The “not all whites” argument is a common straw man argument on this blog. I will make some statement about whites and then be informed that “not all whites” are like that, that they are Individuals. Like there is some special rule of English that “whites” always means “all whites”. Even when I say “some whites” or “most whites” it can still be taken to mean “all whites” – since clearly I only put in those words as a cheap trick to fool people.
In America, according to the government numbers, whites are supposedly better at reading than blacks. I would never know that from this blog: Only rarely do black commenters seriously misunderstand me while it is quite common for whites. And this imagined “all” before “whites” – which is not in any grammar book I know of – is one of the main causes.
Example: When I say, “Whites owned slaves” it hardly means they all owned slaves. As far as I know no more than 2% of White Americans ever did. Yet that does not make the statement untrue or meaningless. Because quantity is not the issue – it was never stated. To make quantity the issue is a derailment. To assume it means “All whites owned slaves” is putting words in my mouth and creating a straw man argument.
Side note: On this blog, unless it is otherwise clear, “white” mostly means just White Americans, though most of what I say seems to apply to English-speaking whites in general.
Since the “all whites” thing is not in any grammar book I wonder where it comes from. The best reason I have heard so far is that many White Americans use dichotomous thinking, seeing things as either-or. That means it is easy for them to think of whites as either being all the same or all Unique Individuals Unaffected by Race or Culture, leaving little middle ground between the two extremes.
So if I say “whites are racist” it is taken to mean that all whites are racist and racist in the same way. As if I said, “All whites are skinhead racists.” But what is in my head is a range:
- from skinhead racists
- to Jim Crow racists
- to scientific racists
- to “The Bell Curve” sorts
- to black pathologists
- to white Republicans
- to ordinary colour-blind racists
- to white liberal racists
- to white anti-racist racists
- to those souls who are not racist at all
- to those who fought against the slave trade
- to the white Freedom Riders
- to John Brown
- and much more besides.
I know whites are individuals. I live in a country that is mostly white. I have to deal with whites at work. I watch American film and television where whites are given whole story lines complete with a love life, where they are almost never reduced to stereotypes as whites.
So I expect them to be individuals. Which makes it all the more surprising and interesting to me when they do seem to act from a hive mind.
See also:
When you just say “Whites are racist” then yes, the “all” is implied, whether you think so or not. We can just as easily say that “Blacks are gangsters” and you too would assume that we are saying that all blacks are gangsters and would defend yourself accordingly. You may as well have said “Germans are Nazis” Do not blame whites for assuming that you are referring to all whites when you would do the same thing in the same circumstance.
What percentage of free black men in the United States owned slaves?
You say only 2 percent of white were slave owners; that seems a few
percentage points low. But the phenomena of black slave-ownership
highlights the argument you’re making about the misappropriation of
the adverbs some, most, all, etc. Good blog.
Glenn
Hive mind? As in drones?
As Kanna-Chan says, and also you are making these statements while in the middle of applying a generalized crime of racism to all white people.
My reading of this entry is that whites should not be so ego-centric: Just because you’re white doesn’t mean that when he refers to whites Abagond is referring to YOU (unless you fit the description). So step down from the soap box and take a breather.
That being said, I think i already expressed my disagreement with blanket statements about whites. But then maybe that was my own ego-centrism coming into play.
By the way, Abagond, I never heard back from the email i sent you. Could you read it and let me know what you think.
JT
Free blacks owned slaves.
I always say this, when whites lump all blacks into one group, usually a group considered as degenerates, most of them would agree. Now, say something about white people that’s true. Say anything that is unflattering, but holds some weight, and soon it’s a problem.
Also, why is it that whites want to be seen as individuals, but the ones, for example, that pop up in this blog think any topic about white people is about them being lumped into the general white population? And some of those same whites will go to blogs that see black people as a dysfunctional monolith, and transmit their disdain here. Now, object to their statements and watch those white people defend themselves in a heartbeat. SMH.
Seriously, white people have a major problem, and when I say white people, yes, I mean most white people including the ones that show up here and to defend their insanity. So, to the white folks who are offended, go ahead and call me a racist if that makes you feel better than I.
Kanna-Chan
Let me ask you a question, what is your purpose for coming here? If this blog is racist as you said in another post, why did you bother to show up?
@brothawolf:
Excellent comment. I can say the same about Asians. I read comments on here from time to time about Asians being racist or being suck-ups to whites, but I don’t let it get to me. You want to know why? I know it doesn’t pertain to me. I don’t get worked up over something because I know firsthand SOME/MOST Asians are racist and suck-up to white people.
I usually don’t agree with the people who post here in disagreement with Abagond, but I think the person named Kanna Chan is right in this case. JT makes a good point regarding what Abagond may actually be getting at, but I also think it’s natural for a reader to look at a statement like “whites are this or that” and go with their first, and emotional, reaction, which of course is to perceive that the writer means to be understood as saying something like “enough whites think such and such as to make it fair to say the group itself tends to think this way.” For example, if something like 55% of the country votes to reelect the president next year, it will become natural for writers to say”America decided to reelect the president even despite GOP efforts to blame him for the economy.” Clearly that will not mean “all Americans,” in fact, in such a case we’d be talking about barely more than half of them, but because of the way we use language we won’t really object to the way the idea is phrased.
I’m not sure how important this point is, even if I’m right– to me, the value of this blog has been in the way it’s made me look at myself as a white person who would like to be part of a movement to bring about an hones view of U.S. history and an eventual reconciliation between all Americans and our actual history. I can honestly say I’ve learned more about race and about my own racism from this blog than I think I did from all the previous reading and education I’ve done and had over the last twenty or so years. Still, it seems like there could be value in trying to be as precise as possible on this blog and as many other such places as we can– seems like that’s going to be more and more necessary as things go forward in this country.
A good post to have handy for pointing such defensive white folks to. I think this argument is mostly a psychological and emotional reaction, and that it has several causes, some or all of which vary from person to person.
A big reason whites almost reflexively whip out the Not All Whites Argument is because they’ve been taught not to think of blacks or Asians or whomever in monolithic terms. Most of them still do, but they’ve especially been taught not to TALK about other racial groups in monolithic terms, cuz that’s stereotyping, we’re all the same underneath, people are supposed to be colorblind, and so on. Whites are told from kindergarten or sooner that they’re supposed to TREAT other people like individuals, even if society often doesn’t, even if they themselves often don’t. Kanna-Chan’s response, then, is a typical white one, basically, “I’m not supposed to say ‘blacks are gangstas,’ so why is it okay for you to say ‘whites claim to be colorblind when they’re not’?”
I think another basic reason is that whites think of themselves as individuals too; they don’t think that their being white has much of anything to do with who and what they are. They think it’s just something coincidental about themselves, like having red hair or hazel eyes or a birthmark. They don’t see that being in that racial group has a lot to do with their life chances, their psychology, their emotions, their reactions to others, and more. And so if someone even suggests that their being white MIGHT have some relevance in their lives and thinking and behavior by pointing out that white people do this or that, they’re not used to thinking about themselves that way, and so they reject observations about “white people.” “Hey, I’M not like that!” they’re thinking, or feeling, “I’m a good person! Okay, I’m white, but just because I’m white doesn’t mean I do any of the bad things you’re claiming white people do. Look at me, I’m white, and I don’t do that!” And so on.
Does that makes sense?
@aspergum:
It makes perfectly good sense.
“I think another basic reason is that whites think of themselves as individuals too; they don’t think that their being white has much of anything to do with who and what they are. They think it’s just something coincidental about themselves, like having red hair or hazel eyes or a birthmark. They don’t see that being in that racial group has a lot to do with their life chances, their psychology, their emotions, their reactions to others, and more. And so if someone even suggests that their being white MIGHT have some relevance in their lives and thinking and behavior by pointing out that white people do this or that, they’re not used to thinking about themselves that way, and so they reject observations about “white people.” “Hey, I’M not like that!” they’re thinking, or feeling, “I’m a good person! Okay, I’m white, but just because I’m white doesn’t mean I do any of the bad things you’re claiming white people do. Look at me, I’m white, and I don’t do that!” And so on.”
Does that makes sense?
******************************
@ Aspergum,
Are YOU a white person?
It is funny up in here. I am certain that Abagond is correct in his assessment, by some of the very post made in this blog.
Most people have a difficult time seeing themselves as they really are. Most don’t even want to really take a good look at themselves. Therefore it is near impossible for white folks to get it. I mean really, why fix something when they don’t think anythings broken? And I am talking about all white folks.
I think this is a good post and I AM WHITE. When people are using stereotypes about other ethnic groups it seems to be ok, but lo behold, when somebody turns the tables. I think some whites should grow up here.
I do not agree everything said here in this blog and usually say so, I am not a racist nor I am a nazi etc. but if someone here on this blog writes how whites are this and that and I know that some whites are like that, but I am not, then why get upset? Not all whites were nazis but nazis were all white. Why get mad about it? Why get angry about facts or opinions?
And in the end of the day, this is abagodns blog. He can say anything he wants here and you can argue, state your opinion about it, but you can not do squat about it. So either contribute to the discussions or not.
@dmerrin1000:
I can honestly say I’ve learned more about race and about my own racism from this blog than I think I did from all the previous reading and education I’ve done and had over the last twenty or so years.
—-
That’s encouraging.
@Matari:
…they don’t think that their being white has much of anything to do with who and what they are. They think it’s just something coincidental about themselves, like having red hair or hazel eyes or a birthmark. They don’t see that being in that racial group has a lot to do with their life chances, their psychology, their emotions, their reactions to others, and more. And so if someone even suggests that their being white MIGHT have some relevance in their lives and thinking and behavior by pointing out that white people do this or that, they’re not used to thinking about themselves that way, and so they reject observations about “white people.” “Hey, I’m not like that!” they’re thinking, or feeling, “I’m a good person! Okay, I’m white, but just because I’m white doesn’t mean I do any of the bad things you’re claiming white people do.
—
I think you nailed it.
@ Nom De Plume
“I think you nailed it.”
********************’
@ Aspergum,
Are YOU a white person?
So, why did I ask this??
Sometimes knowing a poster’s ethnicity helps me to better understand what/why/how they write. Nonetheless, I’m beginning to get that Aspergum doesn’t wish to divulge that “information” for whatever reason(s) … That’s alright with me.
I have no issues with Aspergum .. except perhaps his/her view re there’s more a wealth/class problem than there is a race (whites vs blacks) problem. That might have been the beginning of when my curiosity about Aspergum’s background or origin, began. Otherwise, I’m usually a fan of Aspergum’s posts.
Yeah, sorry I haven’t replied to that question, Matari (and hey, I’m a big fan of your posts too!). I’m just not comfortable anymore with divulging anything about myself online, except I guess that I live in the U.S. I know that one’s raced, gendered, classed etc. positionalities matter in regards to what one says, but then, when people do say they’re black or white or male or female or whatever, but they’re in a comment section under a pseudonym, who really knows if they’re even telling the truth, except that person?
I would address the class/race nexus/conundrum again, but yeah, we disagree on that, which is cool, and it’s not related to this posts’s topic, so that sleeping dog can go on sleeping.
When i see white ppl say/type, “blacks are…” I usually assume that they are either ignorant or racist and take offense to what they are saying. I don’t believe I am in the wrong for thinking that way. Most ppl do
@ Aspergum
“but then, when people do say they’re black or white or male or female or whatever, but they’re in a comment section under a pseudonym, who really knows if they’re even telling the truth, except that person?”
***********************
..except that person – and their Maker. : )
I tend/try to take people at “face value” until I have reason to do otherwise.
I think that most of the folks who comment here regularly are honest in that regard. It’s not easy pretending to be someone you aren’t – all the time. And to what end, what agenda ..? Unless that individual has multiple personalities that crosses racial lines (it happens) or they’re just a chronic liar …
But anyhow, when it comes to trolls, “the only thing I believe about them” is that they ALWAYS have some sort of nefarious or oblique agenda! That of course would be ALL TROLLS, without exception. : ))
aspergum
That isn’t what I was implying. The way you phrased it, you made it sound like I DO think all blacks are “gangstas” but I was conditioned not to say that I do. That couldn’t be further from the truth.What my post was getting at, is that you don’t like people generalizing someone because of their skin color. I don’t believe all blacks are gangstas, nor do I believe all whites are racist or all Germans are Nazi’s or any number of the various stereotypes that abound.
@ Ankhesen Mié
Yes!
Sam, JT and Leigh have it right: I am talking in general terms. If it does not apply to you personally why are you getting so upset? Do thin, well-read Americans get upset when people say, “Americans are fat” or “Americans don’t read?” Why not?
White people make statements about blacks all the time. Blacks are lazy. Blacks expect hand-outs. Blacks lack intelligence. Black women are loud. Etc. I know they are making general statements and do not mean ALL blacks. For example, I doubt any of them would regard Angela Bassett or Michelle Obama as loud, lazy, lacking in intelligence or expecting a hand-out. And I know that bringing up those examples would hardly disprove their statements to them. Because the issue was never about SOME, MOST, MANY or ALL.
So when white commenters bring up the NOT ALL thing it strikes me as odd, as a derailment. Sure, NOT ALL whites are racist, but so what? More than enough of them are. That is what matters, not whether it is ALL of them.
i think it’s just human nature to assume that you are implying that all of a group (or at least the vast majority) act a certain way if you don’t specify. and we all know that it can be very inaccurate and potentially damaging for people to generalise. if anything, i’d agree that using a prefix like ‘some’ every time you talk about a certain group would get tiresome – and especially on a racial blog like this.
‘Sam, JT and Leigh have it right: I am talking in general terms. If it does not apply to you personally why are you getting so upset? Do thin, well-read Americans get upset when people say, “Americans are fat” or “Americans don’t read?” Why not?
White people make statements about blacks all the time. Blacks are lazy. Blacks expect hand-outs. Blacks lack intelligence. Black women are loud. Etc. I know they are making general statements and do not mean ALL blacks. For example, I doubt any of them would regard Angela Bassett or Michelle Obama as loud, lazy, lacking in intelligence or expecting a hand-out. And I know that bringing up those examples would hardly disprove their statements to them. Because the issue was never about SOME, MOST, MANY or ALL.’
This all sounds very reasonable but i hate reading generalised statements, especially about black women! it doesn’t matter if they pertain to me specifically. i just don’t want to hear that black women are (loud/fat/ugly) because it hurts, even if i consider myself to have none of the mentioned traits. in fact that extends to generalisations about women as a whole too. i think we should be careful about how we put things. you know the saying ‘treat people like how you’d like to be treated..’
Abagond has said many times on this blog that when he says, “Whites…” he doesn’t mean all Whites. I can’t believe he has to keep repeating this.
When I hear people saying, “Blacks are lazy, Black women are loud, Blacks aren’t as intelligent as Whites”, I can’ ever recall them clarifying and saying that they don’t mean all Blacks.
‘The “not all whites” argument’ is nothing new. It’s akin to “the slaves were happier before you came along” (that Frederick Douglass heard) or the new “Liberals are your friends” (that we hear.)
I part with the wisdom of Steve Biko, bless him eternally:
Steve Biko on “White Racism”
“This description of “metaphysical guilt” explains adequately that WHITE RACISM is only possible because whites are indifferent to suffering and patient with cruelty meted out to the black man. Instead of involving themselves in an all-out attempt to stamp out racism from their white society, liberals waste lots of time trying to prove to as many blacks as they can find that they are liberal. This arises out of the false belief that we are faced with a black problem. There is nothing the matter with blacks. The problem is WHITE RACISM. The sooner liberals realize this the better for us blacks. Their presence amongst us is irksome and of nuisance value. It removes the focus of attention from essentials and shifts it to ill-defined philosophical concepts that are both irrelevant to the black man and merely a red herring across the track. White liberals must leave blacks to take care of their own business while they concern themselves with the real evil in our society–white racism.”
“White liberals must leave blacks to take care of their own business while they concern themselves with the real evil in our society–white racism.”
So true! White liberals want to get that cookie when we should be out working to stop, intercept or interfere with our own racism, in ourselves, friends or family, in our daily lives.
@ Onitaset
Great Steve Biko quote. Thanks.
I was reading about this whole NOT ALL WHITES thing on another blog. They said it was driven by white allies seeking cookies (validation). They want black people to tell them they are not racist. I have certainly had commenters like that! But not all whites who use the “not all whites” argument strike me as allies. However it does make sense of the Tim Wise Cookie Factory,
Abagond:
All whites didn’t partake in slavery and colonialism, but, all whites benefit from what was done to native-americans and africans. All whites are not racist, but, all whites benefit from racist policies and institutions that set up roadblocks for black success. It doesn’t matter how noble one white person may be in relation to black people. They commit the same crime as one of us, they get probation and time served. They get pulled over by the cops, they’re not accidentally shot and killed by a nervous black cop. They get into college because of family, religous, and personal ties…The only way a lot of us get into college is thru sports, WTF?
Tyrone
Black Eros Movement
Abagond, I have been following this blog for a while now and I have learned a a lot. Thank you very much.
@ Tyrone
Excellent points.
My ethnic group was oppressed by the English for 800 years. They attempted genocide on us twice. We didn’t get independence until 1921 and by that time my family had long before fled to America. Jews have been persecuted right on up until the present day. Pol Pot attempted genocide on Cambodians 30 years ago. Albanians were massacred in Kosovo in NINETEEN-NINETY-FRIGGIN-NINE. The way folks around here carry on you’d think slavery in America ended last Thursday.
So, Abagond, basically what your saying is that any time Whites object to being grouped together in a negative way it’s a staw man argument to avoid being found guilty of racism. Right? You also respond to Ankhesen Mie’s clarification of your term “hive mind” as being an example of White’s being “drones” in the affimative. I guess by objecting to that term being used against Whites I would be guilty of hoisting a straw man. It seems to me that what’s going on here is you just object to any resistance to your Black racism. It just shows that unless White people maintain their demographic majority Klan with a Tan commissars like you will begin shoving us in to the gas chambers every chance you get.
Oh Jay, I think your point is well taken but I have one crtiticism. By your ethnic group I take you to mean the Irish. Well the British would never have gone into Ireland in the first place had the Irish people not been willing poarticipant in the Counter-Reformation and it’s attempt to impose the Bishop of Rome on a Protestant people in Great Britain by force of arms. I guess one man’s “oppression” is another man’s “self defense”. Which I think is the whole point of this blog. I just wish people of color would stop being liars and hypocrites on this issue.
@Mitchell Day, If only the colorless would give the example.
@ Mitchell Day
Disagreeing that many whites seem to act like drones, say, is not a straw man. Because it is something I argue:
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/the-secret-course-on-whiteness/
But to put words in my mouth and say that I think ALL whites are like that IS a straw man because it is an argument I never made.
@mitchell day:
“Well the British would never have gone into Ireland in the first place had the Irish people not been willing poarticipant in the Counter-Reformation and it’s attempt to impose the Bishop of Rome on a Protestant people in Great Britain by force of arms.”
Well, they actually did. Normans were the first, then some vikings and them some english and then again some english and then again some more. You may be referring to the time when an catholic ENGLISH KING tried to organise a campaing to get his power back and failed which resulted the new attack by Olvier Cromwells protestant army.
@Mitchell Day
What Sam says about the history of Ireland is accurate.
The situation about the Counter-Reformation you seem to be referring to came centuries AFTER the invasion of the first Old English “planters” that ruled over the Gaelic Irish, and after the harsher Tudor conquest of island…
I am not sure how this false recounting of Irish history supports your wish that “people of color would stop being liars and hypocrites on this issue”?
I have a black brother in law and two half-black nieces. I love them both, and think they’re awesome. I’m very fond of ym brother in law and like to spend time with him; he’s the supposedly non-existent stereotypically geeky black guy who shouldn’t exist and only appears as the computer programmer in Hollywood movies. And yet, there he is. He’s one of his company’s star branch managers (a financial institution).
His sister is charming and, tragically, in her early 30′s and unmarried, involuntarily, and desperately looking. Educated and smart and classy. So fits another stereotype.
His brothers are well-spoken is less educated businessmen who live very comfortable lives fraught with hard work and diligence. They have comfortable nuclear families.
I’m told this is rare in America. And yet, their friends are similar.
Still; Even with this family connection, when I sit on a subway with a dozen young black men being rude and a few young black women are edging and taunting them on, being raucus and really disturbing everyone else, I don’t think:
“There go a bunch of asshole jerks. Humans can really suck.”
Despite my family connections, the nieces I love, my extremely cool and funny brother in law, this is what I think:
“What a bunch of asshole black kids.”
When my GF and I were attacked by three obviously strung out black youth on a street in summer, and I had to pulverize one guy and ended up badly injured myself, I didn’t think:
Attacked by a jerk.
I thought:
Attacked by some black guy who thought he could target white people with impunity.
I vote this:
It’s virtually impossible not to be racist on some level. It goes for black and white people.
I honestly have no idea how to move forward. I must entertain the possibility that this is nearly impossible.
I worry for my nieces. The oldest one is well into the age where she’s starting to notice it.
Both the black kids and the white kids are very hard on her. In different ways, but both bad.
I suspect a big part of the problem is that there are subtleties that not only are expected to be understood, but *must* be understood in order for communication to work.
“Whites owned slaves” seems to me an obviously more reasonable statement than “blacks owned slaves”, because it was the general rule of slavery. Regardless of the percentage of whites who owned slaves, the people who did own slaves were generally white. There was not, to my knowledge (which *may* be incomplete, anyone feel free to correct me), a significant portion of the slave population that was owned by slaves.
Take the statement, for some location, “It rains in the rainy season.” Now, this would seem almost a tautology. If there were a say or two, or five, of the rainy season in which it did NOT rain, and/or a day, or two, or five, in the otherwise dry rest of the year on which it DID rain, this would not in a reasonable world cause one to interrupt the statement with “No, it ALSO rained 5 days of the dry season!” or such. because, what the hell, it’s just rain, and probably not coming down anyplace where anyone involved in the discussion lives, anyway.
But when you apply it to whites and slaves, you are suddenly bringing in group identities, and guilt, and this naturally (which is not to say correctly, or reasonably) morphs in the defensive mind into accusation. Andpeople get all weird and irrational.
Arg, sorry, 2am cut and paste error. that should hae read,
“There was not, to my knowledge (which *may* be incomplete, anyone feel free to correct me), a significant portion of the slave population that was owned by free blacks.”
Here’s where the rubber meets the road. Look at all the media, how many times are issues that mostly impact people of color talked about and compare that to all the other things that are talked about. For every blog run by somebody obviously White its about anything but the continued oppression of “others”, that its wrong and we should be working to eliminate it.
One person mentioned “Road Blocks” which there are many. For every Obama there are ten brothers in jail because nobody wanted to give them an opportunity, never mind that Obama went to school in a very white middle class area much like myself. So I know nothing about the object poverty and police brutality that some of my relatives have experienced living in largely all Black areas of Los Angeles.
This is an intentional road block that nobody is seemingly wanting to fix. Why is that? Millions of people will stand in line for the latest Iphone, why is that more important than racial harmony????
That’s because fixing problematic long difficult to solve social problems are just not important anymore.
I think it would be better to use a term like “white racists”.
I doubt when white people use the “not all whites” argument as you call it they really think you don’t know that many white people have nothing to do with racism.
I think it’s more likely that many white people are mortified of being lumped in with white racists (which is a good thing) and feel that not specifying unfairly undermines the white people who never were racist.
“I think it would be better to use a term like “white racists”.”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And I think it would be better for you to read a myriad of posts the author of this blog has written about (WHITE people and RACISM) – before you comment again.
You might learn WHY whites are not the ones who are oppressed, mistreated, marginalized, undermined by racism/white supremacy.
@Saadiyah
Sure you don’t hear them saying that but they don’t do it for the same reason Abagond doesn’t feel the need most of the time when he intially makes these kinds of statements.
To the hardcore racist who says blacks are lazy, violent, unintelligent etc….they don’t literally mean all, just many or most blacks are that way they acknowledge that genius blacks exist, athletic blacks exists, hardworking blacks exist….
They just feel that it doesn’t need to be pointed out, obviously some black people like that do exist from their perspective, but not enough to matter as an aspect of debate or conversation.
They are “X” factors, not generalizations.
@CaptainScorpio
Over the entire US 1-2 percent of whites owned slaves, 4-5% of southern white people.
Of the free black population I believe 25-28% owned slaves.
How many free blacks were there during slavery? Does the large percentage reflect the fact that they were part of a much smaller group? By the way, where do these percentages of white and free black slave owners come from?
Does this number account for free blacks who bought family members to keep them from being separated?
Most importantly……what does this have to do with the post? The initial reference to slavery was made as an example of how a statement should not be taken as a generalization. Does the percentage of free black slave owners have any real bearing on that? To me, it sounds like the comment about the larger percentage of black slave owners is meant to somehow counter act the generalization about white slave owners. But logically, it seems that if you take a 2% from 90% of the population and compare it to 25% of the remaining 10%(of which maybe 2% were free), you get a significantly smaller number.