>No, Doug, I'm saying I'm sick of Henry's casual use of the term
>"Whites" as though there's some cohesive group called "Whites" -- I
>mean, why not just say "Chinese kill students who protest" or ...
>
>Or do you think it's kewl to characterize "Whites" based on the actions
>of the railroad barrons? Let's not forget: the exercise of power over
>any group to exploit their labor is yucky, and it has been practiced by
>each and every racial group in the history of this planet.
For sure, Jordan, which is why I think class is important, and why I object to a lot of uses of "race" as misleading substitutes for class. And a lot of exploitative social relationships are racialized after the fact - like Barbara Fields's argument that racialization followed enslavement. But it's still hard to doubt that "white" Brits see Nepalese as somehow more expendable than they are, or the Chinese tunnel workers in Henry's example. So this race-class thing is pretty damn complicated, and I think both of you are treating it too simply.
Doug