Defending whiteness indirectly: a synthetic approach to race discourse analysis

Abstract

This article examines the discursive method utilized by a sample of white college students in the United States when engaging in racetalk. Findings reveal myriad contradictions within their responses. It is suggested that these contradictions are not coincidental; rather, they serve two important functions for the speakers: first, they aid the interlocutors in their impression management (i.e. their image of a nonracist); and second, the rationalization of the racial order. Utilizing an integrative approach, it is argued that this form of racetalk, whether intentionally or unintentionally, defends the white racial frame. This racetalk allows respondents to (

Mixed Messages

“…It has also been used in looking at configurations of race and racism and other social issues (Wetherell and Potter 1992;Foster 2009). As well as analysing the spoken word in research interviews, it has been used to look at formal written texts (Edley 1993) and in formal spoken texts such as television broadcasts (Potter 1996).…”

In love and war: racial disharmony and America's discordant racial articulations in the wake of the Jeremiah Wright media spectacle

“…This articulation also minimizes, if not eliminates, a sense of guilt around racial oppression by positioning African Americans as the cause of their own oppression. Invariably, this move rationalizes a problematic racial order that privileges some groups over others (Foster 2009). It is reflective of ignoring the ''hidden wound'' of racial oppression in the US (Berry 1989: 4), a position that reiterates CRT's claim that Whites have had the privilege to daily ignore the material conditions of a racist hierarchy while persons of color must daily bear the burden materially, mentally, and emotionally (Delgado and Stefancic 2001).…”

Representations and Remembrance: Tracing Civil Rights Meanings in the Narratives of Civil Rights Activists and Hollywood Filmmakers

“…Today, new ideological resources are available for guiding race talk: posing as "color-blind," de-emphasizing the collective memory of black oppression, and insisting that race is not longer significant. This pattern of race talk constitutes a new discursive action, which is characterized by white ambivalence towards the ever-continuing significance of race limiting opportunities for black Americans and other minorities (Bonilla Silva 2006;Foster 2009). This new discursive action is a manifestation of both the "New Racism" (Bonilla Silva 2006) and distorted communication (Habermas 2003).…”