The 5 Tactics Used Against The Woke

Specific tactics are used to deflect or avoid addressing the issue of racism. This post will explore 5 of the most common tactics, how they work, and their impact on marginalized communities. 

It Starts with Shame

We have all heard the typical responses and arguments to counterclaims of racism and oppression. Phrases like “Africans were the ones who sold Africans,” “Black on Black crime,” “Illegals,” “What about personal accountability?” and more. 

Every counter-response has two main objectives: to deflect and discredit. But why?

Shame and the White Racial Identity

Thandeka, a theologian, scholar, and minister, argues that shame plays a central role in the white racial identity. Thandeka has written extensively on race, identity, and spirituality issues. Her work often focuses on the intersections of psychology, theology, and social dynamics, particularly as they pertain to the experiences of white individuals and their racial identities. 

One of Thandeka’s notable contributions is her exploration of whiteness and its connection to shame. She argues that many white individuals experience shame related to their racial identity but are often unacknowledged, unrecognized, or suppressed. This shame may stem from historical and contemporary injustices perpetrated by white individuals and institutions and from a sense of complicity in systems of oppression.

What is Shame?

Shame is an intense feeling that we dread. It often arises when individuals perceive themselves as falling short of societal or personal expectations, values, or standards. Shame can be intensely painful. The feeling of shame is right up there with the ugly naked sense, as I refer to it.

Shame is a universal emotion, but what triggers feelings of shame can vary across cultures. For instance, someone who grew up religious might feel shame for having sexual relations outside of marriage. However, someone who did not grow up with those same beliefs might feel no shame for engaging in such behavior.

Shame v. Guilt

Shame is different from guilt. Guilt typically focuses on specific behaviors and their consequences. Shame tends to be more focused on the self as a whole. Conversely, guilt might lead someone to think, “I did something bad,” while shame might lead to the thought, “I am bad.”

The Compass of Shame Scale

Donald Nathanson, a Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, developed the Compass of Shame Scale (CoSS) and its four coping styles. The four coping styles on the Compass of Shame are:

1. Withdrawal: This coping style involves distancing oneself from the source of shame, often through isolation, avoiding social interactions, and retreating emotionally. Individuals who adopt a withdrawal coping style may become quiet, distant, or emotionally detached to protect themselves from further shame.
2. Attack Self: In this coping style, individuals turn their shame inward and engage in self-criticism and self-blame. They may criticize themselves, feel unworthy, and experience low self-esteem. The attack self-coping style is characterized by a harsh internal dialogue that reinforces feelings of shame.
3. Avoidance: Avoidance involves redirecting attention away from the source of shame and focusing on other things. Avoidance can include distracting oneself with various activities, avoiding situations that trigger shame, or using substances to escape the uncomfortable emotions associated with shame.
4. Attack Other: This coping style involves projecting one’s feelings of shame onto others. Individuals who adopt the attack other coping style may criticize, blame, or belittle others to deflect attention from their shame.

The Compass of Shame Scale provides a framework for understanding how individuals respond to shame and offers insights into potential ways to address and cope with these emotions in healthier and more constructive ways.

How People Cope With Feelings of Shame and Racism

The coping mechanisms typically seen in racism discourse are Avoidance and Attack Other. Withdrawal is another typical response to shame; we don’t necessarily see when it’s happening. Let’s look at some examples of each in action.

Withdrawal:

Withdrawal involves distancing oneself from the source of shame.

Individuals can withdraw and isolate themselves from people with opposing views and minority groups. 

“Conservative flight” from California refers to a phenomenon where individuals who identify as politically conservative choose to leave the state of California in favor of states that align more closely with their political and ideological preferences. 

Several factors, such as taxation policies, cultural differences, and living costs, are cited as motivators for leaving the state. However, a significant driving force was the growing disdain for liberals, cultural differences, and how these influence education and policies.

Withdrawing from specific groups of people is a way for individuals to protect themselves from experiencing further shame.

Attack of others:

The “attack other” coping style involves deflecting attention from shame by criticizing, blaming, or belittling others. Black communities and individuals are subject to pervasive hyper-awareness and surveillance. This fixation on Black people is due, at least in part, to systemic oppression that has marginalized African Americans for centuries.

Acts of domestic terrorism against entire communities have been perpetrated against Black people throughout history. And yet mainstream society stereotypes Black culture as criminal and reliant on welfare. This negative view is sometimes internalized even by Black people themselves.

It’s no surprise that the narratives surrounding Black people are so pervasive. Their mistreatment and oppression go against everything whiteness is believed to be, which is highly evolved, civilized, and wholesome. To maintain this idea, one must portray the victim as the villain. And in this way, one can avoid feelings of shame.

Avoidance:

Avoidance can manifest by redirecting attention away from the source of shame. In Florida, leaders have taken drastic measures to change the way schools teach students about African American history. The Florida State Board of Education adopted new African American history standards. 

These new standards are a huge step backward for a state that has required teaching African American history since 1994.

The new standards will make light of chattel slavery in the US by teaching students that enslaved people were “taught skills.” Textbooks are being rewritten to withhold information about the race of the subjects they learn about concerning Black history. 

In January, Florida Governor DeSantis criticized the College Board’s pilot class for Advanced Placement African American Studies, which had received support from the state’s education department. The course was deemed to lack “educational value” and was denied approval unless specific changes were made, such as removing topics related to reparations and Black Lives Matter.

Florida’s leadership has taken drastic measures to avoid shame. They have gone as far as to rewrite textbooks and change school standards to withhold information about Black history and systemic racism.

So far, we’ve touched on the coping mechanisms commonly used to avoid feelings of shame in the context of racism. We have examined how people avoid, withdraw, and attack others to thwart shame.

Next, we will name and analyze some of the most common tactics used in response to accusations of racism and criticism over the mistreatment of individuals from marginalized communities.

The Tactics Used to Combat Shame

In this post, “tactics” refers to specific strategies or methods used to deflect or avoid addressing issues related to racism. We have all seen these tactics in action. For individuals from marginalized communities, these tactics are all too familiar. They work so well that we learn to give up efforts of sharing our experiences and accounts of racism to avoid the inevitable headache and upset that comes with the subject matter.

I have asked myself and have heard other people of color ask themselves: Why do white people react the way they do over racism? With time one might begin to understand that when you tell a white person they’re being racist, they interpret the message as an accusation about their very character. But what about the reaction to discourse on racism? Why do individuals react defensively when the account of a racist act involves total strangers?

We don’t see or understand the shame that begins to brew within the deepest depths of the white psyche any time racism is mentioned. They see images of white sheets, Nazis, and burning crosses and feel they are being grouped with “bad white people.” So it doesn’t matter if you’re pointing out their racist act or the racist act of a stranger; they will defend white individuality first and foremost.

The Tactics: Digressive Victimization, Competitive Victimhood, and Gaslighting

Digressive Victimization

This tactic involves shifting the focus away from the issue at hand by portraying oneself as a victim over a different issue. The individual might claim that they are being unfairly targeted. This tactic can effectively derail conversations about systemic issues by centering the discussion on the individual’s experiences.

An example of digressive victimization is when white people insist that being subjected to consequences for racist acts is a violation of ‘free speech.’ The purpose of this claim is not based on sincerity but rather a strategic method of diverting discomfort and shame.

Competitive Victimhood

Similar to digressive victimization, this tactic involves portraying oneself as a victim. However, in this case, the individual attempts to outdo the experiences of others by claiming to have faced even worse discrimination or mistreatment. This tactic can lead to a harmful “oppression Olympics” dynamic, where individuals compete to prove who has faced the most discrimination.

For example, someone might talk about the poverty they experienced growing up and proclaim that they have experienced “more discrimination than any Black person.” Responding to such an audacious claim can be difficult and overwhelming. Where would you even begin?

Gaslighting

This tactic involves denying or downplaying the experiences of others and making them question their perception of reality. The individual may use tactics such as claiming that the accuser is too sensitive or overreacting. This tactic can be especially harmful as it undermines the experiences of marginalized individuals and can make it more challenging to address systemic issues.

For example, Black and Hispanic children are more likely to get suspended from school than white children. But some will argue that white children get into more trouble than Asian children and ask if we should conclude that white children are also being targeted. This might sound reasonable and logical, but it then denies the reality in which society views Black and brown children. Whereas white and Asian children are not regarded in the same way.

Another example is when a person of color shares an experience of racism they have either witnessed or personally experienced, and a white person explains why they are wrong to conclude that there was any racism involved. Sometimes, the white person takes it further by insisting that the person of color is making everything about race.

Victim Blaming

Victim blaming in the context of racism involves placing blame on the victim rather than addressing the systemic issues that led to their mistreatment. To avoid accepting that police brutality is a problem, many blame the victims and insist they must have resisted arrest.

Another popular one is insisting that Africans sold Africans into slavery. This is an audacious and ignorant statement, as slave traders came for people to enslave, so they weren’t coming to the shores of West Africa to negotiate.

To respond to this tactic, it’s important to shift the conversation back to the systemic issues and hold those in power accountable for their actions.

Character Assassination

Character assassination is a tactic that involves attacking the character of individuals who speak out against systemic issues rather than addressing the problems themselves. For example, calling someone a “race baiter” instead of engaging with their arguments about systemic racism. This tactic can be especially harmful as it can discourage individuals from speaking out and perpetuates harmful power dynamics.

People of color are particularly vulnerable to this tactic because people are not judged as individuals but as monolithic groups.

One should focus on the issues and not engage in personal attacks when this tactic is used.

Impact on Marginalized Communities

These tactics can and have had a significant impact on marginalized communities. They can prevent progress by derailing conversations, limiting participation, and undermining the experiences of those facing discrimination. They can also perpetuate harmful power dynamics by centering the experiences of dominant groups.

How to Respond

When you come across these tactics, it’s important to respond in a way that centers the experiences of marginalized individuals and addresses systemic issues. Here are some tips:

• Acknowledge the experiences of marginalized individuals and center their experiences in the conversation.
• Reframe the conversation around systemic issues and the need for progress.
• Encourage participation and engagement in the conversation.
• Call out harmful behavior and language when you see it.
• Educate yourself and others on these tactics and their impact.

By understanding these tactics and their impact, we can work towards creating more inclusive and equitable communities.