A Sense of Doubt blog post #2439 - Pre-Writing Example: for Essay Two on "Invention of Systemic Racism" by Phillip SalzmanThis blog post features an example of pre-writing to share with my students.
In our second essay in English 101 at Lower Columbia College in the Fall of 2021, I re-framed my persuasive essay assignment as a response to an article with which they disagree in all or in part. I chose an example that I outlined for them, a literal paragraph-by-paragraph encapsulation of what the author wrote with some of my own notes in reaction to those things.
I asked the students to follow a different pattern in their pre-work: starting by creating an outline of their launch point article, then brainstorming off that outline, and then diving into pre-write, which I am modeling here, which should dovetail directly into the first draft.
Here’s the article I chose as an example:
From -
“The Invention of Systemic Racism”
by Phillip Carl Salzman
August 6, 2020
OVERVIEW
Salzman’s central thesis seems to be that there’s no such thing as systemic racism and that it has been invented by “radical sociologists” when slavery proved to not be a sufficient cause of the inherent racism that people of color insists exists in our society.
Salzman appears to be triggered by many things. He seems to be angered by the “1619 Project” published by the New York Times for which Nikole Hannah-Jones won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 2020 (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_1619_Project).
Because he’s triggered he seems to believe many things that are either not true or partly true in addition to the central claim that radical professors made up systemic racism. He contends that “The 1619 Project” claims that slavery and only slavery is the foundation of America, that historians “disproved” it, that radical feminist faculties have indoctrinated America’s teachers and are then unfair to boys, and that African Americans have demanded equal opportunity that they do not deserve especially in the arena of college admission.
Furthermore, since he is unwilling to accept systemic racism as the explanation for an opportunity gap, a whole system of different treatment for African-Americans, he argues that the “statistically poor performance of people of color” (mostly academic performance) is due to poor family structure (single mothers and no male role models), community culture (the old black people are lazy racism not well hidden in his rhetoric), and lack of school choice for African Americans, this last one includes the unfair radical feminist teachers.
He also seems triggered by a letter at Princeton University sent to its president by faculty on, amusingly, July 4th, 2020.
The faculty who signed the letter argue that anti-black racism is “foundational to America” and prevalent everywhere, including Princeton, and notably its hiring practices. In it the undersigned faculty makes “demands” which would be good first steps to reversing the trend of racism on the campus and a model for how to do that work in the culture at large.
Salzman’s biggest gaff in his response to the letter and to systemic racism is his failure to see it as a complex and dynamic state of affairs in which people of color, especially African-Americans, are targeted or ignored because of their skin color in many ways that are often invisible, insidious, and difficult to diagnose.
Salzman claims that there’s not evidence for systemic racism. And that we’ve had Affirmative Action for over fifty years, and why hasn’t that solved the problem?
He fails to understand or even acknowledge that systemic racism is embedded in laws and regulations of individual organizations and society’s culture at large, affecting the criminal justice system, employment, housing, health care, education, political representation, and more (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism).
Salzman argues that proponents of the existence of systemic racism believe it is proven in the under-representation of African-Americans in “choice professions, jobs, and wealth” (para 5). He further over-simplifies suggesting that it’s due to “bigotry and discrimmination” that more black people are not rocket scientists, ignoring systems in place that deny opportunity at every turn, jeopardize the very health and welfare of African-Americans, and perpetuate systems of white privilege.
It’s much easier for Salzman to construct a weak straw man, erroneously claiming that those who believe in systemic racism believe the problem is cases of “bigotry and discrimination” in the choices in schools and organizations because this idea is much easier to negate. Surely, there are not reckless racists around the country actively making choices to discriminate against African-Americans, and these choices are the entire cause of the systems that so many people have argued and shown evidence to “prove” are in place.
We must understand this “proof” though if we are going to have this debate about whether systemic racism exists. Because the very nature of the proof is attempting to prove a causal link between the lack of opportunities for African-Americans and systems that perpetuate those failures of opportunity, access, and agency. It’s much like “proving” why birds migrate south in the winter. Have we ever been able to ask a bird to explain its behavior? And yet we observe their actions and the effects of their actions, and it seems that our guess is right that they seek warmer climes in winter where food is more available and return north in warm months for the same reason. It’s also much like proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. But Salzman refuses to engage with the complexity of systemic racism because he cannot effectively argue it away if it’s not a piñata bashed to bits and hanging by a thread.
Has Salzman ever spoken to any African-Americans and asked them if they believe that racism is baked into systems that perpetuate oppression against them even when no one is exhibiting obvious and easy to identify attitudes of bigotry and discrimination?
And what of all the faculty in the world who believe that systemic racism exists, including the faculty singing the Princeton letter (too many to count but could be over a hundred). Are all these learned faculty persons “radical” and “inventors” of a thing that doesn’t exist?
Just on a common sense level, with basic reasoning, if all these people believe in a thing, is it likely to be true?
If we’re talking about Qanon, I would say no. But I suspect that the number of people who believe in systemic racism, both those who have experienced it and those who have studied it, is much, much higher.
Like this:
73% of African-Americans believe that they are treated less fairly than whites while only 48% of whites believe this.
This is interesting but hateful
these are good:
This last one, the Pew Research study, has even more startling statistics and Salzman actually cites another PEW study, so...
71% of blacks vs 56% of whites believe race relations are generally bad as of this 2019 study.
The split is about the same in the belief that Trump made it worse.
84% of blacks believe that the “legacy of slavery” still affects the position of black people in society vs 58% of whites.
Even more dramatic, 84% of blacks feel the country has not gone far enough in giving blacks equal rights with whites vs only 37% of whites.
Only 7% of whites believe that black people it’s not likely that eventually black people will have equal rights compared to 50% of black people.
Statistically, whites and blacks disagree with Salzman that systemic racism is “invented.”
In most of these items, over 50% or close to 50% of whites believe what the majority of blacks believe about racism in America.
But when it comes to action, 63% of whites believe that America has done enough to ensure equal rights and 93% believe that true equal rights will eventually be a reality.
About these two things, black people do not agree, and they should know, right?
Granted, that argument is going to get lots of push back.
There’s the old trope that black people cry racism all the time for everything even when there is no racism at work, which is the implicit message of Salzman’s entire article.
Boiling down his tired and old argument of white privilege and “methinks he protests too much” obvious psychological projection, Salzman argues that there is no systemic racism, Affirmative Action exists and has put unworthy black people in equal positions with whites despite a lack of “merit,” and the problems blacks face are their own fault. And so, when they cry racism, theu are just wrong. And when white people stand with them and cry racism, they are wrong and radical, which Salzman seems to use as a synonym for “unrealistic, mistaken, and blinded.”
Is the push back justified? Do black people cry racism when there is no racism?
This is like asking if a little kid with chocolate smeared all over his face is going to deny getting into the off-limits candy.
Also, who is in a position to judge if something is racism or not racism? Those who suffer because of it or those in power? Black people or white people?
Much like I prefer to believe ALL WOMEN when they accuse others of sexual assault, even though there documented cases in which women have been proven to be liars, I prefer to believe black people when they cry the foul of racism, even though there are documented cases in which they may be ascribing racism to a situation that is not ARGUABLY caused by racism. And yet, for much the same reason that I believe women because we live in a sexist society, I believe black people because we live in a racist society. Even if we cannot draw the line between cause and effect when a black person cries racism does not negate the fact that we LIVE IN A RACIST SOCIETY.
Some argue, and these are those radicals Salzman eschews, that in a sexist society, everything is the product of sexism just like if we accept that we live in a racist society – and the PEW stats show that most of us do – then everything is the product of racism in such a power dynamic.
This argument is the very heart of the freak out over Critical Race Theory as “dangerous” because it breeds division and makes white kids hate themselves, which is such a stupid accusation, it’s almost not even worth it to refute it.
Acknowledging that our very systems of society are founded on racism (which has a deep history in our country due to slavery) does not mean white people are to BLAME and should hate themselves. But if we are going to achieve equal rights, we white people have to agree to stand beside the people of color and change the systems, question our privilege, and learn to live in a non-racist society (the process is the same for sexism, homophobia, and all of the prejudices).
It’s not about white people hating themselves because that’s stupid. It’s about each of us doing our part not just to stop perpetuating the systems of racist oppression but to actively work to stamp out those systems, attitudes, and behaviors.
And Salzman’s hateful article is a racist treatise of the worst kind as it hides in sheep’s clothing (though not well) as an allegedly “credible” and learned author with a long academic career and degrees when it’s just as rancid, loathsome, and ignorant as the stereotypical Klansman spewing the n-word out with his tobacco spit.
One last point, and then I am going to stop, because I could go on and on. Here’s an example of what I mean by questioning our white privilege and trying to root out the ways in which systemic racism shapes our attitude even when we are unaware of it, in denial about it.
I have recently come out in my class room as someone who hates Kyrie Irving. I have held this opinion for quite some time. I do not believe he is a team player. He says stupid shit to the media about the earth being flat or caring more about the situation in Palestine than his job and basketball DURING THE PLAYOFFS. And the way he exited Cleveland. AND NOW, this BS over not getting vaccinated in which he claims to NOT being anti-vax and that he is protesting the people who have lost their jobs due to vaccine mandates and then he says “don’t put this on me, why are you putting this on me,” by which he presumably means criticism over his decision to not get vaccinated which means he may not play in the NBA this year when he is a key player in the championship run for the Brooklyn Nets. Well, who the fuck else is responsible for his decision?
So I justify all this hatred of Kyrie (even though his smudging at arenas and other things would make us aligned and friendly – I also care about Palestine) with what he said and why and not racism.
But is it still racism?
In contrast, though I was critical of 18-yr old cocky LeBron James, I no longer am critical, and I love his media presence, his intelligence, and they way he speaks to the media.
But I do love him JUST because he exhibits the values I criticize Kyrie for not exhibiting, mainly team-attitude? Or do I love him because he sounds more “white?”
And furthermore, even though I love lots of black players and black players who sound more black, like Draymond Green, Kevin Durant, and CJ McCollum, am I critical of any white players as viciously as I am of Kyrie? Is my “hatred” of Kyrie more about racism than about his opinions and attitudes?
That’s a real possibility, and I need to explore myself.
Anti-racism does not mean that I cannot be critical of black people because people are human and therefore flawed and hardly always right. But it does mean I need to monitor my opinions for unintended perpetuation of the systems of oppression. Kind of like how I used to be bugged by Oprah. Kind of the same thing. Note “used to be bugged.”
Okay, pre-writing done for now.
If any student has read to this point, I want you to note the way I explore ideas here not all of which will make it into my essay. That’s what pre-writing is for.
LET ‘ER RIP!!
Write any old thing.
Get it out!
Word.
-chris tower
2110.22-09:42
From -
“The Invention of Systemic Racism”
by Phillip Carl Salzman
August 6, 2020
https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2020/08/06/the-invention-of-systemic-racism/
INTRODUCTION
Main argument: people of color allegedly demand different treatment - regarded as performing well in schools and the workforce even when they do not.
- Because American slavery
- Supposedly the 1619 Project claims that slavery and only slavery is the foundation of America
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html
- Supposedly 1619 proven false by historians -
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/historians-clash-1619-project/604093/
- not quite what is in that source
- agreement that “slavery’s legacy still shapes American life
- Claims she admitted it was NOT history
https://pjmedia.com/culture/tyler-o-neil/2020/07/29/1619-project-founder-admits-its-not-a-history-but-a-fight-to-control-the-national-narrative-n724944
- True - but that’s not really the point
- It’s oversimplification to say she “admits” it wasn’t history when she claims it uses history to “challenge the national narrative.”
PARA2
- Slavery is evil
- but it “ended” 150 years ago (so what?)
- slavery is not an explanation for poor performance of African-Americans today
PARA3
- radicals “invented” systemic racism
- he misdefines systemic racism and cites a Princenton Letter on anti-Blackness:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfPmfeDKBi25_7rUTKkhZ3cyMICQicp05ReVaeBpEdYUCkyIA/viewform
PARA4
- poorly quoted and uncited quotes from the letter
PARA5
- claims that systemic racism is proven without evidence and oversimplifies a definition of it
- claims that all arguments for under-representation are evidence of racism
- criticisms of those who signed the letter
PARA6
- Argues that under-representation still exists despite 50 years of “vigorous” Affirmative Action
- Misrepresents what “inclusion and diversity” efforts means
- means “people of color” only
- weak argument that opposing viewpoints are not tolerated
- cite his own article - https://fcpp.org/2019/04/27/commissars-in-our-universities/
- argues that criticism of this letter was ill-received
Katz criticism: https://quillette.com/2020/07/08/a-declaration-of-independence-by-a-princeton-professor/
reception of Katz’s criticism:
https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2020/07/on-bad-faith-responses-to-joshua-katz
- This is a reasonable rebuttal though it describes verbal smear campaigns on campus in wake of Katz’s criticism
PARA7
- a mess of ideas as Salzman attempts to analyze all of this rhetoric
- blames all the commentary as boiling down JUST to “People of color [be] excused from responsibility for statistically poor performance, and the fault for their poor performance is allocated to whites.”
- argues that this is a socialist argument against “equal opportunity” in the supposed American system of supposed equal opportunity.
- he claims that those who disagree with him argue that “equal outcomes should be guaranteed” - curious that he has no evidence that this is the actual claim of his opponents
- then he claims that progressive universities “indoctrinate” students to social justice and socialist ideals (also without evidence)
PARA8
- criticism of black people as the “cause celebre” of progressives as marginalized by white oppression
- he claims none of this marginalization is demonstrated (NOT TRUE) AND simply asserted to be true (which is what he is doing)
- he cites an argument against the BLM narrative of innocent black men being killed
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/flames-from-false-narratives/
(This one will take longer to unpack and refute)
- “And alternative explanations for poor performance based on real world influences are ignored.”
(What is the root cause of these “real world influences”? Could they be systemic racism??)
PARA9
- And so he tries to outline those “real world influences”
- FAMILY STRUCTURE
- 70% of African-Americans grow up in single parent homes
cites himself again
https://pjmedia.com/parenting/philip-carl-salzman/2019/03/06/boys-without-dads-feminisms-collateral-damage-n114087
- And why don’t they have DADs???
- Argues for MALE ROLE MODELS to counteract what that is wrong with women I am not sure
- FAULTY CAUSE AND EFFECT - are these boys more likely to be “drug users, homeless, gang members, criminals, incarcerated” because they are brought up by single MOMs or because of SYSTEMIC RACISM????
- And he compares to children in two-parent homes. Gee, what’s the race and class demographics of those homes???
Cites this book with little context
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Culture-Matters-Pretending-Problem-ebook/dp/B07QGL14HW/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=black+culture+matters&qid=1596498406&sr=8-1
- Says Obama and others have lamented this same problem - but how exactly? This same way? Doubt it
PARA10
- Tackles “community culture” next
“This includes the degree of emphasis placed on following the rules and being law-abiding; the commitment to hard work and postponement of gratification; and placing a high level of stress on education, seeing education as valuable in itself. These all contribute to strong performance and success in America.”
- wow....
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_gratification
PARA11
“Community culture varies from one population sector to another. These factors are strong in Asian American and Jewish communities, and while they are also strong among middle-class African Americans, they are weaker in African American inner cities.” - wow - why do we think this is?? Could it be RACIST STRUCTURE OF OUR NATION??
PARA12
- But not all problems lie with inner city kids
- denial of school choice to African American parents
https://www.city-journal.org/html/school-choice-last-civil-rights-battle-11879.html
- and this gem:
“One further question is whether teachers trained by our radical feminist faculties of education give boys a fair shake or marginalize them even more, an even greater problem for those not always oriented toward education.”
............... wow...........
- who are all these teachers indoctrinated by “radical feminist faculties” ???
- evidence?
- So this guy is a racial bigot and a misogynist though he clearly doesn’t think he is?
PARA13
- More quotes from the Princeton letter
adding: “Presumably this would also include expunging any reference to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his “racist” colorblind ideals.”
- what “this” is in that sentence is unclear.
- The items he lists do not mention MLK let alone expunging him from the curricula
PARA14
- “For self-proclaimed “progressives” and anti-racists,”
WRONG
Many that he claims are progressive are loathe to call themselves such and ROBIN DiANGELO famously asserted that it is not for her to label herself “anti-racist”
Likewise, I like to think I am “anti-racist” and yet I am aware of all the hidden and invisible ways racism works on me and our culture because of SYSTEMIC RACISM so...
- Again he argues that the “solution” proposed (for which he offers no evidence) is “leaving aside universalistic standards such as merit, to use force majeure by way of preferences, quotas, and special benefits for African Americans to compensate for weak performance”
- cites himself again for the “death or merit”
https://pjmedia.com/columns/philip-carl-salzman/2019/05/28/the-death-of-merit-and-the-race-to-mediocrity-in-our-increasingly-marxist-universities-n120276
- he then QUOTES more from the Princeton letter
in how it wishes to “reconsider” standardized testing” - hardly sounds like “force majeure”
- And other provisions like more faculty of color, more diverse course offerings, more faculty of color as leaders, etc.
- he continues with the letters provisions for changes to admissions policies:
- much the same - more candidates of color and students of color
PARA15
- cites himself again about “racial pandering”
https://pjmedia.com/columns/philip-carl-salzman/2020/06/30/universities-commit-to-racism-n587609
- According to a Pew opinion poll, 62% of African Americans say that race should not be a factor in college and university admissions, while 20% say it should only be a minor factor. 65% of Hispanics and 58% of Asians say it should not be a factor.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/25/most-americans-say-colleges-should-not-consider-race-or-ethnicity-in-admissions/
- And yet, here’s a whole bunch of key people at PRINCETON claiming otherwise...
PARA16
“The liberal American position assumes all individuals and all categories of people have the potential to succeed—and assuming certain categories of people are incapable of succeeding is demeaning. Canceling the use of standardized tests because some groups do not perform as well as others is to feign equality when the assumption is otherwise. To assume that people of a particular race are incapable of succeeding without special favors is a racism of low expectations.”
- Again he characterizes the arguments with which he disagrees without actually citing those specific arguments, which were not made
- it comes down to whether one begins that there is a systemic racist culture (not to mention class differences) in our country and it effects everything, including education
- it couldn’t be that education is funded by property taxes could it?
PARA17
- And now he gets really pejorative:
“The Woke Revolution is not really about stamping out “racism” and helping African Americans, Hispanics, illegal aliens, and LGBTQ++ any more than the Black Lives Matter organization is about saving black lives”
So many things here it is difficult to decide which to tackle first
- “woke revolution”???
“Recruiting weak candidates as students and professors who struggle to keep up, and undermining the value of their degrees“
- Oh, we are assuming people of color are the weaker choices?
- WHAT?
- “few individual African American deaths at the hands of police, while ignoring the tens of thousands of African Americans shot or killed by other African Americans, shows any real concern for black lives.”
- SIGH ... hardly. And even so, crime is different. He is completely ignoring the whole point of the movement.
UNARMED and possibly INNOCENT black men should not be killed just for being black and male and seen as a threat... why? Could it be racism?
PARA18
“The Woke Revolution is really about a power grab, through destroying liberal American institutions and culture and replacing them with a Marxist-inspired identity class struggle, socialism, and a totalitarian culture that cancels any opposition. This is now the agenda of our universities, of “progressive” politicians and office holders, and of the rioting mobs in the streets. The USSR, China, Cuba, and Venezuela are the utopias to which the Woke Revolution wants to take us. And the socialist “equality” that they espouse would be the equality of poverty and powerlessness that “people of color” would enjoy no more than any other subject of a totalitarian tyranny.”
- So many unsupported claims and NONSENSE
- This is just all reactionary bullshit without a shred of evidence or even a reasonable stance of disagreement
I added this comment to the site where Salzman is published:
Thank you for providing the perfect tool to teach my college composition students argument by starting with an opinion article that seems credible, apparently written by a credible author with some credentials, and yet is nothing more than a reactionary rant full of unsupported claims. When claims are supported they are often supported with misused or misanalyzed evidence. This is a great example of hostile rhetoric, unreasonable bias, and inflammatory language that is often masked to students in a first read of such a piece, especially one by a "professor."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
- Bloggery committed by chris tower - 2110.22 - 10:10
- Days ago = 2303 days ago
- New note - On 1807.06, I ceased daily transmission of my Hey Mom feature after three years of daily conversations. I plan to continue Hey Mom posts at least twice per week but will continue to post the days since ("Days Ago") count on my blog each day. The blog entry numbering in the title has changed to reflect total Sense of Doubt posts since I began the blog on 0705.04, which include Hey Mom posts, Daily Bowie posts, and Sense of Doubt posts. Hey Mom posts will still be numbered sequentially. New Hey Mom posts will use the same format as all the other Hey Mom posts; all other posts will feature this format seen here.
No comments:
Post a Comment