When we hire white folks to work in communities of color, it can get confusing.
Years later (after I had stopped working there), the organization was planning a performance arts project featuring South Asian women and their personal stories. This white colleague expressed interest in co-leading the project. As participants, my friend and I expressed our disapproval with this idea to the organizer. We couldn’t imagine having a white woman in the room while we were sharing our very personal ideas in what was meant to be a space for South Asian women. It felt voyeuristic. I followed up on this complaint with a 1-1 conversation with this white colleague, who was my friend at the time. We had a long conversation where I explained that it didn’t feel right for her to be present in the project, and I asked her directly, “why do you feel like it is okay to be leading this?” Her response was “Because this is a project of [the organization], and I’m a part of [the organization].” It was a simple response, and I couldn’t argue with that in particular; yes, she worked there and was a part of the organization. But still, did that mean she could be leading a project that aimed to create a safe space for South Asian women? The organization decided not to let her co-lead the project, and I’m grateful they took our feedback at the time.Seattle Demographics:
I recently spoke to Polly Trout, a white woman who founded Seattle Education Access (SEA) in 2002. “The mission of SEA was to help marginalized youth get back on track with education. By walking side by side with these young people, most of whom were both people of color and grew up in intergenerational poverty, really radicalized my politics. I was a typical white lady, naive and ignorant,” she chuckled. She told me a story of accompanying an undocumented student to a financial aid office, where the officer grilled the student with many questions, beyond what was even legal to ask. Polly said that the officer looked directly at her and said “I hope you understand, we have to be careful with those people.”
“White people don’t often see this despicable behavior in the daylight, right in front of them. We don’t have to see it, we hide from it and we are protected from it,” said Polly. Incidents like this sparked her journey and reflections. “By 2013, I had realized I made some really profound mistakes in 2002. My founding board was an all white board, which fed the white supremacy embedded in the culture of the organization. For that and some other reasons I resigned from SEA,” she said. “After leaving SEA in 2014, I made a vow that I was not gonna apply for any jobs that would be better filled by a leader of color,” she said.
White: 69.5% (Non-Hispanic Whites: 66.3%)
Asian: 13.8% (4.1% Chinese, 2.6% Filipino, 2.2% Vietnamese, 1.3% Japanese, 1.1% Korean, 0.8% Indian, 0.3% Cambodian, 0.3% Laotian, 0.2% Pakistanis, 0.2% Indonesian, 0.2% Thai)
The beauty of the argument is it cannot be refuted within the left. Baizuo set up these organizations to help POC, but the only way to truly help anyone is to give them responsibility. Baizuo are white supremacists not because they believe whites are superior, but because they behave as if whites are superior and place POC into subordinate roles. Baizuo create aid organizations and then colonize them.
"White privilege" is a big deal with baizuo because they are subconsciously white supremacist. The white nationalist doesn't seek to run the local NAACP office or work in aid communities of South Asian women. The baizuo says all whites have "white privilege," but really it is only a sin for baizuo, like how Original Sin is a Christian sin.
For baizuo to reach enlightenment, or nirvana, or whatever their higher stage is called, they must remove themselves from the presence of POC. Eventually, this will be accomplished with baizuo suicides.
Seen at nrxn