Home Categories About
argument top image
Is white fragility real? Is white fragility real?
Yes, white fragility is real Yes, white fragility is real
No, white fragility does not exist No, white fragility does not exist
White fragility looks at how white people become defensive when racism is discussed White fragility looks at how white people become defensive when racism is discussed
White fragility highlights that only non-whites are "raced" White fragility highlights that only non-whites are "raced"
White fragility exposes how white people are established as perfectly privileged and socialized to think they are superior White fragility exposes how white people are established as perfectly privileged and socialized to think they are superior
White fragility promotes ending racism through open dialogue White fragility promotes ending racism through open dialogue
White fragility is a racist concept White fragility is a racist concept
White Fragility has an epistemological problem White Fragility has an epistemological problem
White fragility prevents meaningful dialogue White fragility prevents meaningful dialogue
White fragility typifies Social Justice Warrior fragility White fragility typifies Social Justice Warrior fragility
White fragility patronises Black people White fragility patronises Black people
White fragility is white supremacy White fragility is white supremacy
If race is a construct, white fragility cannot exist If race is a construct, white fragility cannot exist
The white fragility focus on white guilt oversimplifies a very complex debate The white fragility focus on white guilt oversimplifies a very complex debate
White fragility fails to acknowledge that racism is collective, not individual White fragility fails to acknowledge that racism is collective, not individual
Debate Mini Map

Is white fragility real?
Back to question

No, white fragility does not exist

< (2 of 2)

The white fragility focus on white guilt oversimplifies a very complex debate

The way racism is reproduced across generations is a very complex subject. Reducing the problem to white guilt and genetic identity fails to acknowledge the innumerable other contributing factors.
Cornell West
< (8 of 9) Next argument >

Context

The context of the argument is that it is justified to reduce the race issue to a single white fragility premise.This ignores the long historical struggle that has existed , the suffering of the black people through slavery, the existing progressive fight against institutional racism.What it does is , it focuses on race through a single frame that the white are evil and this solely can be used as a source of analysis and the justification [1]

The Argument

The focus on white guilt creates an atmosphere that any attack against the white justified the means used.This essentially means in the practical analysis , where the black lives matter movement decides to vandalise property, to attack the white people and even in the creation of a class war then this is justified because it is eliminating the deeply entrenched privilege, power and biasness that exists among the white. [2] [3]

Counter arguments

The central reason why white fragility is a sufficient premise to be used as a tool against the white even at a point where it establishes white guilt is ; to create traction, to create a plethora of decolonisation discussion and finally to mainly create awareness that there's institutional privilege, political privilege, economic privilege and social privilege amongst the white.This then creates oppression among the Black who at the end of the day suffer without any form of freedom. [4] [5]

Proponents

Framing

White fragility is real to the extent that it establishes self-examination and awareness.This awareness within the context of the historical prejudice enhances more of a critical interrogation to question , the individual privilege that exists among the white, the societal and institutional privilege.This voices a lot to the society to excersibate for the black people and understanding the problems to the core than conceding to the existence of the problems and at the end of the day maintaining nuetrality. [6]

Premises

The interrogation and self-examination is critical to understand the problems.In interrogating the problems then the society will awaken to the truth and react as a ripple effect and change the inherent biasness. This is more progressive and leads to progressive equality than just sitting back.A change in terms of the laws, policies, benefits for the oppressed and traction to change

Rejecting the premises

However, this can be used as a basis to be radical against the white.It also incentivises the politicisation of black African American's issues and profit out of them.It also builds resentment, anger and suffering of the black people to equate all their problems to the white people.This inhibits choice autonomy and rationalisation of problems

References

  1. https://iep.utm.edu/fanon/
  2. https://www.amazon.com/White-Guilt-Together-Destroyed-Promise/dp/0060578637
  3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdHEbOAQFmY&list=PL4kEVE4Q4H1BXUojVkUk_WdZjti-ivPnU&index=33
  4. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/
  5. https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/1963-malcolm-x-racial-separation/
  6. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/
This page was last edited on Tuesday, 8 Sep 2020 at 13:39 UTC

Explore related arguments