White Fragility, Chapter Five

In the fifth chapter of White Fragility, Robin Diangelo points out a very unique factor: the good/bad binary. The good/bad binary is not just specific to race. It is a broad idea that can be discussed in any moral situation; it relates to anything pertaining to judgment really. I like how Diangelo pointed out an instance from the past, when it was okay for white people to treat black people harshly: “… it was socially acceptable for white people to openly proclaim their belief in their racial superiority” (Diangelo, 71). This was before the Civil War; and during the Civil War, when white people saw the violence brought against blacks and said it was not okay to treat them that way, they saw it as immoral. They became the racists. The Southerners became the racists, because they were for slavery, while the Northerners were against it. What I am understanding from this piece of historical evidence is that things are okay to do or not okay to do based on what the white people said.

When Diangelo also claimed that it was the good/bad binary that made it very difficult for white people to discuss racism, I did not understand what she meant. Then she added a quote from African American scholar Omowale Akintunde: “For most whites, racism is like murder: the concept exists, but someone has to commit it in order for it to happen” (72). What I am taking away from this quote is that white people are ignorant to see that racism is everywhere in the world; most white people only choose to acknowledge it when they see it happen.

In previous chapters, I have noticed that Diangelo repeats how race plays a part in our everyday individual lives, and how her race allows her to do much more than other races. She emphasizes the importance of these aspects to understand that it is our race that influences whether we will be successful. Yes, even though today people are more socially diverse racially, sexually, etc., there still are and always will be certain groups that do not accept them.

Diangelo also claims that there are some common claims white people make to defend that they are not racist. “The first set claims color blindness: ‘I don’t see color [and/or race has no meaning to me]; therefore I am free of racism.’ The second set claims to value diversity: ‘I know people of color [and/or have been near people of color, and/or have general fond regard for people of color]; therefore I am free of racism’” (76). Then she lists some things people may say that fall under these two categories. Diangelo claims that these people do not truly understand racism because they divert themselves from the topic of discussion by ending the conversation claiming they are not racist. They say these things to not fall under the stereotypical category that white people are racist.

I also liked how Diangelo states that not everyone can be treated the same, depending on the situation and circumstances. When she mentioned this, it really changed what I was taught in elementary school, which is to treat others the way you want to be treated.