This thread about race, class, organizational stability, and "changing things from the inside" is perfect.

And this. This is why some people are like "She wasn't supposed to do her job? How else was she supposed to advance?" And the rest of us are like "Fuck her advancement."

If changing a system means you have to, for an undermined period, buy into the worst parts of that system for even a CHANCE at dusting up around the margins maybe find another way.
If you feel as if the lives of some of the most vulnerable people are worth sacrificing for the sake of your (political) career, you aren't "lifting as you climb," you're just out for self.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Robert L. Reece, PhD

Robert L. Reece, PhD Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PhuzzieSlippers

18 Oct
Slavery was SO MUCH worse than people imagine.

I wrote my dissertation on slavery and it is incredibly traumatizing. In grad school I had to dramatically shift my entertainment habits to cope. No more dramatic or realistic shows and movies. Just escapism.
Slave narratives, accounts of lynching, civil war aftermath...brings me to tears still.
Honestly, slave economics was one of the worst parts for me.

Imagine someone buying you on a payment plan. Imagine someone using you as collateral for a loan. Imagine getting repossessed.

It was a whole other level of dehumanization for me.
Read 4 tweets
23 Jun
Reviewing racial inequality with my students today, including around a dozen charts, tables, and graphs to give them a picture of the depth and breadth of the problem.

I figure it might be useful to share some of them below.
"the great equalizer" education isn't all that equalizing. White folks earn more than their black and Latino counterparts at every education level.
Even when black families reach the middle class, most of their kids are downwardly mobile.

Of black children born into the middle income quintile, 69% of them fall to the bottom two quintiles as adults.
Read 10 tweets
30 May
I do, however, feel it's important to contextualize the "non-violent" protests of the 1960s that people like to romanticize.

The matches were not nonviolent for the sake of it. They were not nonviolent because they respected property or had dignity or maturity.
Nonviolent marches as a primary movement tactic emerged at the intersection of a specific geopolitical and technological moment.

The country was in the middle of the Cold War and televisions were becoming a more important tool of propoganda. Color TV was emerging.
Organizers sought to leverage the American propoganda war with the Soviet Union.

They knew that American law enforcement would react violently to their protests. So they dressed up in their Sunday best and hit the streets (often shadowed by armed security, just in case).
Read 8 tweets
15 Dec 19
Reminder that the "micro" prefix in "microaggression" isn't a measurement of the size of the slight.

It means it happens at the "micro" level, ie between individuals. This is in contrast to the "macro" level, which refers to social structures and institutions.
It's the difference in "microeconomics" and "macroeconomics."
Microeconomics is about individual decisions.
Macroeconomics is about large scale forces.
Both important.

This is the problem when terms spread through the public faster and deeper than the definitions.
This comment was a reply to this tweet. It was intended to address a common misconception that microaggression means events that are small and insignificant.

I wasn't trying to explain all the contours of the term, just offer one important clarification.
Read 4 tweets
28 Aug 19
Gonna pull some expertise as somebody who has written and published about Dave Chappelle.

The problem with comedians like him now is that they think railing against "PC culture" puts them outside of the mainstream when it really doesn't. That's status quo behavior.
Dave Chappelle was great because his critics were once innovative and creative. Problem is society changes. And if you don't change with it positions and opinions that were once forward thinking and thought provoking become tired and worn.
When you make your mark as an outsider taking shots at those on the inside, then you become one of the insiders, it takes thought and introspection to maintain that same level of poignant critique. You have to ask yourself whose side are you on.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!