THE HEGEMONIC ORDER OF
WHITENESS IN SOCIETY
THIS MAY SEEM CONVOLUTED ON
THE SURFACE ====> THE TERM “WHITE SUPREMACY” SEEMS TO HAVE
CONTEMPORARY PURCHASE IN MUCH SOCIOLOGICAL LITERATURE ====> BUT I FIND IT IS
AMBIGUOUS AND ACCUSATORY AND DOESN'T CONVEY THE STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS
OF THE SITUATION ====> AMBIGUOUS IN THE SENSE THAT IT IS OFTEN USED IN
RELATION TO “HATE MONGERS” =====> IT IS ACCUSATORY IN THE SENSE THAT
IT CAN BE INTERPRETED AS BLAMING WHITE PEOPLE, WHEN THE FACT IS THAT
WHITE PEOPLE ARE AS VICTIMIZED {E.G., UNDUE EXPECTATIONS; DISTORTED JUDGEMENT;
FALSE CONCIOUSNESS} BY THIS FRAMEWORK AS PEOPLE OF COLOUR ======> “THE
HEGEMONIC ORDER OF WHITENESS” FRAMES A WORLD CULTURE OF IDEAS THAT WE
ALL HAVE A RELATIONSHIP TO {FRAMEWORK AND SYSTEM NOT INDIVIDUALS} ====> WE
ARE ALL IN SOME WAY IN COLLUSION WITH AND PART OF THE OVERARCHING YET INVISIBLE
AND TRANSPARENT APPARATUS OF WHITENESS.}}}
SOCIAL
THEORISTS HAVE FOR SOMETIME EXPLORED =======> MEDIA AND ITS MESSAGES
==> HOW THE ORDER OF WHITENESS IN SOCIETY MAINTAINS ITSELF? ======>
NOW CONCUR THAT THE STATUS QUO MAINTAINS ITSELF TODAY – NOT THROUGH FORCE OR
PHYSICAL DETERENTS, BUT RATHER – THROUGH THE HEGEMONIC CONTROL OF THE
PUBLIC DISCOURSE (THROUGH THE DISTRIBUTION OF AN ELABORATE SYSTEM OF
NORMS AND IMPERATIVES).
SO
WHITENESS NOT ONLY REFERS TO PEOPLE BUT TO A PARADIGM OF REALITY
THAT IS ENFORCED AND MAINTAINED THROUGH AN ELABORATE SYSTEM OF NORMS AND VALUES
PRIMARILY PROPAGATED THROUGH GLOBAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS "MANUFACTURING
CONSENT" THROUGH THE CONTROL OF MAINSTREAM MEDIA AND POPULAR CULTURE [SEE
- FOUCAULT, ROSENBERG, HERMAN AND CHOMSKY (1988), GRILLO AND WILDMAN (1991),
MCINTOCK (1995), BACKHOUSE (1999), ETC].
ETHNICITY AND RACE AND “WHITENESS” AS KEY STATUS-INEQUALITY SYSTEMS.
DEBATES
OVER “WHITENESS” AS AND ETHNICITY
THE DEBATE SUGGESTS ON THE ONE SIDE THAT MAINSTREAM WHITES DO NOT HAVE
AN ETHNICITY, AND ON THE OTHER THAT THEY DO. WHAT IS THE LOGIC PRESENTED ON
BOTH SIDES
ENGLISH-SPEAKING CANADIANS OF EUROPEAN DESCENT ARE RELUCTANT TO DEFINE
THEMSELVES AS AN ETHNICITY, PREFERRING INSTEAD, TO CONCEAL THERE “ETHNIC-NESS
BY ATTRIBUTING ETHNICITY ONLY TO “MINORITIES” WHILE IMPLYING “WHITENESS” AS
THE TACITLY ACCEPTED NORM AROUND WHICH “OTHER” ETHNIITIES ORBIT.[PP. 84]
DEBATES OVER WHITENESS AS AN ETHNICITY ARE INCREASINGLY POLARIZED. TO
ONE SIDE ARE THOSE WHO ARGUE THAT MAINSTREAM WHITES DO NOT HAVE ETHNICITY
=== LOGIC OF ARGUMENT: {1} (BECAUSE) MOST ARE UNAWARE OF THEIR SHARED INDENTITY
AS A CONSCIOUS DISTINCTION. THEY JUST ARE, AND LABELLING THEM AS ETHNIC IS
INCONSISTENT WITH COMMONLY ACCEPTED DEFINITIONS OF ETHNICITY AS SHARED
AWARENESS OF GROUP BELONGING, COMMON ANCESTRY, CULTURE, AND IDENTITY.
TO THE OTHER SIDE ARE THOSE WHO CONTEND THAT EVERYBODY INCLUDING
WHITES IS ETHNICALLY LOCATED WHETHER AWARE OF IT OR NOT =====> LOGIC
OF LATTER ARGUMENT: ALL POSITIONS IN SOCIETY ARE SITUATED; THERE IS NO POSITION
FROM NO-WHERE =====>HEREIN LIES THE “GENIUS” OF WHITE PRIVILEGE:
{1}WHITENESS IS EVERTHING BECAUSE IT IS PERCEIVED BY WHITES TO BE NOTHING IN
PARTICULAR. {2} AT THE SAME TIME, WHITENESS IS NOTHING BECAUSE OF ITS TENDENCY
TOWARD THE NORMATIVE IN COLONIZING THE DEFINITION OF NORMALITY =====> TO EXCLUDE WHITENESS AS AN UNMARKED
RACE CATEGORY THAT STANDS OUTSIDE HISTORY OR CONVENTION IS TO REDOUBLE ITS
HEGEMONY BY NATURALIZING IT =====> THE CAPACITY TO BE EVERYTHING AND NOTHING
(AND VISA VERSA) MAKES IT DOUBLY IMPORTANT TO FOSTER AWARENESS OF WHITENESS AS
IF IT WERE A “RACE” IN ALIGNMENT WITH OTHER “RACES” -- IE., MAKE ITS
INVISIBILITY VISIBLE {2005: 36}.
CANADA'S MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY WILL FLOURISH ONLY WHEN WHITES
ACKNOWLEDGE, THEY TOO ARE PART OF THE MOSAIC RATHER THAN THE GROUP THAT KEEPS
EVERYONE IN PLACE.
WHITE
HEGEMONIC SOCIETY CAN BE DEFINED AS A SOCIETY IN WHICH:
1) THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL ECONOMIC, AND
CULTURAL ARE CONTROLLED BY A WHITE POWER ELITE.
2) “WHITENESS” IS NORMALIZED AS THE STANDARD
TO WHICH ALL GROUPS ARE EXPECTED TO CONFORM.
3) WHITE PEOPLE HAVE PREFERENTIAL ACCESS TO
THE GOOD THINGS IN LIFE BECAUSE OF THEIR RACE.