Buddhism and Whiteness: Critical Reflections—Book Review

The Watercooler
72

I’m a third-generation immigrant. I pass as white English, and I grew up in poor area with high levels of white racism and moved to a less poor area with still high levels of more polite white racism. Therefore I’ve been part of a lot of “ha, you’re English too!” racist talks, which is both sad and amusing, because I can shut it down by having a foreign surname (one that clearly links to a national group often despised by white racists).

I am confronted by my otherness, my mother’s otherness, and her parent’s otherness regularly. The UK government has, I believe, passed a law making it easier for people like me to be deported in case we are unwanted. My wife has been targeted for abuse because “an English girl shouldn’t marry a foreigner” at work.
My non-white students tend to be confronted with their blackness regularly. They are disciplined more harshly by teachers – I have seen this with my own eyes. Evidence suggests that this is statistically significant across the population. Students resist racial integration in shared spaces to an extent which is very visible.

White people not wanting to take on the task of confronting their whiteness is not a solution and not a strength. White people have constructed a world where others must apologise for their otherness regularly, and face more limited life experiences because of it. (People with stereotypically white names are more likely to get jobs than someone with a name that brings with it negative stereotypes, I posted a link to the study earlier). It is an unfair burden to elide whiteness, and it is an unfair burden which maintains the racial superiorities inherent in “I am the default, and I don’t have to bother”. Colour-blindness is not a solution, as it merely elides the issues in favour of but I’m alright, what are you complaining about?

To quote Martin Luther King:

"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.”

Confronting whiteness is not convenient, I agree. But it won’t put you in prison, it won’t make your children’s lives in school harder, and it, at worst, results in a kind of shame that you can take on and tackle by yourself. I, for one, am glad that the effects are so transitory.

So, if you think talking about whiteness is a red-herring for a factual reason, please explain and give those facts.
And if you think it is a red-herring because if makes you feel lesser, then the good news is that you’re not being oppressed, you’re just being asked to be a better person. Isn’t that a worthwhile journey?

6 Likes
74

This is such an unfortunate stereotype.

It has been interesting reading the comments on this thread, reflecting about the various groups that I’m involved with, and wondering what difference, if any, I could make. My primary practice group was, for some time, my local Thai monastery. I still attend that, but the teachers who could speak good English have wound up in different places. It’s such a short-sighted idea that noone at such places have deep practice. It’s actually pretty obvious when one is on a retreat who the people with deep practice are when they come to the monastery to provide breakfast, etc. Those have the sort of calmness that otherwise only the monastics have.

Then there is a loose group that includes various White, Sri Lankan, and Thai people, with the occasional ethnic Chinese. Not super organised but we’ve run a sutta discussion group since lockdowns started.

Then there is a local “Insight” group which is pretty much totally white, but has the advantage of being organised and having some people who have quite a lot of experience. Interestingly, there’s very little awareness of other Buddhist groups in these circles (apart from Zen groups, which are equally white). Many in this group are very in favour of engaged practice and so on, but overlook that Fo Guang Shan, who have a presence here, are huge in that area—FGS ran support centres after our 2011 earthquake and are savvy enough to organise attractive events that many local politicians and other community members turn up to. They do a lot to raise public awareness of Dharma.

I don’t recall coming across any Māori or Polynesian people at any Dharma/Dhamma events. However, one of the effects of Colonisation was that those groups are now much more active in Christianity than the White community, so perhaps they are less likely to be seeking an alternative spiritual practice.

So that brings me to the question of what, if anything, I should be doing about the makeup of such groups. It’s obviously a no-brainer that in my education role, making sure all groups have an opportunity to study is good for them (and good “business” for us). It’s less obvious that I should be concerned about, for example, a lack of Māori people in New Zealand Buddhist groups, when Māori are currently in the process of revitalising their own culture.

2 Likes
75

Wow! Really? As someone who was born in India and grew up in the UK (England, Midlands) in the 60’s and 70’s, I would say we are getting less divisive and less racialised. It’s great over here now compared to where we were back then, especially for those - two generations down from me - who are currently in school.

Back then we had the ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech from Enoch Powell. You can imagine that my parents didn’t feel particularly welcome :laughing: - Now I find Rish! on the ballot paper for Prime Minister. I’m not sure that the current Tory membership are quite ready yet to go for someone with his (ahem…) “background” :wink: .

Just one persons perspective though. Maybe it’s different for you in Wales

Is that right? I can’t seem to find any evidence for this. My admittedly very limited experience suggests that without the public framing, the problem is still there, but it’s just concealed, often in plain sight. Bringing it out into the open and giving it a name and definition, allows it to be investigated, including statistical analysis, and dealt with in a sensible manner. Especially in those areas where we suspect (what is now known as) ‘institutional racism’.

You know: first you 1) name the problem, then 2) see if there’s a cause, then 3) see if there is a possible solution and then 4) follow the path to the solution :wink:

8 Likes
76

As a teacher in the UK (again, in the Midlands) I am happy to report your optimism is well-founded. Racism does occur, and some teachers just don’t understand how what they say and do is harmful. But staff and students work much harder to be anti-racist than was happening when I was at school in the 90s.

 

You know: first you 1) name the problem, then 2) see if there’s a cause, then 3) see if there is a possible solution and then 4) follow the path to the solution :wink:

This was great :smiley:

3 Likes
77

As a teacher in the UK (again, in the Midlands) I am happy to report your optimism is well-founded. Racism does occur, and some teachers just don’t understand how what they say and do is harmful. But staff and students work much harder to be anti-racist than was happening when I was at school in the 90s.

I’ll add this (slow mode so can’t edit): By focusing on the potential for racism, rather than being colour-blind to race as it it doesn’t matter any more, there is less tension. This is directly opposite to the idea that you cause division by talking about the issues.
This brings to mind sad cases of abuse within families. From personal family history, not talking about a family member being abusive hides the abuse, it doesn’t negate it. It might hurt some or all members of the family to talk about and acknowledge the abuse, but that response of hurt doesn’t mean the honesty and openness is wrong.

1 Like
78

I am assuming here that you are talking about the last decade or so. I agree that there is currently a growing climate of division in western societies, and it is remarkable that the same issues are being transported simultaneously from USA to UK to OZ to NZ to Italy, France, Spain, Germany etc. which should already be a red flag. But I think it is important to understand where this climate comes from. If we blame other regular people in society for it, we participate in the division and we are the useful idiots of those who need to foster division. It is quite clear to me that this climate of divisiveness is being created by those who are in a position to steer public debate, that is people with money, and therefore access to think tanks, media, including legacy and social media, social influencers, celebrities, politicians etc. People who are capable of creating a buzz around predetermined issues with the specific goal of creating division.

Why do these people need to create division? Because they are under threat of losing their status and power by the current conjoncture whereby the entire western world is entering into economic recession after decades of decadence in many areas, driven by the greed of the actual, real decision makers (not the politicians who are merely servants of the real power centers). When this happens, the elites are afraid that the populace might unite to voice their common legitimate grievances, so the elites must keep people as divided as possible.

How do they create division? I think the best example here is ‘wokeness’. Take a legitimate issue such as racism or feminism, stretch it to such an extent that it borders on absurdity and then fire fierce debate on the matter on all the screens people’s eyeballs are locked onto. What you get is on one side people correctly arguing that these issues are legitimate ones to talk about and on the other side people correctly arguing that the debate has been rendered absurd. Thus people enter in bitter arguments, pointing fingers (it’s the fault of liberals! No, you don’t understand, it’s the fault of conservatives!) at each other, not capable of understanding that they are engaging in a pre-programmed behavior.

Liberals, just like conservatives, are victims of the campaign to sow division. The solution imho is to refrain from pointing fingers at our fellow citizens and instead understand who is fostering the division and why.

To me the real question here is: is such a statement soothing the division or is it fostering it?

6 Likes
79

Is it —?or isn’t it — strange that after an OP that presents publications that invite “white Buddhists” (I don’t warm to this term but that’s who the book(s) is about) to look at themselves, their attitudes and their practices, instead of actually pausing to think and then maybe writing, “Perhaps we could do more of this and less of that” …. we get a long thread where at a guess 90% of the contributors are white, and there is a protracted discussion of whether whiteness is or is not a homogeneous state?

Where’s self examination that the OP invites us to make? Where are the suggestions for new strategies that can be deployed to respect and thank those people who preserved and taught the Buddhadhamma for two thousand years? Where are more strategies for reaching out to BIPOC people who don’t have Buddhism in their heritage?

It rather reminds me of Nero fiddling while Rome burns. We’ve got a bit of a cheek haven’t we, not being content with invading and colonising a large number of countries and pillaging their crops, products and human labour, to finish it all by co-opting the finest religion and reshaping it to fit our own needs?

This is a moment when I don’t feel proud to be a member of the Forum and I’m so grateful for the small number of posts above that do unpack the meanings of the OP for the rest of us that can’t see beyond the whiteness of our own noses.

And I want to apologise to all participants and readers who have felt distressed or marginalised by what they have read in this thread. You deserve better.

12 Likes
81

There’s a book I just read called White Fragility. I promise that it is relevant at this point. Here’s the Wiki page: White Fragility - Wikipedia

3 Likes
82

I’m going to throw a few rambling thoughts in here. I’m not sure I’m the best qualified (where I’m from, Ireland, has had a fairly homogeneous population up to perhaps 30 years ago). There has been a lot of inward migration since then (a change, I guess, from extensive often rather involuntary outward migration), much from Europe and the EU but much from elsewhere too so, for example, my own partner is from a Chinese background, one sister-in-law is Thai (brought back from Australia by my brother where a lot of Irish people spend a year or two on working holiday visas in their youth :slight_smile: ), though another sister-in-law is just a plain ol’ Irish girl. Anyway, thinking and having to deal with this whole race issue is fairly new here. I’m not going to get too into that.

Still, Buddhism does tend in a fairly white, educated and affluent direction in terms of membership. Though, one certainly would come across Thai and Sri Lankan etc. people far more in it than one would expect in everyday life, so it’s really hard to judge. :man_shrugging:

I suppose Irish and white (Europeans etc.) Buddhists do tend to invariably be converts (there just hasn’t been the time for that not to be the case). That must be a significant issue. I come from a fairly typical Irish Catholic working class background; most of my relatives, parents, uncles and aunts still are. I have noticed that foreign Catholics living here do tend to fairly seamlessly slot into that whole scene (Filipinos, Polish etc. – even priests coming from African countries where missions originally went out to, now that so few Irish people become priests – a bit ironic). I guess, apart from the language, the experience is fairly similar everywhere. I can remember one or two Catholic converts from my teenage years when I was still being dragged along to mass. They were really serious about the whole thing, very quick to get involved, sign up for roles etc. I suppose when one is brought up in a religion one tends to take it more for granted, maybe be a bit more complacent about it all, not think so deeply about it. So, I guess a Catholic coming in from abroad is going to have a similar mindset and attitude in that way to Irish Catholics. I wonder if a foreign Catholic showed up in a church where everyone was a Catholic convert, would they just find it all a bit over-earnest and just a bit too much? I guess back when Jesus or Buddha were originally walking the earth, then everyone at the time was a convert. However, things probably get a bit different when a religion is there for several generations passing from parents to children. Hopefully, Buddhism in the West will get to that stage. Realistically, IMO monasticism (the role of monks and nuns) needs to become more prominent if that’s going to happen (the religion heading towards how it is practiced out in Asia): the whole individualistic retreat centre approach is only going to go so far.

I commented earlier that Buddhism does seem to tend white, affluent and educated in the West. In terms of race and whiteness (an issue raised by the OP), the reasons for that are definitely worth pondering (though I don’t feel terribly qualified to speak on that).

That does leave affluence and education too. Certainly in the US, the conditions of the “working class” (usually defined as those without a college education) has gone backwards since around the 1970s, work conditions getting more precarious, standard of living falling in relative terms (whereas the “middle class” has become more affluent relatively and the top few percentage doing really well – inequality has risen rather sharply). I don’t have much experience of US Buddhism. However, Buddhism centred on expensive retreat centres is not exactly conducive to the participation of less affluent folks. At least in Ireland, any of the more Theravada groups tend to be donation based, which probably helps. Sunyata, one of the main retreat centres in Clare in Ireland (run by a grass roots group of volunteers), doesn’t ask for anything upfront. There’s an envelope slot in the entrance hall to the main retreat hall and at some point during a multiday retreat, one can quietly slip an envelope or some money into that. If one didn’t give anything, no one will really notice. Nonetheless, things do still skew more educated and affluent on average.

3 Likes
83

I agree that we need more of a sense of community.

When my wife and I were at a family program at Shambhala Mountain, Colorado we met a young couple with two small children. We asked them how long they have been Buddhist and they answered, “we were born Buddhist.” That’s the problem with stereotypes and generalizations, since they were white, we had just assumed they were convert Buddhists. This was about 20 years ago, so by now there could even be 3rd or 4th generation white and African-American Buddhists at that community. The Shambhala tradition is not our preferred Buddhist tradition, but they have done a good job at creating a community environment.

2 Likes
84

Here is a very insightful critique of the book White Fragility written by the prominent Columbia University professor John McWhorter:

4 Likes
85

This is a powerful critique from a particular perspective:

Being middle class, upwardly mobile, and Black has been quite common during my existence since the mid-1960s, and to deny this is to assert that affirmative action for Black people did not work.

What do people who experience racism and aren’t upwardly mobile need? Sadly, they are less likely to get publishing contracts or to write for The Atlantic.
And this historical and personal perspective does not elucidate that affirmative action is creating social mobility now, at a time when measures of social mobility are extremely low.

2 Likes
87

I agree… everything in the US politics and media is made to be racial. They spread divisiveness and hate daily.

People really need to start looking at more things than just the color of peoples skin!

On a side note:
As for the school situation, as a teacher in NJ i can assure you that a child’s performance in school is overwhelmingly more influenced by his/her home life than what is happening in the classroom.

88

Sounds like a very useful read. I’ll have to get a copy. I look at homogeneity as a form that rises from the mind, itself it not an accurate depiction of the diversity that exists within, across, and between ‘groups.’ Our mind creates these categories. Our practice can dismantle them, but the sociopolitical environment, and legitimately- the regional experiences of ‘others’, resists this dismantling. We are left with an opportunity to dismantle racism but little opportunity to investigate how the mind creates new barries, groups, and forms in the process.

89

The issue I have with a lot of this literature is that late capitalism has ensnared its discourse into market mechanics (or at the very least the social media popularity contest), thus making the finding of actual helpful material difficult due to the profit motive involved in being overly rhetorical and bombastic. If you are referencing white fragility, I will tell you as somebody who has read very interesting scholarly literature on topics related to what the author is maybe going for, found the snippets I did read of that book to be utterly, and absolutely ridiculous.

One example is the comparing of modern white people looking at a messed up prison system in the USA and those in times of yore who attended sunday lynchings for fun. This is exactly the type of stuff that just ruins it for me. I understand the place of hyperbole and all that, but when done with a serious face so you can collect 750k in speaking fees (as the author did one year) is just to me, one big sad joke.

When you collect 30-40k for speaking fees on topics of “diversity and inclusion” you are part of the problem, which I won’t even get into on this post. How does one even reconcile a person getting paid that kind of money going on and on about diversity and inclusion? It is hilarious!

As for the original op … I see very little being done on the Buddhist front in my area (or any area I have came across) regarding community outreach, or breaking down barriers between particular communities of similar people and Buddhist groups. My experience with Buddhist groups has been almost creepy if I am being entirely honest. A friend who is a Buddhist professor runs a shin group, a tradition I have minimal interest in, and I hang out with them because they are down to earth people.

3 Likes
90

Fwiw, there’s some good stuff over at the anarchist library on this, which is provided free, often anonymously, with no profit motive.

Do you have links to some of the “interesting scholarly literature” you were thinking of?

1 Like
91

I agree. Words have done much to support white passivity and investigation of everything but the subject proposed. Clever is not wisdom.

92

I will look back in my calibre library since I don’t actually own any tangible books on the subject, but some of the authors who come to mind are Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic, and others who have written on topics around critical race theory, and I am drawing on a blank on one that is more directly related. This was a fleeting area of study for me if I am being completely honest, mostly because what I have read has been really out there, maybe this is my own fault in selection.

The anarchist library is great, and I have found many resources on there. Probably due to what some may say are “communist” or “communitarian” leanings, I tend to forego identity ideals and try to focus more on collective community building, irregardless (and without too much focus on) individually defining characteristics. Jodi Dean is an author (she is a communist and political theorist) who breaks down a lot of the problems in modern over-identification with one’s individual traits or characteristics through the analysis of modern issues, even democracy. It is quite easily demonstrated how that clearly works against community formations and fractures collectively among normally collaborative people. This issue is perpetuated by social media which is designed to not only modify one’s behavior, but modify collective activity and quite literally has been shown to change the society’s perception of reality.

The hard thing now is having an actual conversation about this with people, who maintain if you challenge books like white fragility, it is your very own “white fragility” that is causing you do so. Which is not only unfalsifiable, but typically becomes an ad hominem attack on the challenger, or accusatory statements of being “red pilled” or on the “q train” or something along those lines.

Exactly right. As with everything that comes up, there are those who get in the ground level and somehow make many profits off of whatever “it” is. This does not make them a genius or all-knowing. This was my biggest issue with Donald Trump, those who equated him with being a “genius” because he was an (alleged) billionaire.

I think a restoration of true community would help society solve a lot of issues, but people continue on, obsessed quite literally, with their individual characteristics and things that make them “special” (in their mind) all the while forgetting that no one person is that much different any other one person. But, the challenge to this statement could be the makeup of the individuals within the communities have changes so drastically over the past 100 years, that tribalism and the fact that humans are more comfortable around people who look like them due to natural selection, evolutionary traits, etc., still presents a large challenge.

3 Likes
93

Excellent book. Having read it I can recommend it. Just be warned, if you are white or benefit from white privilege, it’s going to reveal a lot of unpleasant things. It’s a good opportunity to watch the mind. Seeing that what you thought you had earned was due to a rigged system can be destabilizing. It’s easy to slip into denial.

Even if it does predominantly look at the phenomenon of whiteness in North America, the patterns can be applied to many situations.

On a theoretical level sure. But the way that society treats (and has treated) people is often drastically different. That’s the issue. Not that we don’t all share in having greed, hatred and delusion. And ignoring the vastly different experiences of people does nothing at all to remedy the problem.

To me, that’s what I wish this thread had been about. Discussing the ways that Buddhists, Buddhist teachers, and Buddhist institutions continue to treat people in unwholesome ways because of their race. Instead it’s been a lot of meta talk.

5 Likes
94

Valid. Propaganda theory assumes we see reality but propaganda and rhetoric somehow trick us into believing in illusions. Arguments of identity politics similarly propose that a true ‘self’ somehow exists outside of the identity political vector.

The ‘socio-politically enlightened identity’ often identifies-with-buddhism as a proposal of one’s enlightenment, albeit visibily not ‘true’ (provisional, not ultimate) to observers. Crtical analysis that deconstructs these ‘forms’ is often motivated, and still ‘provisional’ in its insights.

I’m not clear if anarchy is more in support of community that ‘socially progressive enlightened literature’, or if it would promote a ‘democracy’ that has any valid insights into wholesome and skillful actions aligned with the dharma. Unskillful practice produces unskillful results.

Dialectics of insight and deconstruction often require a willigness to suspend, investigate, and challenge previous forms and convictions. The insight produce is paradigmatic, and thus unavailable to linear-provisional investigations. Insights from one ‘view’ are ‘common-sense’ to another.

1 Like