“Playing devil’s advocate” means taking the opposing point of view for the sake of argument. It is used to test arguments, to debate an issue.
It is also something the privileged do when talking to the marginalized about their marginalization, like when White Americans talk about racism.
The term devil’s advocate comes from the Catholic Church. A devil’s advocate was someone who took the devil’s side, so to speak, in arguing against whether someone should be declared a saint. A big part of that was questioning the reported miracles.
White Americans who play devil’s advocate do the same thing in discussions about racism. Racism must be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. As if in a country like the US, with a long history of racism, such an event would be that unbelievable. Like the miracle of a saint or something.
Playing devil’s advocate allows Whites to defend their own white privilege as if all they care about is the truth, objectivity, “debating the issues”, testing ideas and so on. It is what I have called Bogus White Objectivity.
It is not a true objectivity or search for truth because they rarely play devil’s advocate against their own privilege.
They minutely examine what people of colour and White allies say, trying to find holes in it, knock it down, “test” it. Fair enough. But when a White or whitewashed person makes a racist argument, they fall silent (unless the argument is particularly brainless). Only what opposes their privilege is “tested”. Thus their “objectivity”, thus their thirst for truth.
It seems like an act, like they are being disingenuous or wilfully obtuse, but they might be so sunk into a white privilege mindset that they regard it as a neutral, fair-minded point of view.
Playing devil’s advocate allows them to:
- Distance themselves from their own privilege – while supporting it the whole time!
- Paint those who object to their presence as enemies of truth, objectivity, open discussion, new ideas, balance – while they themselves repeat like sheep the Standard Lies that American society is built on. They bring no new ideas, nor do they seem truly open to them. The balance they bring is to defend the extremely well-defended racist status quo.
They push themselves into discussions between people of colour and, instead of seeking broaden their own knowledge and understanding, they turn it into a debate to “win”. People are talking about issues that affect their lives and they turn it into a game for their own amusement. White privilege gives them the luxury of not having to take it seriously. White racism, in fact, demands that they do not.
Objectivity, open discussion, new ideas and all of that are good things, of course. I am not saying otherwise. But in my experience most Whites – not all, just most – who say they are for those things in discussions on race are in fact their enemies. They are the opposite of what they appear to be.
See also:
umm hmm… umm hmm… This is precisely why, i refuse to talk to white people about racism, white supremacy and white privilege. I am saving my self a headache.
LikeLike
And now I know why there are blacks of. This blog that refuse to engage whites. Though I greatly enjoy herneith methods for dealing with them.
And I agree some do want to have an open discussion that cam be quite interesting.
LikeLike
Correction on*
LikeLike
White people are oblivious or act like they are. I’ve learned to no longer and I absolutely mean NO LONGER engage white people in a conversation about racism. They either just play it off or act stupid. Maybe they are stupid.
I say actual things that affect my life and people like me and they just don’t get it. They never will.
Now on certain blogs sites I just don’t say anything. I just sit back and watch the freak show. I just bite my tongue now. There’s no point of talking about racism to white people.
They will just derail the points being made, play stupid, laugh at my points( yes it has happened). It’s like talking to a white brick wall.
LikeLike
See…we’re seen as complainers about blackface. But when Nick Cannon made fun of white people…now they wanna cry. Give me a break.
Nothing about what he did oppressed them on any level whatsoever.
LikeLike
Your use of the term “whitewashed person” is racist and offensive to me.
LikeLike
So, are these trolls, then? If they are just obtuse because of the white privilege mindset, then I would say not. But if they are willfully obtuse and just playing a game, then – hey.
LikeLike
I got came here to read the comments, to see if the white supremacist trolls came up with any new arguments/deflection tactics
LikeLike
BTW, my name is Adonis. The Adonis.
LikeLike
How whites play devils advocate
*Racist white person (Although this could even be non-white person)*
“Well, black people can’t be taught, because you people are just plain inferior intellectually”
*Keith*
“Now we are getting to it !!!!”
“O. I’m inferior, meaning what ?”
*Racist white person (Although this could even be non-white person)*
“Meaning. I don’t like black people. I don’t like looking at them. I don’t like seeing them, Chinese I can kinda tolerate, but not black”
“No matter how you taught, your just born inferior, it’s just that way, for some reason, blacks just can’t learn, everything they touch turns into a mess, if I’m not around here to hold their hand and walk them through everything, then everything just turns to nothing”
*Keith*
Keith sits back, put his feet up open up a Budweiser
“Ooooooh, so we are incapable of doing nothing constructive ? Right ?”
*Racist white person (Although this could even be non-white person)*
“Yes and I just tolerate ya. I try to be compassionate but I really can’t do anything with you people because you are all just plain inferior !!!!!!! INFERIOR !! INFERIOR !!…… By nature !!! You just can’t do zero, you can’t cut it, all your good for is getting in the way, and messing things up for whites trying to live in civilised society”
*Keith*
“OK – That’s your conclusion”
*Racist white person (Although this could even be non-white person)*
“Yes that’s my conclusion”
*Keith*
“OK- But we are still stuck with that one thing, aren’t we ?
*Racist white person (Although this could even be non-white person)*
“What’s that ?”
*Keith*
“The doing part”
“Keith”
“What do you with people who are absolute inferior ?”
“Now let’s wrap this up now in five minutes, coz we are getting towards the end and I got a pizza in the oven”
“What do you with people who are absolute inferior ?”
“Make up your mind”
LikeLike
@ John
How is “whitewashed person” a racist term?
LikeLike
^ I was going to ask the same thing, but I just got beat to it.
(http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/whitewash_2)
(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whitewash)
The original definition has nothing to do with race at all. It means to cover up facts.
LikeLike
There is an informal meaning that refers to adopting speech, mannerisms, attitudes, etc. of those of European descent or western culture, but that does not make any determination of good or bad, better or worse, right or wrong, so also is not inherently racist. (It’s like saying someone is westernized.)
(http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=white+wash)
We can disapprove of it, (e.g., if we state that we did not like how the characters were whitewashed in “The Last Airbender”), but that is like saying we disapprove of Hamlet being performed in Japanese.
I also would like someone to explain to me how whitewash is used in a racist sense.
LikeLike
The white posters that pretend to be obtuse but only come here to mock and ridicule. They don’t come in good faith they don’t come to learn. They just come to be jerks. They know who they are.
LikeLike
Mary
It’s a joke to them. No reason for them to take it serious. Until we start moving in their neighborhoods.
LikeLike
..thus their thirst for truth, Lmao!!
Notice too, that no matter how “fair” they consider themselves, they will say, that they AGREE with the racist argument or PoV, even though they say it more softly. They only join forces with that PoV out of sheer common sense.
Yes, they are complete innocents in the world. Of course.
Broaden their own knowledge and understanding.
Right. Because they want to LEARN.
LikeLike
Abagond:
Any claim of certainty, where a complex set of potential causes may exist, probably ought to be subjected to a stringent burden of proof.
Abagond:
Isn’t it reasonable to presume that the majority opinion is already sufficiently well-defended?
LikeLike
“Isn’t it reasonable to presume that the majority opinion is already sufficiently well-defended?”
********
Ahhh… like the majority opinion of whites who think (like you) that blacks are typically shiftless/lazy, without discipline, criminal, amoral and usually looking for any type of a FREE ride because all people are now on the same level playing field – since current racism is almost meaningless and doesn’t really hurt black people’s ability to excel. After all, just look at Oprah, Obama and Michael (pick one!). They prove racism is an old, overused excuse. Right Randy?
LikeLike
Randy
Typical and totally representative of what Abagond has posted about. Right on cue you start to dissect and defend the Devils Advocate approach with regard to racism.
What you conveniently forget or fail to consider in doing so Randy is that Racism is NOT a Mathematical or Logic argument! It is a MORAL and Ethical one!
There is a BIG difference there…Its ok to play devils advocate when there is nothing much at stake like in solving a Proof Theory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_theory
But when people’s lives and livelihood are at stake can it morally or ethically be right that they should suffer until it can be proved conclusively with no doubt?
This is the type of standard expected in those who approach discussions on issues like racism with no sense of moral conscience.
Not saying, of course, people like Randy do not have any moral conscience when it comes to these sort of debates. (I am really!) Its just like making the distinction between animals and humans. If you agree and see the two as totally separate species then arguing that because both feel pain their experiences should be treated as equal makes NO logical sense!
How can it be if they are not the same?
In the same way the pain and suffering experienced by Black people cannot be the same that would be experienced (in similar circumstances) by white people would it?
How can it be if they are not the same?
And so the devil’s advocate argument/approach continues and appears quite legitimate for this reason…
LikeLike
Put the word “devil” or “racism” in a post and you’ll catch someone’s eye. All this time I’ve heard the expression “devil’s advocate”, I never knew where it came from. This is the first time I’ve ever seen it painted black and white. 🙂
LikeLike
@Bulanik:
Yeah, bc arguing about someone else’ lived experience for FUN! is something only a privileged person would think to do. The discussion becomes not a learning experience for them but a contest that no matter what you say you will lose, all so that person can feel good because they won. And they wil lsay absolutley anything to win the argument, switching goalposts, derailing onto another topic, asking you to cite resources they never had any intention of reading. Ive seen this tactic wherever marginilized people go to discusss anything of importance among themselves.
LikeLike
Matari:
I meant the majority opinion on this board.
Kwamla:
Sorry, I must disagree. Every moral or ethical argument has a logical / rational argument underpinning it. For example, promoting the ubiquity of fair treatment maximizes social stability which maximizes wellness among people and societies, or so forth.
Kwamla:
You’re assuming that a solution to reduce suffering is being prevented by insistence on a strict burden of proof, but you haven’t named the solution. Who is to say that your solution, should you propose one and it be implemented, wouldn’t cause greater suffering?
Ultimately, you appear to be claiming that a particular person or group’s feelings, rather than rational consideration and consensus agreement, should dictate policy.
LikeLike
Randy, are you part/full android? That is what you sound like when you type – like you have never had any feeling or acted on any emotion in your life. How the hell did you chat up your wife, with a passionless, logical, rationale as to why she should mate with you and procreate?
LikeLike
@Omnipresent: “Randy, are you part/full android.” LMAO. I love it.
LikeLike
@Kiwi: No that makes two of us. LMAO too.
LikeLike
I had to ask it Mary – I think he thinks he is coming across as rational and objective but what he says doesnt sound like it came from a human most of the time.
LikeLike
Omnipresent:
I tend to think that this form of discussion benefits from concise, dispassionate language. With my friends and family it’s all warmth and affection, except where we also engage in similar types of debates and there again I try to use more precise language.
Omnipresent:
Heck no. You can’t pick up women like that. Different tools for different jobs. I think people call this “code switching”.
LikeLike
Leave it to Randy to prove Abagond’s point, which is probably the only reason he’s even allowed to comment here. He’s also a great example of someone wanting to state a viewpoint as concrete gospel, as opposed to nurturing a genuine desire to learn something.
@Keith Essien
See? This is what happens when the mores and customs of your social strata prohibit you from speaking your mind on what to do with “those people.” Somewhere, Lee Atwater’s crying into a warm pint of skunky beer. The devil’s advocate tactic is a fig leaf for laying down personal belief as truth while claiming to seek the “truth.”
@Matari
Oprah and Barack Obama are just outliers and exceptions, as far as Randy’s concerned. The young bucks hanging out at the ATL Metro Mall? Those are the standard, as far as he’s concerned.
To ask why he believes this means travelling centuries back in time to the precise moment some enterprising traders spread the fiction that Negros were lazy, idle creatures unless pressed into the service of their betters through hard labor and involuntary servitude.
Randy probably kicks himself time and again for not being born the dashing son of a wealthy antebellum planter.
LikeLike
Perhaps if you shared some of that warmth and affection with others considered outside your immediate family you might begin to assimilate some of the comments expressed here about those unfeeling, unemotional BORG like comments you express. Its this unquestioned belief you have that passion and emotion need to be suppressed in resolving complex social issues which limits you. You are effectively only bringing half a brain (left brain functioning) to the discussions here! When clearly both are needed!
There you go with the typical left brain analytical reasoning again. Every ethical argument has it own rationale. It is not logically right or logically wrong! The logic here is something either the individual and/or the collective agree to hold true.
So guess WHO decides “…if fair treatment maximizes social stability and wellness…”? We all do of course Or we don’t!
Lets deal with your other typical left brain response to questions of morality I posed…
Lets go back 200 years into the past and lets pretend say the problem was the African slave trade and the solution was that it should be stopped and ended immediately. Now its true Merchants and Traders might protest that an immediate stoppage might cause harm and suffering to all the people who’s lively hood depended on it. Causing many to experience direct financial hardship.
We could take the feelings of the Merchants and Traders into account here and we could balance these against the feelings of the African slaves, whose family, culture, identity and lives had been lost and whose dignity as human beings was being erased and down graded to the level of sub-human beasts of burden.
How should such an obvious moral question be decided and resolved?
Is there a logical analytical and and dispassionate answer that a left brained approach could provide? One that everyone could logically agree on including the African slaves?
This is obviously a rhetorical question. But in the absence of any moral consciousness (no emotion or passion) in those coming to agreement in making such a decision. It could easily be argued that the feelings of the African slaves should not take precedence over rational consideration and consensus agreement amongst the Merchants, Traders and any other similar affected parties.
Enlighten me Randy how you would have gone about dispassionately, rationally and logically trying to resolve this moral dilemma?
LikeLike
@Kiwi,
Some of Randy’s emotional attitudes slip through (e.g., “feral children”) and the “Borg” would not use a series of dispassionate arguments based on hearsay or “whatif” premises.
LikeLike
They push themselves into discussions between people of colour and, instead of seeking broaden their own knowledge and understanding, they turn it into a debate to “win”.
Or they turn it into an argument about themselves and how they feel hurt or treated unfairly. Either way, it’s a ploy to disrupt conversations in their favor without no regard of other parties.
LikeLike
Your use of the term “whitewashed person” is racist and offensive to me.
See what I mean?
LikeLike
Randy:
I tend to think that this form of discussion benefits from concise, dispassionate language. With my friends and family it’s all warmth and affection, except where we also engage in similar types of debates and there again I try to use more precise language.
Precise is one thing, but to ask questions or make statements where is a lack of genuine interest in the responses (you always seem to have a textbook style ‘standard’ answer for every scenario and seem not to take on board peoples own individual take on things) and a severe lack of compassion whilst not demonstrating empathy will never get you a full and rounded answer I dont think.
Even when you chose to reply to posts on here, this must be due to an emotional response – I am not saying you are enraged/upset or anything but, the topic MEANS something to you, enough for you to have an opinion on and comment on. Arugably, it matters so much to you that you actually refuse (though not openly) to engage honestly in discussion and debate. You already have your viewpoint and you stick firmly to it. Have you ever said to a commenter on here – I dont understand it but I can see how that might be or that is beyond my experience but I take your word for it.
LikeLike
^^^^
Benefit of the doubt is the phrase I was thinking of
Kiwi
I was thinking of something more along the lines of “the Borg”.
*Like*
LikeLike
Randy:
Heck no. You can’t pick up women like that. Different tools for different jobs. I think people call this “code switching”.
Not sure I know it as being called code switching – perhaps more a split/dual personality???? More like Jekyll and Hyde perhaps??? 😉
LikeLike
Kwamla:
You raise an interesting point. I don’t think that emotion should be suppressed, as it provides an impetus to examine issues which affect us on a primal level.
However, when evaluating situations and policies, logic and reason provide a framework for thoughtful consideration. Concepts of “fairness” and “justice” are products of this type of analysis and judgment.
Consider that most systems of jurisprudence are based on impartial reasoning. I doubt you would prefer the hot passions of an angry mob to calm cool consideration, though the latter is obviously not infallible.
Kwamla:
I think there are several rational approaches to arguing for the end of slavery.
The so-called “Golden Rule” (i.e. “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”) has arisen in numerous cultures and provides one logical basis for arguing for the end of slavery.
Enlightenment-era development of “natural rights” beliefs provided a common basis for promotion of individual liberty. Extending these rights to all persons follows from those beliefs, and if I’m not mistaken, was an argument used at the time against the practice of slavery.
LikeLike
Omnipresent:
Absolutely, but I wouldn’t expect anyone to change their minds just because I feel a certain way. Therein lies the value of reasoned debate.
Omnipresent:
I tend not to comment about people’s feelings, which are completely subjective. However, I think matters of policy lend themselves to coolly logical discussion.
Omnipresent:
I think most people do this – showing different sides of their personalities at the office, at a bar, at church, visiting grandma, playing sports, and so forth.
LikeLike
@Randy
“like the majority opinion of whites who think (like you) that blacks are typically shiftless/lazy, without discipline, criminal, amoral and usually looking for any type of a FREE ride because all people are now on the same level playing field – since current racism is almost meaningless and doesn’t really hurt black people’s ability to excel.”
Originally made by Matari in response to you.
Is this a fair or approximate summary of your views on this subject ?
LikeLike
@Mbeti ^^^^^
No, that is not an approximate summary of my views on the subject.
I have stated that behaviors and practices among many poor people, both individually and within their communities, perpetuates poverty and prevents them from achieving academic success, a necessary step to climbing the socioeconomic ladder.
That condition is not specific to any particular race or ethnic group.
LikeLike
@Randy
I see you are back to your typical standard denial of white privilege conferred as a direct result of globally imposed white supremacist ideology.
I suspect the resolution of guilt plays a major part in your continuing life experiences. Which will continue to be the case until you elect to deal with the morality of this question rather than the non-empathetic challenge of justifying unearned illusory advantage.
LikeLike
Playing the devil’s advocate in a debate about racism (white supremacy) is really about demonsraring how morally deficient, uncaring and non-empathetic you can be when it comes to justifying unearned and illusory social advantages (white privileges)
As can be witnessed throughout this blog there are no shortages of applicants for this unevolved role!
LikeLike
Kwamla:
How is “privilege” related to this discussion?
LikeLike
Randy you stated
“I have stated that behaviors and practices among many poor people, both individually and within their communities, perpetuates poverty and prevents them from achieving academic success, a necessary step to climbing the socioeconomic ladder.”
You have the order reversed. Most POC & the poor are predetermined to be so. There is very little class movement in this country because school systems, funding, public services, resources etc. are all purposely of lower quality for us. Once you’ve been given lesser quality for things that are crucial to a higher quality of life you’ve been effectively stripped of the tools you would need to get out of poverty.
Kids that go to inner-city schools get a half assed brainwashing that is erroneously titled education & thus have little chance of going to college. Going out into the world seeking employment they’re slapped in the face with the reality that they need a degree to get one that’s worth a damn, the same degree their poor K-12 education barred them from getting. They get terrible jobs or none at all but still have to provide for themselves with inadequate pay to do so forcing them to figure out alternative ways to get cash (Drug dealing, robbing, prostitution, gambling)
The system in place games them into perpetual poverty so they counter punch & game the system back by committing crimes to get money & conning government welfare to get resources. Filling out tons of applications & getting no call backs, being last hired & first fired, not having enough to pay the months rent or feed your kids creates extreme stress and many people simply give up.
We should be aiming our critiques at the system in place. It makes sure there’s always someone to connect calls, sweep floors, clean bathrooms, & say “do you want fries with that?” In other words America makes sure there’s always someone to do the job no one wants. Blaming those who were never given a fair chance to compete who end up in said jobs (or with no job at all) is truly victim blaming.
LikeLike
@Randy
It is related because you deny its existence. Examine your own comment to Mbeti and contrast it with the response by A. Your entire focus is on the actions and behaviours of African-Americans. What about the actions and behaviours of white Americans?
You are playing devils advocate with your refusal to acknowledge any correlation. This is in itself is a privilege.
LikeLike
A:
Funding levels undoubtedly play a role, but the matter is complex. There are a number of high-profile school districts (such as DC and Kansas City) with very high dollars per student but chronically poor academic results.
Another counter to your proposition is that even in poor districts you can predict academic performance by demographics. Immigrants in particular succeed at statistically higher rates.
Anecdotally, I’ve observed significant differences (mostly class based) among pre-school aged kids.
I taught my own children to read and do math before they started kindergarten. I also require respectful behavior. A school full of kids like mine wouldn’t require metal detectors or cops.
We cross paths with children sometimes who are much older and yet can’t construct a coherent sentence. Their parents should have seen to that before they first set foot into a school.
I don’t make these statements out of a sense of superiority. I am, in fact, fortunate and privileged due to factors I had no control over. Specifically, because I had attentive parents who invested effort in my development.
Which government program do you propose would instill similar values in kids from failing school districts?
LikeLike
Kwamla:
I’m not singling out any particular group.
Also, I place such a focus on “actions and behaviors” because it seems impossible to succeed without them. If you believe that idea to be in error, please provide a counterexample.
LikeLike
Randy,
You asked about the question of privilege and how it was related to this discussion. I told you it related to your focus on actions and behaviours.You have also stated that you see these two to be necessary for success.
So why is it you refuse to correlate one group’s actions and behaviours with those of another? They cannot be looked at solely in isolation.
You are still exercising privilege here by refusing this examination. And you are still playing Devils Advocate in response to A’s comment?
Its the number one reason circular discussions like this continue. You obviously never seem to tire of playing this game 🙂
LikeLike
Randy:
I am, in fact, fortunate and privileged due to factors I had no control over. Specifically, because I had attentive parents who invested effort in my development.
Kwamla talks about ‘circular discussions’ and you and I have had similar exchanges before.
What about those individuals that do NOT have parents who are attentive, who invest effort in their development? What happens to them when they are sent to a school in their district that is an inner city school like the ones A describes – what happens then? How can people teach others what they have not been taught themselves?
What is the root cause of this problem i.e. perpetuation of poor, ill educated individuals? Lets go back to the 1930’s so 3 generations back where the individuals were brought up in the same environment with the same lack of opportunities both educationally and then in them getting a good job. What are the chances for the children of the 4th generation? What can be done to break the cycle?
When people are not investing in an individual in either a familial setting or at school in formative years, what effect do you think this will have on an individual? How can an individual potentially change their destiny without that family support and a decent education?
You have insisted that people should take personal responsibility but I would argue that some of these things are out of their hands.
LikeLike
Omnipresent:
I argue that people need to take personal responsibility because realistically, nobody can do it for them.
How can you compel people to embrace values and behaviors which they haven’t chosen to embrace?
In a legal system that treats people as individuals with agency, you cannot. At best you can attempt to persuade them.
Is this an impossible task? I don’t have an answer to that question. Given that people can be compelled to value the latest fashion trend or consumer product, it doesn’t seem impossible.
The rest of your comment illustrates the challenges facing poor people from dysfunctional communities. I can readily understand the magnitude of those challenges.
Omnipresent:
Parents need to teach children. If good parenting has broken down, then I struggle to conceive how any program or budgetary line item can fix it.
Can you?
LikeLike
He’s a kickboxing cyborg scanner who can KILL PEOPLE WITH HIS MIND!!
LikeLike
@ Randy: “In a legal system that treats people as individuals with agency, you cannot. At best you can attempt to persuade them.” hahaha. your privilege is out of this world! United states legal system has not and is not looking POC as individuals. I’m going to ask a question. First when you read all the terrible things that has and currently happening to POC, do you feel sad, and outraged? there is no way to avoid a direct answer to this.
LikeLike
Randy is an asshole-that’s my comment. Randy,why don’t you tell your mother that YOU (you know, the average dumb,insensitive and head-up-his behind white male) that you aren’t sure that childbirth is that big of a deal-after all it can’t REALLY hurt THAT much since it’s been happening for millions of years.i want you to tell HER how painless YOU AS A MAN have decided labor in childbirth is. I want you to do this Randy-you know,insult her about the accuracy of her account of HER lived experience of being a woman in the throes of labor while having you. The reason I want you to do this Randy is so that she can dash your stupid brains out after you say this and she,despite her best efforts at self control and “objectivity” will decide she’s finally had enough of her devilspawn son’s combined arrogance and stupidity and feels ashamed that she brought someone so simulaneously stupid and smug into this world. And by this she will have done a great deed- she will have made it so that no one ever has to listen to your racist mewling and whining ever again. Randy,you are not nor will you ever be considered smart by people who really are. You will be seen for what you are- a great,howling fraud when it comes to brains.you are just NOT a smart guy.
LikeLike