, but adopting the walk and the talk and the nod would now be insulting. I understand the "whiteness" idea as shorthand for in-group culture, akin to the older WASP acronym, and see that Irish, Jews, Italians, etc. took a generation or two to acculturate. The School House Rock video "Great American Melting Pot" summed this up with a grandma waving an American flag, then revealing a button – "Kiss Me I'm Polish." I understand that there is a mainstream culture in the US, complicated by not having a real ethnic basis, but formalizing "whiteness" and "blackness" to my mind has made things worse.
It has created both a disincentive for black people to join mainstream culture—leading to disintegrated social groups, anti-academic attitudes, treating hair-braiding as cultural appropriation, viewing Jamaican and African blacks as outgroup—and an incentive for white people to become less inclusive. Identities based on what everyone can see on the outside has made cultural exchange and integration more difficult. On social media, if I’m not fighting folks who think anyone right of Mitt Romney is a racist bigot homophobe, or MAGA heads cheering everything Trump, I’m fighting people insinuating IQ by ethnicity is deterministic or linking crime to race.
Blacks assimilated. Black assimilation is obstructed by white people. There was opposition to Blacks joining labor unions and the military. Blacks had to create their own education systems and colleges because whites did not want them in their institutions. Now we see unqualified whites replacing fully qualified Blacks.
Whites are even upset when Blacks craft a country music album and win a Grammy. Whites do not want Blacks to become fully “American”.
Blacks had to fight for access to the American dream.
There is a subset of Blacks who use the label ADOS (African descendants of slavery) as a source of pride. There is a much larger percentage of Blacks who are proud of African heritage. There are international organizations that foster this connection.
But I'm curious... you say "it" has created a disincentive for Black people to join mainstream culture. I'm not sure what your 'it' actually is? Or how that 'it' creates a disincentive to 'mainstream'?
What makes culture mainstream is the fact that 'most' Americans enjoy it, partake of it, contribute to it, recognize it (when they see it), etc. It's 'mainstream' because -- quite literally -- it tends to sweep all of us into it's central current. Certainly there are the quiet pools to the side of the 'main stream', little eddies, counter-currents, the occasional set of rapids, etc. But -- for the most part -- the mainstream tends to pull in and absorb what initially seems outside that surging flow.
In the 60's & 70's Rock 'N Roll / Hootchie Koo seemed very counter-culturish. Hippies, Communes, Drugs-Sex - Love the one you're with, letting your freak flag fly, don't trust anyone over 30, etc. And then that generation ages...and what seemed vital to rebel against now seems vital to a good life. And the definition of 'good life' changes and evolves and pretty soon Steppenwolf's "Born to Be Wild" (the anthem to Easy Rider in '69) becomes the soundtrack for a floormat commercial. "For whatever comes your way, there's Weathertech!"
Today I've heard more pounding Rap/HipHop coming from the upscale speakers on Teslas than I have from what used to be called 'ghetto-blasters'. "Ye" has, it's said, 2.7 BILLION followers on Instagram...that sounds pretty mainstream to me.
As for what 'In Group' culture is, doesn't that vary by group, and sub-group, and sub-sub-group to your very point? When it comes to that kind of question I'm always reminded of that famous Groucho Marx quote: "I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member!"
The “One Drop Rule” defined Blackness in the United States. Enslavers who sexually assaulted enslaved Black women, separated their “interracial” offspring from those produced with white women. The children with Black women could be a source of profit. New Orleans created two classes of Blacks. “Pure” Blacks tended to work in the fields. Creoles worked in the House and were often treated better than enslaved people in the field. A caste system developed where closeness to whiteness put Blacks in a better social position.
I think it is appropriate to talk about "white culture" if 99% of the people engaged in that activity are white. It is NOT appropriate to talk about Enlightenment culture as if it was white.
We have a SCOTUS justice who backed out of defining a woman. I wonder, then, how eager she would be to define Black or White.
I know that I have no inclination to look for some arbitrary line between this race and that race, between this ethnicity and some other ethnicity. If you find yourself favoring or faulting one race or ethnicity over another, it's probably not them, it's you.
"Whiteness" is a concept we wrestle with in my family. If you saw me on the street, you might assume that this is a generic white dude. But I'm Jewish, the son of a Soviet emigre on one side, and there are "white people" things that, as a member of a ethno-religious minority, I laughingly associate with "the other."
I take off my shoes in the house--I do this in an ethnic way, not the Mr. Rogers way. I use my hands when I talk. And heaven forbid I should see someone putting peanut butter on a bagel.
My wife is a non-Jew who supported me in converting our kids to Judaism and attends services with me more than most Jews I know. But she often resents it when I mockingly say, "that's white people stuff," as a cypher for things that are boring, generic, vanilla American--un-Jewish. I am a very proud American and many of the things I mock are things that I love. But I feel entitled to this gentle ribbing of the mainstream as someone with at least one foot outside the mainstream.
Truth be told, were the shoe (or, indoors, the slipper) on the other foot, if a non-Jew said, "that's so Jewish," I'd be very uncomfortable. Even if it came from a dear friend or a non-Jewish family member. So why am I so comfortable as a theoretical outsider mocking Whiteness where I would take deep offense to anyone but another Jew laughing at my Jewishness?
Within my memory, which goes back a ways, people used to be able to tease about ethnicity without causing undue offense. It's a fine line, to be sure, between an innocent joke and bigotry. And it's a moveable line. What seems OK today, was wrong years before, and vice versa. We need to consider what's in the heart and where a person is coming from. I can cut a lot of slack, when I know the person means no offense.
Please forgive, what I guess is, my naive perhaps nonchalant answer but I think there is such a thing as “white culture”. At least white American. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. There’s crossover with “black culture” but I think it’s in the music, the attire, the food, the dialect. It’s discernible. Same with black American culture.
I mean, just as a superficial example, I’m black, I grew up in a predominantly black neighborhood but it used to be predominantly Italian and Jewish. I went to a decent neighborhood school with lots of white American teachers. Every time we had events at the school, whether catered or not, you could taste the difference in the potato and macaroni salads. Not a problem at all but no matter what, you could tell if we got macaroni salads from the white American owned spot up the block, or if one of the black parents brought it in. It’s not merely a difference in recipe, it’s ideas behind food and traditions passed down. And if we take that a step further, there’s a difference in when a white American, black Trinidadian, black Jamaican, a black Dominican, and a black American make baked mac n cheese. It’s all in the culture and traditions.
Again, excuse my naivety but what’s the problem in acknowledging and even embracing it? Is it wrong to acknowledge these things or are we just tired of woke identity politics?
What s anti-Blackness?
1. The call to free Derek Chauvin.
2. Allowing segregated facilities in government contracts
3. Digging up Black Lives Matter Plaza.
4. Removing the names of Black histtorical figures from government agency websites.
Racism is not a deal breaker for Conservatives
Since coming a long time ago from the Soviet Union, I have often wondered whether the whiteness and the blackness descriptors in American life are not racial at all. I grew up in a setting with numerous ethnic groups, the dominant being Russian, where everyone knew which tribe they belonged to through history or heritage or language or culture; this was so without any reference to skin color or marked physical characteristics. So many people coming to US in the past either wanted to erase their past or had their cultural tribal identities erased, which is unnatural for humans historically. This violent self erasure or erasure by others generates these meaningless homogenized Borg-like entities that describe so little of those who they claim as their members. We naturally look for a tribe/kin. If none is available we come up with something. Just think of the complexity of Africa’s complex ethnic collage. How meaningful would it be to call them African or black? But bring them to a culture where cultural identity is translated mostly as food and most people can’t identify countries on the map of the same continent, and they become black or white.
There is no such thing as white culture even if Kendi thinks it exists. There are American values, like valuing education, hard work, law abiding, speaking English, and self-reliance and manybe this is confused with culture. I do think there may be a case for Black culture only because so many Blacks seem to say they identify with Black culture, and to be proud of black culture (which you won't find with whites because there is no white culture). I'm not familiar with the term Blackness but I am familiar with the term whiteness andI hope it has nothing to do with blackness. Whiteness is a slur against white people. If you are unfamiliar with the term it means whites are committed to perpetually subodinating Blacks.
Love the YouTube thumbnail. 5 esteemed members of the African American community and one obvious grifter!
Haha, now I have to go look.
After a recent change by the Trump administration, the federal government no longer explicitly prohibits contractors from having segregated restaurants, waiting rooms and drinking fountains.
The segregation clause is one of several identified in a public memo issued by the General Services Administration last month, affecting all civil federal agencies. The memo explains that it is making changes prompted by President Trump's executive order on diversity, equity and inclusion, which repealed an executive order signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 regarding federal contractors and nondiscrimination.
https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/03/18/nx-s1-5326118/segregation-federal-contracts-far-regulation-trump
This is the Conservative wet dream Glenn refuses to address
Edit to add:
Conservatives are consistent. Current Conservatives want Jackie Robinson’s military service erased. When he was alive, Jackie Robinson had to confront the Trump of his day, Barry Goldwater
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/goldwater-jackie-robinson/474498/
With the globalization of the tech workplace, I gave up on classification a long time ago. I do make a bit of a game of it in trying to guess somebody's background from their name, but visual appearance is definitely problematic. Lots of South Asians are darker than many African Americans, and many middle easterners are darker than lighter African Americans. It is easy to pass / assume a presumed background. And the Africans themselves are widely divergent, not surprising given that Africa has the widest genetic diversity. But the Ibo/Igbo differ considerably from the Bantu/Zulu group which is quite different from, say the population of Ethopia / Northern Sudan. If it were not for the name, on some calls I would mistake some of the Central African individuals for French workers, their accent can be essentially identical.
I do not believe in 'Black' or 'White' culture. There are lots of differnt subcultures. Growing up I preferred Mozart to the Beatles or the Rolling Stones, and I do remember the Beach Boys.
Old Scientist and Techie
I think this comes down to the imperative to make clear distinctions between race and culture, and issue I've discussed with Glenn several times publicly; John participated in one of those conversations.
Here are two related quotes by Ralph Ellison on this topic:
In 1958, Ellison said in an interview that, “As for the term ‘culture’ . . . I know of no valid demonstration that culture is transmitted through the genes. . . . Nor should the existence of a specifically ‘Negro’ idiom in any way be confused with the vague, racist terms ‘white culture or ‘black culture’; rather, it is a matter of diversity within unity.”
In a 1979 address at Brown University titled “Portrait of Inman Page: A Dedication Speech,” Ellison spoke of Page, one of the first Afro-American graduates of Brown during the Reconstruction period, and of his experience as a young man at Douglass High School in Oklahoma when Dr. Page was its principal. Ellison spoke of the early New England tradition of education of which both he and Dr. Page were heirs because of the “young graduates of New England colleges who went south to teach newly freed slaves.”
Ellison continued: “I think it a good idea to keep this historical circumstance in mind when we hear glib talk of a ‘white culture’ and a ‘black culture’ in the United States. Because the truth of the matter is that between the two racial groups there has always been a constant exchange of cultural and stylistic elements. Whether in the arts, education, athletics, or in certain conceptions and misconceptions of democratic justice, interchange, appropriation and integration (not segregation) have been the constants of our developing nation.
“So, at this particular moment of our history,” Ellison reasoned, “I think it important that we keep in mind that the culture of the United States is a composite, pluralistic culture-of-cultures, and that all of its diverse elements have been to some extent inspirited by those ideals which were enshrined during the founding of this nation. In our embrace of these ideals, we are one and yet many, and never more so than after they led to the Civil War, the Emancipation and the Reconstruction.”
Distinguishing race and culture is essential!
Ellison was truly a great American. Genius gets thrown around quite a bit, but it's a useful concept re: Ellison. I wonder how many black Americans under 50 yrs old even know who he is? (Same for white Americans).
I hear you. Unfortunately, the miseducation of Americans continues a la Carter G. Woodson. Fortunately, with Invisible Man, Ellison's star continues to shine, but today, more are likely familiar with James Baldwin and Toni Morrison's work than Ellison's.
Nah! There is no such thing as 'Blackness' in so far as culture goes... just as there is no such thing as 'Whiteness'.
Rather there is a collection of categories of likes/dislike, preferences, tendencies, behaviors, dialects, fashions, etc. which -- to John's point -- are stereotypically perceived as usually wearing a Black face....or a White face....or the face of a teenager or young adult....or or or or.
Glenn references Marvin Gaye as a kind of touchstone, saying that the people he grew-up with, there on the southside of Chicago, 'knew who Marvin Gaye was'.... but what that observation more truly reveals is not 'Blackness', per se, but the parochial nature of Glenn's own upbringing. Everyone knew who Marvin was! If you grew-up listening to major AM Rock Stations (WLS out of Chicago, CKLW out of Detroit) you heard Motown ALL the time. Gaye's music, the Supremes, the Temptations, Smokey Robinson, et al -- their music filled the airwaves as much as the Beatles, the Stones, the Monkees, the Mamas & the Papas, etc.
If we liked Thriller, by Michael Jackson, does that make us a part of 'Blackness'? Is Thriller even considered a part of 'Blackness'? Is Charlie Pride 'Blackness'...or Shaboozey? Is Eminem? And if Glenn or John enjoy Beethoven, does that mean they're somehow not as Black? If I hate Rap & HipHop does that make me a racist?
Stereotypes are simply oversimplified, 2-dimensional, easy-to-digest codifiers. It's easy to think only in caricature. It's lazy; it's quick, and sometimes it's even right...but many times it's absolutely wrong.
Does 'Whiteness' not have rhythm; is it incapable of jumping? Is 'Blackness' unable to appreciate Michelangelo, Bernini, Turner, Tolstoy, Shakespeare, or Dryden? Does skin color & associated sterotypical categorical associations determine how we think, how we feel, how we live?
The truth is -- as Glenn noted -- all this IS just seasoning (and a mild seasoning at that). We like what we like, we enjoy & appreciate what we enjoy NOT because of our skin color but because we are who we are as individuals...who we have become as thinking, rational, responsible adults. I would think I have vastly more in common with both Glenn & John than I have with a 20 something White kid from the Bronx. So what?
Terence, this is stupid stuff.
(and what Blackness, Whiteness, or Other-ness do we inhabit if we recognize that reference?)
This is an interesting topic that I rarely get to discuss. I grew up (60s-70s) in a multicultural lower middle-class neighborhood (Glenn might know the south side of Maywood) that experienced both white flight and black flight (including my best friend's family) as west side Chicago families moved in, escaping but also bringing poverty, violence, and drugs. We ended up being the only white family for over a mile.
I absorbed all the culture - yes, Marvin Gaye and Gladys Knight, but also Proviso East basketball, natural hair, Adventist church, friends correcting their parents saying "Colored" and their grandparents saying "Negro." My friends said that I walked black, and my brother became the soloist in a gospel choir. I got the head nod of acknowledgement from black friends, but only if they were with other people I knew. I also saw how mixed families and especially black kids with red hair and/or freckles were treated horribly, and kids who were academically inclined were called "acting-white" and "Oreos."
So, I was immersed in a culture that might be called "blackness," but that's just a name. I had the benefit of attending a high school that was 45% white, 35% black, and 20% Hispanic. There was even a class division among "whites" between north Maywood (mostly German ancestry from 1800s), Melrose Park (mostly 2nd-3rd generation Italian), and lower-class folks like me. There were cliques based on these observable traits, but not nearly as much as groups that cut across these lines. I was most comfortable in academics, sports, and music, whose groups were very diverse.
In college and beyond, I lost the "in-group" black recognition because there was no one to vouch for me, and I did not keep up with the evolving culture. I have black friends and they know about my background, but adopting the walk and the talk and the nod would now be insulting. I understand the "whiteness" idea as shorthand for in-group culture, akin to the older WASP acronym, and see that Irish, Jews, Italians, etc. took a generation or two to acculturate. The School House Rock video "Great American Melting Pot" summed this up with a grandma waving an American flag, then revealing a button – "Kiss Me I'm Polish." I understand that there is a mainstream culture in the US, complicated by not having a real ethnic basis, but formalizing "whiteness" and "blackness" to my mind has made things worse.
It has created both a disincentive for black people to join mainstream culture—leading to disintegrated social groups, anti-academic attitudes, treating hair-braiding as cultural appropriation, viewing Jamaican and African blacks as outgroup—and an incentive for white people to become less inclusive. Identities based on what everyone can see on the outside has made cultural exchange and integration more difficult. On social media, if I’m not fighting folks who think anyone right of Mitt Romney is a racist bigot homophobe, or MAGA heads cheering everything Trump, I’m fighting people insinuating IQ by ethnicity is deterministic or linking crime to race.
Blacks assimilated. Black assimilation is obstructed by white people. There was opposition to Blacks joining labor unions and the military. Blacks had to create their own education systems and colleges because whites did not want them in their institutions. Now we see unqualified whites replacing fully qualified Blacks.
Whites are even upset when Blacks craft a country music album and win a Grammy. Whites do not want Blacks to become fully “American”.
Blacks had to fight for access to the American dream.
There is a subset of Blacks who use the label ADOS (African descendants of slavery) as a source of pride. There is a much larger percentage of Blacks who are proud of African heritage. There are international organizations that foster this connection.
You have a very limited view of Black culture.
Very interesting comment.
But I'm curious... you say "it" has created a disincentive for Black people to join mainstream culture. I'm not sure what your 'it' actually is? Or how that 'it' creates a disincentive to 'mainstream'?
What makes culture mainstream is the fact that 'most' Americans enjoy it, partake of it, contribute to it, recognize it (when they see it), etc. It's 'mainstream' because -- quite literally -- it tends to sweep all of us into it's central current. Certainly there are the quiet pools to the side of the 'main stream', little eddies, counter-currents, the occasional set of rapids, etc. But -- for the most part -- the mainstream tends to pull in and absorb what initially seems outside that surging flow.
In the 60's & 70's Rock 'N Roll / Hootchie Koo seemed very counter-culturish. Hippies, Communes, Drugs-Sex - Love the one you're with, letting your freak flag fly, don't trust anyone over 30, etc. And then that generation ages...and what seemed vital to rebel against now seems vital to a good life. And the definition of 'good life' changes and evolves and pretty soon Steppenwolf's "Born to Be Wild" (the anthem to Easy Rider in '69) becomes the soundtrack for a floormat commercial. "For whatever comes your way, there's Weathertech!"
Today I've heard more pounding Rap/HipHop coming from the upscale speakers on Teslas than I have from what used to be called 'ghetto-blasters'. "Ye" has, it's said, 2.7 BILLION followers on Instagram...that sounds pretty mainstream to me.
As for what 'In Group' culture is, doesn't that vary by group, and sub-group, and sub-sub-group to your very point? When it comes to that kind of question I'm always reminded of that famous Groucho Marx quote: "I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member!"
The “One Drop Rule” defined Blackness in the United States. Enslavers who sexually assaulted enslaved Black women, separated their “interracial” offspring from those produced with white women. The children with Black women could be a source of profit. New Orleans created two classes of Blacks. “Pure” Blacks tended to work in the fields. Creoles worked in the House and were often treated better than enslaved people in the field. A caste system developed where closeness to whiteness put Blacks in a better social position.
https://youtu.be/i29pjSIRr88?feature=shared
Blackness is a legal creation of the United States. It wasn’t until 1967 that SCOTUS said “interracial” marriage was legal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia
I think it is appropriate to talk about "white culture" if 99% of the people engaged in that activity are white. It is NOT appropriate to talk about Enlightenment culture as if it was white.
Who tf does that? (hint: no one)
Also this 99% must be a mix of ethnic groups
We have a SCOTUS justice who backed out of defining a woman. I wonder, then, how eager she would be to define Black or White.
I know that I have no inclination to look for some arbitrary line between this race and that race, between this ethnicity and some other ethnicity. If you find yourself favoring or faulting one race or ethnicity over another, it's probably not them, it's you.
"Whiteness" is a concept we wrestle with in my family. If you saw me on the street, you might assume that this is a generic white dude. But I'm Jewish, the son of a Soviet emigre on one side, and there are "white people" things that, as a member of a ethno-religious minority, I laughingly associate with "the other."
I take off my shoes in the house--I do this in an ethnic way, not the Mr. Rogers way. I use my hands when I talk. And heaven forbid I should see someone putting peanut butter on a bagel.
My wife is a non-Jew who supported me in converting our kids to Judaism and attends services with me more than most Jews I know. But she often resents it when I mockingly say, "that's white people stuff," as a cypher for things that are boring, generic, vanilla American--un-Jewish. I am a very proud American and many of the things I mock are things that I love. But I feel entitled to this gentle ribbing of the mainstream as someone with at least one foot outside the mainstream.
Truth be told, were the shoe (or, indoors, the slipper) on the other foot, if a non-Jew said, "that's so Jewish," I'd be very uncomfortable. Even if it came from a dear friend or a non-Jewish family member. So why am I so comfortable as a theoretical outsider mocking Whiteness where I would take deep offense to anyone but another Jew laughing at my Jewishness?
Within my memory, which goes back a ways, people used to be able to tease about ethnicity without causing undue offense. It's a fine line, to be sure, between an innocent joke and bigotry. And it's a moveable line. What seems OK today, was wrong years before, and vice versa. We need to consider what's in the heart and where a person is coming from. I can cut a lot of slack, when I know the person means no offense.