Allow me to be totally ignorant -- I don't understand the use of 'endemic' in this context. What do you understand it to mean? Because I have no idea, so I can't comment either way!
I have no small confusion on that matter myself, admittedly. I can't imagine anything he could mean to it that I would be able to agree to, though, and "WTF?" was my immediate reaction--trying to question individual meanings (both for "endemic" and for "white racism") came later.
Well, I *think* the use here is 'native'/'inherent' -- so "White racism is endemic" means "White people are naturally racist." And I don't think that's a bad thing to disagree with. Am I missing something?
My first reading--one I have not yet convinced myself was wrong--was that it was an outright denial of systemic racism resulting in white privilege, in favor of an "isolated acts" model. Even if one reads it more narrowly as claiming that systemic racism is merely not all-pervasive, I'm still not sure I can accept. If he means "There is an imaginable future in which white people are not racist" then I agree with him but a) strongly suspect he is arguing against a straw argument, and b) question what "white people" would mean in that future.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject