Hey Dude, Where's My Privilege? Race and Lawbreaking in Black and White
Envision the following, if you can.
Imagine that a group of black youth were to descend upon a college town, take to an open field and proceed to smoke pot--lots of it--just as they had announced they would, at the very time they had promised to be there. Thousands of them, lighting up, virtually daring police to enforce the law and arrest them.
Now, in such a scenario as this, how long do you think it would take for the cops to call their bluff?
If you've paid any attention whatsoever to the so-called war on drugs, you'll almost instinctively know the answer. It is people of color who have always borne the brunt of drug crackdowns, even though whites use drugs at rates that are equal to or higher than the rates for the black and brown. So, for instance, although whites comprise more than 70 percent of all drug users (slightly higher than our share of the population), and blacks and Latinos combined make up about 25 percent of users (less than their combined share of the population), it is the latter two groups whose members comprise about 9 in 10 persons incarcerated for a possession offense in the U.S. No, black and brown youth couldn't get away with mass lawbreaking of this type for very long.
But when a bunch of white stoners announce their plans for a big pot-fest, known alternately (depending on which of several such events we're talking about) as 420 Smoke-Out, or the 420 Festival (the 420 being a not-so-secret code for cannabis consumption), and then proceed to break the laws against such an event just as promised, nothing happens. No arrests, no citations, no wading into the crowd by overzealous cops intent on bashing the heads of the hooligans arrayed before them. Of course not.
Just like there is very little in the way of law enforcement response when white college students riot on their campuses, as they have done over 150 times in the past fifteen years, and never over important political matters of social injustice, or war, but rather, because of the outcomes of sporting events or crackdowns on underage drinking. White folks, you see, get pissed when you interrupt our right to party.
And so in Boulder, Colorado and Santa Cruz, California just a few weeks ago (on April 20th, 4/20 get it? No irony here, just maddeningly predictable pothead behavior), thousands of people--statistically speaking, nearly all of them white, and with virtually no black folks, other than perhaps an occasional Bob Marley pic on a t-shirt--showed up to spark up: part of an annual pot pilgrimage that has been going on for several years now, always with the same, unarrested result.
Now don't misunderstand, I've indulged my fair share of weed, and I'm not one to advocate the criminalization of such activity, as I think it both a waste of justice system resources and overly punitive. Yet none of that is the point. The point is this: people of color simply could not get away with such a flagrant disrespect for the law, no matter how stupid that law may be. But white hacky-sack kickin' hippies who continue to believe--against all evidence to the contrary--that patchouli can actually cover up body odor? Well, they can get away with damned near anything.
Oh sure, to read the headline in the student paper at UC Santa Cruz, you might think there had been some jackbooted overreaction by the cops to such behavior. After all, "UCSC Cracks Down on 4/20 Festival," makes it seem as though perhaps the administration had decided to actually arrest people, or even suspend or expel them for engaging in blatantly illegal behavior. But no. Upon reading the article one learns that by "cracking down" the author meant that the campus would erect barricades, enforce parking rules, limit use of school shuttles and ban students from having friends crash at their dorms overnight. Damn pigs, what a police state! Apparently the folks at Santa Cruz haven't gotten the memo on how to deal with scofflaws such as these. To wit, the reaction by Colorado-Boulder officials who sprayed them down with water from a sprinkler system a few years back. Although some among the assembled may have experienced the dousing as oppressive--after all, it might almost constitute a bath if one were to get wet enough--for most, the occasion was likely viewed as a welcome respite from an otherwise hot day.
Though I tend to agree with those who claim pot has very little negative health effect upon its users, it does appear to have rather serious consequences for cognitive function, which would normally be, ya know, a problem at a college. Indeed, at the big Boulder smoke-out in 2008, white users demonstrated a drug-induced vapidity that would be viewed as culturally pathological were it exhibited by students of color. So, for instance, despite CU Boulder being a highly selective university, they managed to admit the likes of Emily Benson, who told a reporter she actually came to the school "for the weed atmosphere," and to be part of the pot legalization movement. Not for an education, mind you, but to get high. And for this, she took a spot that could have been given to a hard-working black or brown kid instead, or a working class white kid for that matter with more serious daily concerns than the munchies. Call it, stoner affirmative action: a form of preferential treatment extended to many of the whites at Boulder apparently, including one young woman who expressed her disappointment upon learning that the cookies and muffins being handed out by one of her classmates at the 4/20 fest weren't "magical," as in, filled with even more of the drugs she had already ingested. Bummer: now she'll have to make do with that one blunt and some Adderall. How will she survive such an indignity as this?
Meanwhile, as the aforementioned Ms. Benson (from the Kansas City area, and whose parents must be so proud of her) indulges her habit, and as thousands of her white classmates do too--many of them styling each other's hair in dreadlocks, because nothing goes better with white privilege than cultural appropriation--it is students of color who continue to be told they are the unqualified ones, that they are the ones who are unjustly taking up space at elite schools, that their acceptance into such places is "lowering standards" and cheapening the value of a college degree.
The irony of it all couldn't be more perfect: a bunch of white college students clamoring for the legalization of pot, not realizing that for them it already is, in effect, legal. If they really wanted to see the laws change, they would be out demanding an end to the racist and classist war on drugs. They would be engaged in advocacy, not bong hits, the latter of which make the former exceedingly difficult. In fact, the only way the nation's drug laws are likely to change--for everyone--would be if the jails and prisons came to be flooded with bodies that looked a lot like the ones in the meadow at UC Santa Cruz and on the quad at CU Boulder. Only if whites start getting locked up will sufficient pressure be brought to bear to liberalize drug laws. As long as the ones being locked up are black and brown, the very same whites whose kids are blazing up (with taxpayer support, via student loans no less), will say nothing. Perhaps if their little bundles of THC started getting sent to the joint (as in, the penitentiary, not the other kind), things would change. But don't expect any of the weed warriors at the 420 events to volunteer for that kind of thing. Their commitment isn't to social change, after all. It's to getting high, to self-indulgence, to their own narcissism.
This is perhaps the most blatant example of white privilege imaginable: the ability to do what you want, when you want, without fear of consequence, and then to have that behavior deemed largely harmless, even when, for others, it would be viewed as dysfunctional, destructive, and evidence of a profound cultural flaw.
Well it's time to flip the script on all that; time to note that it isn't the culture of black and brown youth, or working class youth (of whatever color), that needs changing. They aren't the problem. They aren't the ones with inverted value systems. They aren't the ones whose presence on campus is the problem. It's some among the ones with money and insufficient melanin who are the problem. And it's time we treated them like one, especially when, by their behavior, they literally beg us to do so.
Tim Wise is author of several books; the most recent of which is Between Barack and a Hard Place, Racism and White Denial in the Age of Obama, published in the Open Media Series by City Lights Books, www.citylights.com
ZNet Articles
ZMag Articles
ZCommentaries
ZVideos
Books
Re: Hey Dude, Where's My Privilege? Race and Lawbreaking in Black and White
By Tothe, Tony at May 21, 2009 06:36 AM
Hello Chris,
Well in Tim's new book "Between Barack and a hard place" as well as his book released in late Sumjmer 2008 he attacks Obama for avoiding discussion of the problem of structural racism in US and for making white people feel comfortable about their dreadful views on race like the Cosby show did in the 80's. I think he's also said some criticism in these books about Obama's race speech where he described the US as a city on the hill, great force freedom in world, and how people of color don't really share these views.
well that is a well and good...I didn't know he said these things in his book...I just read what shows up here at Z...where he hasnt had much to say about the Obama''s administrations crimes...
But you're right, his articles after the election were dreadful stuff. Even earlier he was saying such vague mush as "Obama is not perfect but he is the most progressive canidate the Democrats have had in decades."
They maybe the case...which doesnt say much for the democrats which I assume he knows already since he is very astute political commentator...thats why defending them or thinking that the dems are going to bring about "Change you can believe in" is naive and pointless...I did not vote for Obama because my state-New Jersey-always votes deomocratic....I would have voted for him if the election was close in my state but I certainly would have no illusions about him... I dont see why serious leftist even get into arguments about voting...yes vote if you want to but dont think they are going to bring about change and certainly dont argue with people if they point out the problems of corporate sponsered and funded candidates and elections in bringing about change regardless of the color of the candidate.....I serioulsy didnt see the point to all of that.....
He seemed really caught up in the emotional symbolism of the whole thing.
That could be....I mean it was certainly a significant event...a person of color being elected president...pretty amazing... but when you look at his policies, assumptions, values and commitments is not that amazing....I think it is more a reflection of the attitude of the country that a person of color could get enough votes to be elected...what he actual stands for and does is another matter...
He signed up as one of the "progressives for Obama." Tim is my friend on Facebook and I think it was on one of his status updates he said something like "Obama is really not a progressive is he with these policies he's implementing?" It may be that alot of the people he works with about race issues are Obama enthusiasts and so he's reluctant to take a really direct stand against Obama.
That makes sense.-Tony
Reply this comment
Re: The Last Few Comments
By Black, Maxwell at May 20, 2009 19:47 PM
I’m not claiming that his basic point about white privilege is incorrect. I made an almost identical argument about a civil disobedience action inGeorgetown
Nothing against my brothers and sisters from Friday nights protest and nothing against white people (I'm a cracker myself). the irony of this whole event is that it was actually a perfect, flawless example of white privilege! Imagine if the exact same scenario had gone down, every detail, but the participants weren't black-clad white people, but young black men from south east DC. There would have been very dead black men in the streets I suspect. And as far as the young lady being hit by that brick: this would have yielded someone, (guilty or innocent) a twenty to life sentence for attempted murder. It wouldn't have been called a protest, but instead a "savage, unprovoked riot". Just a thought.
So, it’s not that I don’t get this stunningly obvious situation; anyone who voluntarily reads websites like this has probably stumbled upon this insight by now. My problem with Wise is who he focuses his alleged outrage at. Does he go after the cops, the legal system, media, education or maybe, just maybe…Capitalism itself?! No. He goes after the most harmless straw men for his “great stands” against injustice: Anarchists (like me), the radical left (who don’t worship Obama and kneel before a weeping Jesse Jackson on election night) white people with dreads, (who cares?) white people just like him (and me) who are into “black culture,” pot smokers and most importantly (and hypocritically in this case) white, privileged, middle class students getting high just like he did.
I would be a lot more impressed if he took a stand against Obama and the “Democratic” party for betraying (predictably) nearly every campaign promise they made. It would also lend much to his credibility if he apologized for telling “those on the left” that we didn’t deserve to breathe the same air as Saint Wise because we didn’t gush with adoration for The Pope of Hope.
Reply this comment
Re: Hey Dude, Where's My Privilege? Race and Lawbreaking in Black and White
By Tothe, Tony at May 20, 2009 17:31 PM
Michael,
I dont disagree with you...the main pont of Tims article-if black or latino kids acted in the same fashion as these white kids they woud be beaten up and thrown in jail in a heartbeat- is surely correct...I also dont disagree with say finding fault with kids who only think Bob Marley was nothing more than a pot head when he was in fact a revolutionary figure..or say kids who claim to be anarchists who dont know who Bakunin was and so on...but again, I dont know if that is more a fault of the kids or the left...I really dont know...not that Tim seems to have much nice things to say about anarchism...go back and read his two dreadful articles about Obama and his left critics.... but this was another very good article by Wise... his words are usually spot on.
Reply this comment
Re:
By Green, Chris at May 20, 2009 17:58 PM
Tony,
Well in Tim's new book "Between Barack and a hard place" as well as his book released in late Sumjmer 2008 he attacks Obama for avoiding discussion of the problem of structural racism in US and for making white people feel comfortable about their dreadful views on race like the Cosby show did in the 80's. I think he's also said some criticism in these books about Obama's race speech where he described the US as a city on the hill, great force freedom in world, and how people of color don't really share these views.
But you're right, his articles after the election were dreadful stuff. Even earlier he was saying such vague mush as "Obama is not perfect but he is the most progressive canidate the Democrats have had in decades." He seemed really caught up in the emotional symbolism of the whole thing. He signed up as one of the "progressives for Obama." Tim is my friend on Facebook and I think it was on one of his status updates he said something like "Obama is really not a progressive is he with these policies he's implementing?" It may be that alot of the people he works with about race issues are Obama enthusiasts and so he's reluctant to take a really direct stand against Obama.
Reply this comment
Re: Hey Dude, Where's My Privilege? Race and Lawbreaking in Black and White
By Tothe, Tony at May 20, 2009 06:46 AM
I like and enjoy Tim's writing alot...he is one of the best when it comes to writing on racism and white privilege..His articles about Obama and Obama's critics from the left though were just awful...they came of as authoritarian..almost as if written by the odious Thomas Friedman...worse yet the critics are proving to be correct which each passing day and Tim has yet to write one article about the policies and actions of Obama since taking office which is truly discouraging and downright depressing. Bombing dark skinned people halfway around the world is a race issue.....Maybe he has, if so I apologize in advance, but I have not seen or read them...
the article in question here is good...I dont really have aproblem with it except that Tim seems to be hammering college kids-at least these college kids-for not be the kind of activists that Tim wants them to be which is fair enough... but I think that is more a comment on the left in general than college kids.-Tony
Reply this comment
Re:
By McGehee, Michael at May 20, 2009 09:21 AM
Tony, i get why wise is criticizing them and agree.
we see the same critique for "punk" kids who wear Che shirts but have no idea who or what he was. criticizing "hippies" for using a culture (ie Bob Marley) to mask their desire to get fucked up is a fair critique.
Reply this comment
Re: Hey Dude, Where's My Privilege? Race and Lawbreaking in Black and White
By Black, Maxwell at May 19, 2009 15:44 PM
I first discovered Wise reading an interview with him in Clamor magazine and found him to be brilliant. However, since the election I’ve found him smug and more or less useless. He has arbitrarily attacked Anarchists and the radical left; completely unprovoked by the way. He seems obsessed with white people with dreads. And, frankly, his self appointed status as the official white spokesperson for “people of color” is getting a little tired.
His single issue obsession seems to have narrowed the parameters of his analysis. Hey Tim, did you know that you can actually be anti-racist, anti-prison and pro-pot all at the same time?! Exhibit A is nearly everyone I know!
“…the ability to do what you want, when you want, without fear of consequence, and then to have that behavior deemed largely harmless…”
I don’t know Tim that sounds pretty freaking good to me! As long as I’m not hurting anyone that’s exactly how I would personally like to live my life. Of course I don’t. However, my life ambition is to change that as much as possible for myself and everyone else. I thought that was what our activism was for Tim! You know…LIBERATION.
Are many young white people on US college campuses spoiled brats? Sure. I believe you were one of those young white people on a college campus not so long ago. Right about the time I was washing dishes for a living. But please explain how busting college kids for getting high (something you’ve admitted to doing more than likely at the same stage of your life as these kids) liberates black people. It wouldn’t. And you know it. So what is the point of this (yet another) patronizing article?
I also noticed that little “working class youth” tribute you slipped in there at the end. So let’s see here: you are the white spokesperson for black people and the middle class spokesperson for the working class. I’ll speak for myself Tim. I’m working class and you are the Privileged Son.
To ZNet I apologize in advance for being personal and a little negative. We all get into politics for personal reasons. I just find his recent work (and its presence here) incredibly disappointing and counterproductive.
Reply this comment
Wise is half-baked
By Ariel, Tal at May 19, 2009 09:41 AM
I've been reading and listening to Tim Wise for years now, and find him to be a strong and important voice in anti-racist activism in this country. However, I find this article to be very smug and over-the-top in attacking pot-smoking kids who are still in their teens. Was Tim Wise smoking pot in front of prisons when he was 18 demanding the release of non-violent offenders? Were you Carl? Maybe you both were, but I know that I was not (though I was smoking plenty of pot).
Maybe instead of personally attacking and mocking kids who may not know better, the results would be better if we reached out to those kids and tried to educate them? I'm sure education of this kind is part of Wise's work, and I would rather read about that then this kind of personal insults that sound more like waking up on the wrong side of the bed than motivational or informative. OK, we get it, these kids are not activist enough for our standards. Most people never become activists, let alone in their teens. Maybe however, these kids would be good candidates, because they actually do show some level of resistance and courage, even though the consequences are relatively minor.
Furthermore, I want to hear more about the actual problems and how to solve them, less about someone's opinion about subcultural trends (patchouli, bob marley, etc.). Anyway, why is it illegitimate for white kids to learn about, appreciate, and yes, "appropriate" black culture? Isn't that actually a positive outcome? Would it be better if white kids rejected all black culture? Of course this is not the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, but isn't it at least a small step in the right direction?
Reply this comment
Wise is Baked
By Sperber, Joshua at May 19, 2009 01:39 AM
What a vindictive and disoriented attack on drug-using youth. Wise ridicules students who are willing to be arrested for their beliefs. He insults "the likes of Emily Benson, who told a reporter she actually came to the school 'for the weed atmosphere,' and to be part of the pot legalization movement," but then goes on to claim that "As long as the ones being locked up are black and brown, the very same whites whose kids are blazing up (with taxpayer support, via student loans no less), will say nothing." Beyond blaming kids for their parents' alleged sins, this blames the electorate for the state's sins. Moreover, Wise offers no argument that "blazing up" and "advocacy" are mutually exclusive, ignoring with his self-serving rant that this particular case of collective smoking was conceived and executed precisely as advocacy. If pot-smoking whites weren't arrested and imprisoned, it's not because they didn't try.
Wise's apparent complaint is with discriminatory policing, revealing in this case a regressively egalitarian sense of justice. But this pro-police state sentiment is more than anything inspired by his moralizing contempt for "white hacky-sack kickin' hippies who continue to believe--against all evidence to the contrary--that patchouli can actually cover up body odor." Wise (who uses race as the basis for a career, which is a bit more profitable than wearing dreadlocks) concludes by cryptically threatening to treat these "hippies" as a "problem" because they're taking advantage of taxpayer dollars and not treating their state educations with appropriate reverence, revealing the crux of his racial politics: his anti-racism exists chiefly in service to correcting "inverted value systems." He is anti-racist insofar as he presumes that people of color are superior at bourgeois conformity.
Reply this comment
Re: Wise is Baked
By Davidson, Carl at May 19, 2009 07:08 AM
What you say may be true, but beside the point.
Wise is absolutely right to point to the treatment of 'dope fests' as an indulgence in white-skin privilege, especially when paired with how minority youth pay an excessive price in incarceration rates. In fact, we all pay, since it costs taxpayers at least $20K per year to imprison drug offenders.
Here's an idea, if the white dopers really want to flout the law to make a point. Hold the next dopefest at the gates of the nearest prision, demanding release of nonviolent drug offenders, rather than on the lawn of Old Main.
Reply this comment