Schick (2014). White resentment in settler society.

Schick, C. (2014). White resentment in settler society. Race Ethnicity and Education, 17(1), 88–102. http://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.733688

“… politics of resentment …” (p 88)

“… how white people have managed to avoid hearing about the typically taboo subjects of racist systems in which they are implicated, no matter how well meaning and well intended they are.” (p 89)

“Through this racial hierarchy that privileges their identifications, whites learn who they are, where they may go, and how to traverse the social landscape (Leonardo 2009, 235). The social, political and historic landscape is never an innocent space, but rather a place into which ‘the relations of power and discipline are inscribed’ (Soja 1989, 6).” (p 89)

[“Context” (p 89)]

“First Nations and Métis peoples comprise approximately 15% of the population and are socially, politically and historically positioned as ‘other’ to the descendents of white settlers …” (p 89)

“… Kumashiro (2000) describes as ‘Education about the other.'” (p 90)

“… politics of resentment in which these discourses are considered normative.” (p 91)

“Space is marked through race, gender, class and other social constructions.” (p 91)

“… the context of emotional belonging in which our teaching is situated … (p 92)

[“Canadian national narratives of innocence and space” (p 92)]

“Ahmed (2000) cites Sibley who says that social space is shaped in important ways by ‘who is felt to belong and not to belong’ (26).” (p 92)

“The threat of difference and loss are not from the outside other who is already marked, but from the potential for the community to fail to cohere in its claim to particular colonizing narratives that constitute their sense of how they understand themselves.” (p 92)

“Multicultural tolerance and the settler narrative suggest that even though Canada is open to all comers, the recognition of difference is limited to that which does not threaten white settler domination.” (p 93)

“Stereotypes about aboriginal people and federal policies that hampered their progress were useful in creating the mythology of the vanishing indigenous peoples and, later, producing management systems that enabled the state to control the progress of aboriginal peoples when they refused to go away.” (p 93)

“… erasure is never complete, however, as aboriginal peoples are neither in the museums nor in the past, but very much present to unsettle the claims of the innocent and entitled settler. … The settler is the originary presence who makes history in an otherwise presumably un-storied place (Bhabha 1994).” (p 94)

[“Politics of resentment” (p 95)]

“Similarly, the emotional space of schools are racialized through discourses of ‘us,’ as the ones whose story is the legitimate history of this place, and ‘them,’ others who are tolerated in their essential difference. … [page break] … The ‘others’ to whom resentment is directed include immigrants, the already-poor who are willing to work for less, and unseen ‘others’ who are ‘destroying our nation.'” (p 95-96)

[“How white racial knowledge is asserted” (p 98)]

“… whites are not ignorant of racial knowledge as is popularly assumed, but in stark contrast, use their knowledge in the participation of race relations in ways that confirm and make use of a structuring system of privilege.” (p 98)

“White people ‘learn their place in racial hierarchy’ by being socialized through the practices of everyday life, including schooling.” (p 98)

“Whites know where to traverse the social landscape in a way that provides great mobility and freedom of movement because of access through skin privilege. It is a freedom of movement that most whites don’t consider. … ‘knowing how to act in racially `acceptable` ways is a form of knowledge that whites develop in their everyday life’ (239).” (p 99)

“… competitive.” (p 99)

“Racism is not simply that which happens between groups who don’t get along. It is the product of Enlightenment history, and its cultural imperialism that brought slavery, colonization and global exploitation. Willinsky (1998) describes education as a process that teaches students in imperialist nations how to divide the world to the extent that some will be able to feel at [page break] home wherever they go, even when they are settler immigrants.” (p 99-100)

“… having diversity policies in official documents means that you don’t actually have to carry out the diversity. Knowing enough to put in the policy is an example of white racial knowledge. Doing nothing about it is another.” (p 100)

Selected References

  • Ahmed, S. 2000. Strange encounters: Embodied others in post-coloniality. London: Routledge.
  • Bhabha, H. 1994. The location of culture. London: Routledge.
  • Kumashiro, K.K. 2000. Toward a theory of anti-oppressive education. Review of Educational Research 70, no. 1: 25–53.
  • Leonardo, Z. 2009. Reading whiteness: Anti-racist pedagogy against white racial knowledge. In Handbook of social justice in education, ed. B. Ayers, T. Quinn, and D. Stovall, 231–48. New York: Routledge.
  • Soja, E. 1989. Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory. London: Verso.
  • Willinsky, J. 1998. Learning to divide the world: Education at empire’s end. Minneapolis, MN: UM Press.
  • Zembylas, M. 2010. Racialization/ethnicization of school emotional spaces: The politics of resentment. Race Ethnicity and Education 13, no. 2: 253–70.
See this page at https://kinasevych.ca/index.php