The Dickinsonian

  • January 3The Dickinsonian's new website has officially launched! Stay tuned for new stories and features.

Call it What it is

Bryce Dunio ’22, Opinion Columnist

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Humanity’s greatest attribute is its capacity to dream. Many mammals can dream of primal desires or of a nightmarish situation, but humans differentiate in our ability to dream of a world without conflict, or perhaps of a world observable only through a dream itself. Every great invention came from an individual who had a dream and acted on it with passionate determination. Every great idea, such as fundamental human rights and democracy, was developed by individuals dreaming of something that the status quo did not provide. But, as great as dreams can be, they can be equally destructive to both logic and rationality when taken to an extreme.

What happens when an individual dreams of a world which another deems a nightmare? What happens when one’s dream is not only based in objective racial hatred, but is achievable solely through the unraveling of society’s fabric? These two questions are especially relevant when reading Kevin Ssonko’s “How Do We Save the World from the White Man?” published a week ago. 

The article peddles a conspiracy theory one would think only the likes of Alex Jones could even fathom, at one point stating that “white men have chosen to respond to calls for equal justice as being an existential threat to their existence.” 

This idea, that all white men are organized unanimously against the threat of ‘equal justice,’ was not backed up by any data nor logical foundation. Rather, this assertion was simply a piece of a greater puzzle depicting a conspiracy theory based on cultural Marxism. In fact, the only defense of these ideals worth noting was the statement that those who either disagree or don’t want involved “have failed to mature beyond a remedial understanding of the racial question.” In other words, if you do not agree with me you must be stupid. Or something. This article especially shows a paralyzing paranoia of an entire race of people. It doesn’t matter if you’re a blue-collar worker from Paris or a physician from Budapest: if you are white, you are the problem. This is where the article goes from typical college rhetoric to blatant genocidal rhetoric. The article concluding with “Humanity and whiteness cannot exist in the same space without conflict” apparently does not constitute racism nor trigger an alarm whatsoever for many people. So let’s read it again with only one word changed.

“Humanity and Jews cannot exist in the same space without conflict.”

Does this sound like something a Nazi would say?

“Humanity and Blackness cannot exist in the same space without conflict.”

Does this sound like something a Confederate would say?

“Humanity and bourgeoisie cannot exist in the same space without conflict.”

Does this sound like something a Communist would say?

What is different with the statement, “Humanity and whiteness cannot exist in the same space without conflict” then ‘Whiteness’ is not some abstract idea for a conspiracy theory found only in the ivory tower of much of modern Academia. It’s an entire race of people, diverse in every way from language to culture. One does not have to choose ‘humanity’ or ‘whiteness’, as Ssonko’s “The challenge to all of humanity will be which side of the conflict we will choose to stand on” asserts. 

By separating humanity and whiteness so distinctively as two separate things is dehumanization in its own entirety. Rather, the rational individual concludes that they can dream of a civil society of racial diversity rather than forcing others to take a side on the desegregation of society. The rational individual concludes that they can dream of a world where racism, or ‘racial prejudice’ as some like to play semantics for, does not take root in mainstream thought. 

The rational individual concludes that they can dream of a world where Pizzagate-level conspiracies are not peddled along by racist, identitarian ideologues shielded by the ‘inclusive’ and ‘diverse’ barriers constructed by the modern college campus, dreaming of a world without ‘whiteness’.

Whiteness is not the problem, but racism is. And if you get the two mixed up, there’s a good chance you’re the latter. We cannot progress as a society when people are still judging others on the color of their skin instead of the content of their character.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
1 Comment

One Response to “Call it What it is”

  1. Michael on February 22nd, 2019 6:35 pm

    I was gonna write up a response but I know that it wouldn’t actually do anything to change how much of a garbage fire this article is.

    I love it when he says that if you confuse racism and whiteness then you’re RACISM. Thats just too golden of an example of some of the worst writing I’ve ever seen thinking that it’s the best writing I’ve ever seen.

The Dickinsonian strives to provide a forum for lively and respectful discussion among members of the Dickinson College community. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we do not adhere to our community standards.

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.




*

The student news site of Dickinson College.
Call it What it is