- Operating Perspective: There’s no “I’m not racist.” There’s ONLY racist and antiracist.
- An antiracist strategy isn’t about equality. It is about actually discrimination against the interests of the privileged, in favor of prioritizing the most vulnerable
- I’m not here to rehabilitate or change anyone’s mind. I want them gone because they’re taking up space and resources.
- “Friends” who are 1 to 2 degrees away from individuals who actively, intentionally, and strategically cause harm, which makes you unsafe to the most vulnerable.
- Take some time to think about the things related to race that make you uncomfortable. Write them down and begin to better understand how they create barriers for you on your antiracist journey
- Find someone in the community who is doing the work of antiracism and commit to finding out what kind of support they need and PROVIDE it
- Sign up for The Alliance Website and Twitter
Hello, everyone. Today’s “How to be an Antiracist” podcast episode is gonna be a little different than what we’ve been doing for the last seven weeks. This is gonna be more of a strategy based on a lot of the things that happened—particularly on Twitter—this past week. I won’t be going into details about that; there’s enough content online if you want to know details, because the details are not important, the people involved are not important.
This is a bigger story. This is about the system. And this is why I want to talk about this because what I’m realizing is, although we’re reading a book on how to be—I mean literally entitled “How to be an Antiracist”—I have yet to come across a strategy. And I know we’re just—next week we’ll do chapter eight—maybe it’s at the end. But I see that I have to step in now to create a strategy because, you know, one of the guiding principles [of the #CauseAScene community] is “Intention without strategy is chaos.”
So we’re going to start with today’s episode of “How to Be An Antiracist – A Strategy.” And so I’m going to read from page nine because we’re going back. This is a debrief. So we’re going back to where, at the beginning—and really, I want to really drive home some things, and then I’ll get into the content that I will be talking about today.
So, on page nine, we have the paragraph says:
What’s the problem with being “not racist”? It is a claim that signifies neutrality: “I am not racist, but neither am I aggressively against racism.” But there is no neutrality in the racism struggle.
The opposite of “racist” isn’t “not racist.” It is “antiracist.” What’s the difference? One endorses either the idea of racial hierarchy as a racist, or racial equality as an antiracist. One either believes problems are rooted in groups of people, as a racist, or locates the roots of problems in power and policies, as an antiracist. One either allows racial equalities to persevere, as a racist, or confronts racial inequalities, as an antiracist. There is no in between safe space of “not racist.” The claim of “not racist” neutrality is a mark of [correction: mask for] racism.
So that’s where we’re going to start today. Because that’s basically what we saw this week. That’s basically the rallying cry of the individuals who were involved in this exchange, as we challenged their ideas.
So even here, I want you to, if you feel that you need to, because you don’t… Some people still don’t see how the systems of race and white supremacy are the root of every—all of these things that we’re dealing with. If you need to replace the term racist at this moment with oppression, I have no problem with that. If you need to replace the word racist or antiracist with minimizing harm, I have no problem with that. Because they all are strategies or perspectives or lenses or ways of acting, moving, and relating to people that challenge and actively work to oppose and dismantle the systems of white supremacy. So, I’m giving you that permission to replace—again if you haven’t, if you’re still struggling in your white mind, that racism is the root of all this—you have my permission to replace the word racism with oppression, or with minimizing harm or harm.
And we’re doing, antiracism, is challenging oppression and minimizing harm. Okay, so with that said, I’m gonna write you—go through a few notes that I have, and then I’m going to get into the actual strategy. So #CauseAScene is operating from a perspective of there is no such thing as “not racist.” There is only a racist and an antiracist. So, as I say to you white folks who follow me, all whiteness is racist by design and which means it cannot be trusted by default.
Many get offended by that, and I understand. So I want to bring in—and if you look at my pinned tweet, you will see that it’s not just white people who are impacted negatively by white supremacy. So white people are racist by design because racism, to be racist, you have to not only have race prejudice—and as we’re reading the various chapters in this book, we’re seeing the various ways of how race prejudice exists.
It’s not this monolith. If it’s not Ku Klux Klan. It’s not just white nationalists, it’s not just Nazis. It’s all these little ways that white supremacy has taught us all to see whiteness as a default, good, hero or victim and everything else, particularly Blackness, as villain.
So when I say whiteness is racist by default I also say people of color—and this is many immigrants; they’re—how white supremacy shows up in their community is the model minority myth, which is they have been taught to believe that assimilation is the thing. So we talked about this before being a segregationist, being an assimilist, and being an antiracist.
And let me actually—I want to read those definitions now. So, if you go to, that’s on page—Chapter Two, the beginning, right at the beginning—on page 24, we talk about, when he has the definitions. So an assimilist is:
One who is expressing the racist idea that a racial group is culturally or behaviorally inferior and is supporting cultural or behavioral enrichment programs to develop that racial group.
So that’s those individuals like, if you assimilate, if you act white enough, you’ll be okay because who you are right now is not okay. But if you act white enough, if you stick to the status quo enough, then you will overcome the default of who you are. So that is very much where the model minority myth is, where you see a lot of Asians, where you see Africans, where you see a lot of people who immigrated or just, people who—that’s one way.
And then you see that in the Black community and as an assimilation when I talk about Blacks have a—have to deal with our own internalized white supremacy and anti-Blackness. So it shows up as assimilation in our own communities where we call out, shame, rebuke anything that we have been taught that is not middle class values, that brings—because now we’re a whole race. So whatever you do, whatever you wear, whatever you look like, however you behave, it is a reflection on me.
Whiteness doesn’t have that. Whiteness, there could be a white individual doing the most obnoxious, harmful, destructive thing, and whiteness can say that is that individual that is not me. Blackness does not get to do that. Blackness, if that individual’s doing that, it becomes, we have been taught to look at it as they are representing us all.
So going back to these definitions, a segregationist:
One who is expressing the racist idea that a permanently inferior racial group can never be developed and is supporting the policy that segregates away that racial group.
And then the antiracist is:
One who is expressing the idea that racial groups are equals and none needs developing, and is supporting policy that reduces racial inequality.
So I want to give you some examples. So I’m gonna finish my little notes right here and then I want to give you some examples of how assimilists, segregationists, and antiracists—which we don’t see much—shows up in tech.
So an antiracist strategy is not about equality, as Dr. Kendi said, it’s about actively discriminating against the interests of the privileged in favor of prioritizing the most vulnerable. When I think about this, I really need to think deeply about—cause I have a shirt that says diversity is not a zero sum game. In game theory and economic theory, a zero sum game is a mathematical representation of a situation in which each participant’s gain or loss of utility is actually balanced by the losses and gains of the utility of others. So when I look at that definition, diversity is not a zero sum game. Inclusion is not a zero sum game. So because even when we’re actively discriminating against those with privilege, they’ll never lose their privilege.
So it’s never an equality gain. It’s never equality. So that’s the things, that’s the next thing, that’s the thing I talk about. It’s not about equality, because you can’t… there’s… I don’t see in my lifetime that we ever gonna upend white supremacy so that whiteness is not the default. I don’t see that happening. I don’t see that happening for some time to come. But what I do see happening is making space for other, for things that are not whiteness to also be accepted.
So it might not be the default, but it won’t be seen with disdain and distrust and and a red light—a green light to harm. So, it is not a zero sum game, ’cause when I take away, when I actively discriminate against whiteness in tech, whiteness is still the dominant power. It’s just saying some individuals need to go, or some spaces need to be created. So it’s opening up and then closing down some different things. So that’s another point that I want to make.
The next one is, I’m not here to rehabilitate or to change anyone’s mind. I want them gone because they’re taking up space and resources. So let me make this clear to individuals you are—and this is why I want to really have some conversations about what assimilists and segregationists look like in the tech space. Because I watch you engage and many of you are wasting your time because there are people with segregationist ideas and perspectives, and you are trying to give them resources. You’re doing your hardest, and you’re getting frustrated, and they keeps saying, “Oh, I need more, I need more.” Because they fundamentally do not believe this stuff.
It is not your time—and you make more work for people who are doing this work like myself, if you are able to discern the difference between these individual behaviors. Because it’s about consistent individual behavior. It is not about benefit of the doubt, it’s not about any of that. It is about what are they consistently showing you. And what we saw this week with all you runnin’ to provide resources and whatnot. If, given enough time, people started researching, these individuals had a history of saying these kind of things and people taking them to task or people trying to educate them. And they have not changed. They are segregationist. They’re not trying to change. They are a distraction.
And so what I hope to do with this strategy is for you to be able to start thinking strategically about how to engage. You can’t just be out here just jumping in threads, not researching beforehand what has been said. Because when you come in, you might step on something, appoint or silence somebody from a marginalized community who’s already made that point. But because you, as a white person, are making it the individual like, “Oh, thank you.” You, because you’re white and you brought it to them in a form that they—it made them comfortable.
Also, there are a lot of ways that you just give a platform and help—hmm, not the word, “promote”—help maintain the status quo and ingrain the segregationist beliefs that are in the tech space.
So the next point I really want to make—this is really important—is some individuals were talking about they were coming to protect their friends or they didn’t want to, they didn’t see a need to distance themselves as a business partner from individuals because of this personal thing that they did. And I wanted to say this: friends, these individuals have friends who are one to two degrees away from individuals who actively, intentionally, and strategically cause harm, which makes you unsafe to the most vulnerable.
So let me—and I’m not gonna, I’m going to say this again. Your refusal to distance yourself, to call out those friends that you have that have either actively—their own individual behaviors, that’s one degree. So you’re the person, you have a one degree friend who actively is demonstrating harmful behavior and/or you the person, you have a friend whose friend they’re defending but has that tendency and actively, intentionally, and strategically causes harm.
So they’re one or two degrees away from you as an individual. I cannot trust you. I do not want you around me. Because proximity to you makes me—gives me proximity to them.
And they have shown to be—to have the potential and actively do—intentionally harm individuals in marginalized communities, which includes me. So I really need you to think about this.
I was talking to a friend yesterday. We went to lunch and I was talking about this very thing, and I told her and she understood if I found—cause we’re talking about pronouns and gender neutrality and gender fluidity. Because again, I am learning this stuff at warp speed because there’s so many individuals in this space that I can learn from, but my friends aren’t in the space. So they’re learning this stuff as they hear it on the news. Or there’s, somebody’s, and they don’t—they’re gettin’ the context, they’re gettin’—they’re really not getting it. And sometimes they say some very harmful ignorant shit, and it becomes incumbent upon me to check they ass too, and educate.
But if I really—not but. period. And if I realized that they are hard and fast and they want to continue the status quo that excludes people who I respect, I’m learning about their oppression. That’s what I’m saying. I respect by default. I’m learning about their oppression and how I can minimize harm. If my friends, who I love dearly, do not respect that they have to go. And I made that very clear, and she was like, “Yes.” She understood.
So this is what it requires. This is what you need to do with your family members. You need to protect the most vulnerable from these individuals. You need to put a barrier around them. If these individuals are in your life and you are excusing that because of this, that and the other, then I need to remove you from my life.
All right, so those are the things I wanted to talk about before we got into the strategy. The strategy is very simplistic in approach, although it’s very complex in operation. So there are three parts, and the first—and the parts are: you need to evaluate; you need to engage; and you need to evolve. So it’s evaluate, engage and evolve.
So the first part is evaluate. So before you jump in, I need you to evaluate what’s going on. And this is words, actions, and service of maintaining the status quo. Distraction, deflection. So this is where I want to give you examples of segregationists and assimilists that we see so much in tech. So a segregationist is, “Why are we having these conversations? There’s absolutely nothing wrong. There is no bias.” It is those individuals who just refuse to acknowledge that they even have a potential to cause harm, because by default, they think everything they do is fine, they’re brilliant. There’s no room for learning. Very closed minded people. It’s like, This is how it’s always been, and this is how it’s always gonna be.
We see that a lot. A lot. And individuals who have been in this space for a very long time. And who you, individuals you revere because they’ve been here, and this makes absolutely no sense to me. Just because someone’s been here forever doesn’t mean they need to stay here. I don’t get the hero worship of individuals who you have seen make statements and do things that actively harm and have no intention of changing.
Those are your segregationists who’re in tech. They fundamentally don’t believe that anything’s wrong, that they need to change. And anybody who says other is the problem. That’s the segregationists in tech. And assimilists in tech are those individuals who talk about their feelings over impact, over harm. Who talk about compassion, who talk about civility, who talk about assume positive intent. Who talk about giving folks the benefit of the doubt. Those are your assimilists. It’s all about the status quo may be bad, but for us to change it, people have to engage it in very calm and nice, and in ways that don’t upset the status quo.
These individuals like microscopic, inchworm change. They’re looking for—they change one policy and they want a pat on the back. Not waiting to see how that policy change will actually impact individuals. They don’t, that’s not what it is. It’s, “Oh I did this thing, now can I get an ally cookie?” Oh yeah, they also call themselves “ally” a lot. They talk about what they’ve done. And I’m gonna tell you, this is what I feel about Bernie Sanders. That’s why he gives me the ick. He’s an assimilist. I don’t care what you did when Martin Luther King was alive. What are you doing today?
And when you keep throwing that in, these individuals, the same individuals want to throw up their—give you M.L. King, quotes from the “I Have a Dream” speech and won’t—have not learned or read or care to read “Letters from a Birmingham Jail” or the video I continuously post of 11 months before he was assassinated, when he talked about white people, white liberals, white progressives being the biggest barrier to change. So this is what these individuals are, these liberals, these are these sensitive progressives who, you want change and yet it has to be very easy, very, you know, methodical very your way.
It has to—that’s it. That was the exchange of the individual who invited me to be on his podcast. He wants me to be on his podcast, to talk to a person who abused women of color in the community and trans individuals. Yet he wants to facilitate a conversation that is civil with an abuser.
It’s that kinda, it’s that thinking. Where you put an abuser’s point of view on the same level, as equal to the person who’s been abused. That’s what an assimilist does. They like to see both sides of the story. That’s what these libertarians come from. Every side of the story has an equal weight. They don’t think about impact. It’s all about intention. And then we very, very seldom see antiracist behavior, anti-oppression behavior, or minimizing harm behavior in this space because there’re very few of us out here.
So many people are so afraid by this, by retaliation of the assimilists and the segregationists that they keep their voices very quiet or not at all. So you have the individuals who have no choice but to speak out. This is why you see so many people of color, people from the LGBTQA+ community being so what people would call aggressive and loud about this. Because we have no choice, this directly affects, impacts us.
That’s another thing about assimilists. It doesn’t normally directly impact you. It—you center yourself and not the person, the individuals who are most harmed, could be most harmed. So with this, I would say this is why I created the guiding principles.
The guiding principles of #CauseAScene are: tech is not neutral; lack of inclusion is a risk management issue; intention without strategy is chaos; and the most important one, we must prioritize the needs of the most vulnerable.
So those are the guiding principles, and what I’m gonna do here in the resources is include—I’m gonna create a PDF of some slides that I have, some things that I’ve been using recently that have these things on so you can use this as a strategy resource. So it’s gonna have the guiding principles on there, so you can remember what they are.
So that was evaluate. Once you’ve evaluated and you recognized where this person or individual or groups of individuals lie, are they segregationists in tech, or are they assimilists in tech, then that’s how you pick your strategy. Everybody’s—we have to stop treating everybody the same. OK? So now we want to engage, and how we engage? We have to de-center whiteness. Whiteness cannot be the center of this. So we have to take out comfort of whiteness and prioritize the comfort and safety of the most vulnerable. And so this is where the rules of engagement come in.
So the slides that I’m gonna share with you are from the talk I did at Write Speak Code this year 2019, from a talk called “Whiteness in Marginalized Spaces: When Coalition Building Harms.” So these are the slides that I’m gonna create into a PDF. They have some definitions and things in it, so you can have a ready resource.
And at this point, so the rules of engagement are—and they need to be based on whose needs and safety must be prioritized. So again, when we go back to what the guiding principles are, the guiding principles are: tech is not neutral; lack of inclusion is a risk management issue; intention without strategy is chaos; and prioritizing the most vulnerable. So if you’re prioritizing the most vulnerable, the rules of engagement is—that is how you engage here.
And so you have to—so there are three levels to the rules of engagement. One is—so we’re gonna use this as a traffic light—red, stop, means we do not have any conversations where we are debating people’s humanity or right to exist. Period. So if someone says something like that, call that shit out. “So you think it’s OK?” No, not even, “You think it’s ok?” ’cause that’s a question. You call it out: “What is not OK, person, is for you at this moment or any other moment to question the to exist or the humanity of another person.”
And that is it. There is no—when you put that statement there and you… that’s it. You do not engage further because what you said, that’s an automatic stop. Because what they want to do is engage you. And because you’ve already did—given ‘em a hard line, it’s just like—these individuals remind me of children. These segregationists remind me of children. If—and you see parents do this—if you don’t stop, I’mma do this. And they keep doing that. You never do anything. There’re never consequences. This is where consequences have to come. You state, “What we will not have is a conversation or debate about the humanity of another person.” And that’s it. And that’s the end of that.
The yellow track, the yellow light, is lived experience. And that’s where you can—this is where you evaluate who is in the position of privilege, oppression, and ability to harm. You’re looking at the thread you’re looking, or you’re at work, you’re looking at this, you’re looking at the Slack conversation, whatever it is, you’re looking at StackOverflow, you’re looking at, you’re on Reddit, whatever it is, you’re trying to evaluate who’s in a position of power, privilege, who has the ability to cause harm.
And then the dialogue is focused on understanding and not providing proof. So there’s gonna be a dialogue there, ’cause now we’re in, so the green light, the red light people are the segregationists. The yellow light people are the assimilists. They still believe that whiteness by default is a thing. So everybody needs to, you know, you’re flawed as a human being, but if you act white enough, you’ll be good. So now we’re having a dialogue to understand—not their point of view, and we’re not providing proof—’cause this is the thing, you know, “Show me,” “Why can’t you tell?” dadada, and so you get people who have come in and engaged, but have not looked at the thread, and it’d be more effective instead of you providing the same resource as… of, you know, Somebody just provided, —if you looked up, somebody provided a resource of “White Fragility” or “Seeing Whiteness” on Scene on Radio—refer to that, grab that tweet link and drop it right there and say, “This person has already told you this.”
So you’re reinforcing that it’s already there. You’re not coming in and talking for, or talking over, people who’ve already been there. What you’re doing is coming in as a community and reinforcing what’s already there. That’s where our power is. Because if not, you’re shooting off all these different directions. People are saying the same thing, but what you’re not doing is bringing it all together and reinforcing the people that was already there.
And that’s where I have to—this is the place where I have to keep telling y’all, don’t speak for other people. Don’t speak for me. Don’t put your feelings. Don’t—what’s the word I’m looking, ’cause it’s not “reflect”—don’t project your feelings or what you think this is on me. When I’m engaging, I’m not angry. Nobody has goaded me into anything. I can speak directly to these individuals if I chose to. I choose not to. This lesson is not for them. This lesson is for the community. So don’t speak for other people. And when you come in and you have not read the thread, and you start providing resources that other people have done, what you’ve done is negated their voice. You silence them. And we need to stop doing that.
And so then the final thing is the green light, and this is the ideology or belief. So these are the people who have the greatest potential to be antiracist, or are antiracist, but are still learning, have the beliefs of antiracism that everybody’s equal but don’t have the strategies, or skill, or the education, or the information. So this is the individual level, and this is the dialogue, it’s focused on amplifying and understanding that, and challenging white supremacy and discrimination.
So at this level, the conversations are about, amplifying understanding. So instead of giving—just dropping links in from books or whatever, what you can do is have a conversation. “You know what, this reminded me of this time when I had this thing, and this is how I worked through that thing.” Again you’re not having a conversation with the person, you’re having—because if I’ve retweeted it, it’s not about that person that I’m retweeting—you’re having this conversation ’cause you want other people in the community to see that we’re the same. That you’ve had similar challenges, and this is how you overcome them. This is how we’re all learning together. I may be the teacher, but my classroom is a experiment. It is an open classroom. So we’re all learning from each other.
So that’s when I want you—so you engage by, you have to come in—that’s how you evaluate; you see, “Hmm, is this person a red light because they are trying to debate somebody’s humanity?” At that point, I’m gonna make a strong statement, and I’m not gonna engage anymore. They’re gonna be—because you don’t want to give those people oxygen. Let them just die on out.
Are they—is it about the lived experience? Are these the assimilists who we need to have a discussion about understanding what oppression is and also looking at what’s already there and amplifying the voices, particularly of the most vulnerable and marginalized, and restating what they said. So you literally can say, “As Kim has stated,” and copy that tweet down or, “As A has stated,” or, “As Mary has stated,” if this person already stated that, do not come in as a white person and restate that because now you, because of whiteness, you are the default expert.
And then the green light is we’re having conversations about your lived experience, what you’re learning, how challenging it was for you, and you’re giving those kinda examples. ‘Cause again, these individuals are not the issue here.
So the last part is—so you’ve evaluated, you’ve engaged, and now you’re gonna evolve. So you need to start asking your questions at this, after we… like, after the thing that happened for five days. I had to take a step back, and I had to really think about how to move forward. What were the teachable moments there? So, what did I learn? Where did I cause harm? How? What am I gonna do differently next time? How am I gonna get… those things.
That’s—and you need to write those things down. You need to put them somewhere so that next time this happens, you can just go pull up—put ’em in your phone, so next time they happen, you can go right to your notes or whatever you use, “OK, this is how I do this.”
And it seems—it may seem to people that is this fake and phony and trite, but everybody has strategies. White supremacy has had a strategy for centuries. We are needing to create a strategy for ourselves to counter this, because if not, we’re just spinning our—we’re like that dog who chases their tail. When they finally catch it, they either bite it off or just keep spinning. We have to stop doing that. That’s wasting energy. We have to be more strategic and we have to move as a group.
This is why I created—did that video of “We’re at a Tipping Point,” because I see it. For the first time, so many people saw these individuals having to deal with consequences of their behavior in real time, and that will embolden other people who’ve been too scared to speak up to speak up. Because they’re like, “OK, if I do this…” So it’s not us going out on our own; we get there together or we don’t get there at all. And so we need to go in and engage as a group so that we’re protecting those who need to be protected.
So, gonna wrap this up. But you obviously, definitely have homework. So first homework is:
Take some time to think about the things related to race that make you uncomfortable. Write them down and begin to better understand how they create barriers for you on your antiracist journey.
Because this is all about self-reflection and self-evaluation. This is why I’m not an advocate of empathy and compassion, because those skills—those are skills, they have to be developed by individuals who believe in self-development and self-reflection. They do not come by default.
And so, I need you to start thinking and evaluating: what are the things that—talk about race, oppression, whatever term you wanna use, or minimizing harm—that cause you the most discomfort? And how can you—and what barriers are you creating from that discomfort? And how can you challenge yourself to get beyond that discomfort?
The next one is:
Find someone in your community who is doing the work of antiracism and commit to finding out what kinda support they need and then providing that support.
So it’s—it amazes me, how all the people who wanna, so many people wanna to talk about how much work I’m doing and how they appreciated this, that, and the other; and very few of you, very few of you, out of the 7000—almost 8000—people who follow me, are actively doing anything that supports this work, period. Beyond Twitter. Your retweets, your engagement, does not fundamentally impact the longevity of the strategy here. Those are momentary, in-the-moment things.
I need you to either figure out how you’re gonna be an active participant and not just a voyeur and a parasite in the #CauseAScene community. Or, someone else you admire who’s doing antiracist work—I’m specifically talking about antiracist work, ’cause that’s another thing I get. When I ask people, they say, “Oh, you’re doing it,” I say, “So what have you done to support?” Then they want to give me a list of shit they’re doing for other organizations that have nothing to do with antiracist work. That has nothin’—that’s great—but that has nothin’ to do with what we’re doing here as dismantling white supremacy; policies, systems, and whatnot in the tech field. That has nothing to do with this.
So that’s the thing, and also, your last—I need you to sign up for The Alliance, which is our tech antiracist agenda that will be coming out in 2020, because this past week told me it is time. What happens is I’ll have an idea and I just put it—I write it out—and I put it on the back burner, waiting for the right time. And it is time for us to have a place, a closed space, where we can have these conversations without being disrupted by the segregationists and the assimilists out there, to have real antiracist conversations where we can develop strategies in the moment, on the fly, where—I mean, we can actually be in a room, in a space, comin’ up wit’ strategies on how to engage these people in real time and how to do it on your jobs, and how do you evaluate job descriptions? And how do you deal with—they’re not microaggressions—deal with the abuses that you experience on your job?
We need to be doing this in real time because it’s time. It’s time for us to push back. We’re at the tipping point.
And So you sign up at The Alliance at hashtag—I mean, so it’s @CauseASceneAll. So that’s the Twitter handle, and then you sign up with MailChimp, get to the—it’s not a newsletter yet, it’s just a, you know, repository, a database collecting emails—and as I move forward in 2020 of building out this platform, you will be kept abreast of what’s going on, how you support, what’s… how do you get engaged. Because we really need this space, particularly as we’re going—I want to get this up as we’re moving closer to the election. Because, as we see with everything, what’s gone on—have been gone on with Facebook this week—we’re gonna have some serious challenges as technologists doin’ our part to ensure that we are educating those people around us in real life to counter the things and the misinformation and the disinformation and the fake news that is happening on these social media platforms.
So, that is today’s episode. I feel really good about it. Again, I had to—like I said—I had to take my time and think about—I had to do that evolve piece—and think about what I learned from this. And I also want to make sure, I want to reiterate, the talking point or the point from the introduction:
There is no in between safe space of “not racist.” The claim of “not racist” neutrality is a mask for racism.
Thank you and have a wonderful day.