The row centres around the exhibition ‘This is Colonialism’ and the museum’s decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display
Police officers are gathered in front of the Zeche Zollern museum in Dortmund, the focus of what social networks are describing as a racism scandal.
The row centres around the exhibition ‘This is Colonialism’ and the museum’s decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display. For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition
The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory, but to reserve a safe space for reflection for non-whites.
I would have been much more sympathetic if it was to prove a point, ie “This is the sense of exclusion experienced by those under colonial oppression”, but no, it’s just some real yikes-worthy stuff 😬
How could they think anything good would come out of doing that. All they do is give ammo to the other side.
It’s also just plain racist.
When you’re so anti-racist, you come full circle and enact segregation again.
We also have women only days in saunas. Is that a problem for you too?
You act like there hasn’t been a push for gender-neutral spaces for years now.
There’s no good answer to the problem and the far-right uses that to always “win”.
The museum creates a space for people of color to view the displays without having to worry about angry racists threatening them with violence. This makes racists angry and violent.
If you buckle and open up the space, who moves in? Why, the racists of course! The space is no longer safe and people are intimidated out of it. The racists don’t want them seeing it, so now they don’t get to see it.
If you don’t buckle, what happens? You get 600 “the left are the real racists” comments on social media from people privileged enough to have never been pushed from any space.
Its the same formula whenever schools have LGBT spaces without homophobes or gyms and trains are “women only” to avoid being leered at and sexually assaulted.
If anyone reading is having trouble relating to these feelings, imagine watching pornography with the actors parents standing behind you – whatever their feelings may be towards their daughters work, you’d definitely be more comfortable if they weren’t there.
I can’t imagine most racists would even be aware of this exhibition if the museum hadn’t striesland effected it into the news cycle with this decision, which benevolent or not, us discrimination.
The museum creates a space for people of color to view the displays without having to worry about angry racists threatening them with violence. This makes racists angry and violent.
If you buckle and open up the space, who moves in? Why, the racists of course! The space is no longer safe and people are intimidated out of it. The racists don’t want them seeing it, so now they don’t get to see it.
… have you ever been to a museum before?
They’re usually pretty prompt in firmly asking you to leave if you make other people uncomfortable with your behavior.
It’s worth considering that it’s not always about behaviour. Presence is also a factor. People are going to act and speak differently depending on who is around. This is especially true for charged topics such as discrimination and colonialism. I wouldn’t be surprised if people affected by colonialism engage with the exhibit differently during the times where they’re alone in the space.
A parallel experience I can relate it to is being in LGBTQ spaces. When I’m with other LGBTQ people, I express myself more openly. In mixed company, I’ll keep things to myself. Because I’ve learned that that is what is safest. And it’s not the behaviour of the specific cishet people in the company causing that discomfort, so there’s no behaviour to call out. But nonetheless their presence still has an effect because of a lifetime of previous experiences.
It’s worth considering that it’s not always about behaviour. Presence is also a factor. People are going to act and speak differently depending on who is around. This is especially true for charged topics such as discrimination and colonialism. I wouldn’t be surprised if people affected by colonialism engage with the exhibit differently during the times where they’re alone in the space.
You could say that about any demographic or combination of demographics though. Asians who are only amongst other Asians likely discuss the issue differently than in a group of Asian and black people. WoC likely discuss the issue very differently amongst only other women. Hell, black people from Africa likely will discuss the issue very differently amongst themselves than in a group mixed with black Germans. Should there separate ‘African black people only’ days? ‘Women only’? ‘Men only’? Separate ‘Asians only’ days?
The concept of a safe space is one for private clubs, not public venues. Admittedly I bring a pretty strongly American bias into this seeing as that’s what anti-discrimination law in the US is based on.
You could say that about any demographic or combination of demographics though. Asians who are only amongst other Asians likely discuss the issue differently than in a group of Asian and black people. WoC likely discuss the issue very differently amongst only other women. Hell, black people from Africa likely will discuss the issue very differently amongst themselves than in a group mixed with black Germans. Should there separate ‘African black people only’ days? ‘Women only’? ‘Men only’? Separate ‘Asians only’ days?
I mean… Yes and no.
We can get more specific about demographics. But it’s certainly not any combination of demographics. We usually place specific importance on demographic divides that feature particular conflicts or differences in institutional power. Like the one that an exhibit on colonialism would be focusing on. Not all combinations are going to have strong effects.
But more to the point, of what relevance is this? Just because there are many different places where we could draw a line, doesn’t mean a line cannot be drawn somewhere based on people’s best efforts.
We can get more specific about demographics. But it’s certainly not any combination of demographics. We usually place specific importance on demographic divides that feature particular conflicts or differences in institutional power.
Do you not think there is a considerable difference in the institutional power of black Europeans in comparison to black Africans throughout the history of colonialism? What about mixed-race people? Should they be excluded due to the differences in institutional power afforded to them under colonialism? Their presence might change the conversations being held. Am I to be counted as white because I pass? Is that not simply colorism? Or are we playing blood quantum games?
But more to the point, of what relevance is this? Just because there are many different places where we could draw a line, doesn’t mean a line cannot be drawn somewhere based on people’s best efforts.
The point of this is that the premise that “People will discuss the issue differently or more freely in a group of only X” is not particularly compelling in and of itself as a reason to exclude individuals from a part of a public venue on racial criteria.
If the line was drawn at black Africans only, and not allowing black Europeans to participate, what would your reaction be then, do you think? If there was a day for whites only, how would you feel?
Do you not think there is a considerable difference in the institutional power of black Europeans in comparison to black Africans throughout the history of colonialism? What about mixed-race people? Should they be excluded due to the differences in institutional power afforded to them under colonialism? Their presence might change the conversations being held. Am I to be counted as white because I pass? Is that not simply colorism? Or are we playing blood quantum games?
As I haven’t said anything about those topics, you’re tilting at windmills here.
The point of this is that the premise that “People will discuss the issue differently or more freely in a group of only X” is not particularly compelling in and of itself as a reason to exclude individuals from a part of a public venue on racial criteria.
You’re free to think that. I was just mentioning that there is more than just behaviour to consider, in response to your previous comment that inappropriate behaviour will get you removed from the museum.
Ultimately, this whole thing is a nothing-burger. A single museum has set aside a 4 hour timeslot on one day a week for people of colour to enjoy a single exhibit about colonialism.
There seems to be reasons for choosing to do so, even if one disagrees with them. And it’s not some significant public exclusion that would degrade one’s quality of life.
Been kicked out of a few have you? Or have you just happened to have repeatedly seen unruly people in them often enough to be able to confidently say they’ll promptly be removed?
Sounds like it isn’t a very safe place for some people.
Been kicked out of a few have you? Or have you just happened to have repeatedly seen unruly people in them often enough to be able to confidently say they’ll promptly be removed?
I am - or rather, was - a constant visitor to museums of various kinds. Ones with no admission fee and small museums suffered more from the problem, though I wouldn’t say it was ever common.
Sounds like it isn’t a very safe place for some people.
“Issues of disorder or creating public unease are promptly resolved.”
“Sounds unsafe!”
???
They were still there in the first place. Is a bar that has 2 stabbings a night “safe” if the people with knives are promptly removed?
Your “there’s nothing to worry about” comment just showed there was something to worry about.
They were still there in the first place. Is a bar that has 2 stabbings a night “safe” if the people with knives are promptly removed?
People being escorted out for being disorderly is very far from a stabbing, and furthermore, there are no public venues of any kind that lack disorderly conduct entirely. I don’t really know what you’re trying to get at here.
Your “there’s nothing to worry about” comment just showed there was something to worry about.
So by that standard, if there are any incidents of disorder in these narrowed racial colonialism discussion groups, we should regard them as unsafe and seek to further narrow the criteria? For the safety of the people there, who are clearly unsafe from the presence of any incidents of disorder, of any magnitude, ever.
I kinda wish people cared as much about the actual discrimination minoritised people face that affects their ability to live their lives fully, as they do about restricting entry to a single museum exhibit one day a week.
I don’t care about the actual act itself of restricting white people from some museum for a day. In a bubble? Who gives a shit.
But this kinda stuff just diminishes the credibility of legitimate movements meant to actually improve equity and equality. It sways the general public into thinking that rights activism is immature and unreasonable.
It gives the AfD sort of parties of the world really easy ammo and is basically just handing them red herrings served on a silver platter.
Shit is dumb and counter productive.
I strongly disagree with the argument that we should moderate our behaviour based on what the people who hate us might say about us.
Bigots and fascists don’t need to be “given ammo”. They just make up their ammo no matter what we do. They lie, all the time. It doesn’t matter what we do or don’t do, they will find a way to feel aggrieved. Changing our behaviour based on what they might say only allows them power and control over us. And it limits what we can do to actually help the marginalised people they target.
We need to be better about where we spend our efforts. We should focus on helping people, regardless of what bigots say. It’s a bad habit of moderates, to spend all their time arguing and negotiating with bigots, rather than supporting the people bigots target.
Regardless of what right wingers say, people in the middle – who frequently sway elections – look at news like this and I don’t think it paints the left in a positive light.
Well I think it’s a losing strategy to care how to right-wing portrays your actions. And I think that caring for minorities is more important than pandering to conservatives and even to some extent to moderates. Especially since historically rights have been won even when the progressive movements fighting for them were extremely unpopular, in other words pandering to the sensibilities of moderates would have lead the movements into stagnation.
The museum claims the objective is not to be discriminatory
discriminatory
“treating a person or group differently from other people, because of their race, gender, sexuality, etc.”How are they treated differently?
that’s… the sole subject of the article.
the museum’s decision to restrict white people from entering a small section of the display
Ok, so? They arent treated differently. They are just not allowed to access a certain space at a certain time because the business owners said so.
Can they now not get a job because they couldnt access the space at that certain time?
Thats not treatment. Thats just business.“They arent treated differently.”
“They are just not allowed to access a certain space at a certain time”
That’s called being treated differently… I really don’t know what else to say.
Can they now not get a job because they couldnt access the space at that certain time?
Can a Cheetah run really fast? What relevance does that have to anything?
Truly, white people are the most oppressed race.
Now they can not… checks notes: Access a safe space for bipoc that is open 4 hours a week!!! Truly disgusting!!!What! You support Child Slavery?!
See, I can also make up imaginary strawman arguments. You reason like a five-year-old.
You dont even reason. you just keep repeating the same argument you had 2 posts ago.
Its not discrimination. youre not missing out on anything. you just cannot access a safe space for bipoc. you can also not enter any womens shelters. are you now arguing that you are being discriminated against for being the wrong gender?
Ah. Tokenism at it best.
Tokenism (n): The policy of making only a perfunctory effort or symbolic gesture toward the accomplishment of a goal, such as racial integration.
You get a news headline and feel so good that you did something…
This kind of self defeating bullshit from the “progressive” wing of politics needs to stop. This is textbook throwing a stick into your own bicycle spokes tier nonsense.
How is that even legal in Germany?
As long as it’s not a public institution they have “Hausrecht”, meaning they can decide who is allowed to enter and who isn’t*.
^^^*Terms ^^^and ^^^conditions ^^^apply
I’m curious how they are enforcing this. Is it self-reported or is there someone at the door determining if you’re un-white enough? I’m half white and racially ambiguous, so not sure I’d make the cut lol. On the other hand, my grandparents were immigrants who lived under colonial rule.
Frankly, the Irish, Saami, Palestinians, and lots of native Americans are all colonized people who might be considered or visually identified as white. That said, I’m in Germany, it can be racist af, so I absolutely understand how a safe space might be desirable.
For several months now, Saturdays at the museum have been reserved for black people and people of colour to explore a colonialism exhibition
Ohhh noo. Anyways…
What’s the blood quantum for being allowed in, do you think?
Strange response to racism.
Heaven forbid that us white people feel the tiniest modicum of discomfort. I sincerely hope it’ll help foster a sense of empathy for those that continue to suffer real substantive harm.
Also, I find it pretty unlikely that the people who would cry about this tiny concession are the same people who would be interested in going to this exhibit anyways.
Racism is either wrong or it isn’t.
That’s massively over-simplified.
Discrimination is bad. But not all discrimination is the same. Ubiquity and power dynamics play a huge role in what makes racism so damaging.
And, unfortunately, sometimes correcting for past discrimination can itself involve discrimination.
That’s massively over-simplified.
No, it’s really not. Racism is either wrong, or it isn’t. There’s not a middle ground here. That not all incidents of racism are equally bad does not mean any incident, large or small, of racism is not bad.
And, unfortunately, sometimes correcting for past discrimination can itself involve discrimination.
There’s nothing more permanent than a temporary solution, as the saying goes. That is precisely why all solutions, even imperfect ones, must be built on solid principles. Affirmative action, for example, is built on solid principles (unless one is some right-libertarian market fetishist, but fuck them), because it seeks the integration and inclusion of all races, even though it currently predominantly benefits non-majority groups. It seeks a better world, a world where people aren’t treated differently based on who their parents or grandparents were. Racism based on the idea of inferiority is far worse than racism based on the idea of collective ethnic guilt - but both are still bad. Racism based on collective ethnic guilt is worse than racism based on a simple but fundamental ‘othering’ of a racial group - but both are still bad.
Considering that people, incorrectly in my opinion, refer to affirmative action as racism constantly, this seems like an odd comment to square.
That’s because people are shitheads and I hate them.
Affirmative action is simply the implementation of the view that society should be comprised, in as many areas as possible, of demographics which reflect the demographics of society as a whole - ie that prejudices should not be allowed to dictate the construction of the institutions which rule our daily lives. It does not ‘other’ anyone - it welcomes them into areas previously closed off. And the principle would, in theory, defend a white minority same as a black or Asian minority. It is a way forward, a better world, a more united world, not a less united one.
I would love to go to an exhibit on colonialism and its vast crimes, and I am upset by the matter on principle. I don’t know why everyone is suddenly interested in running apologia for racial segregation.
It’s not unavailable to you. You can pick literally any other time but that four hours, like any other well adjusted adult would do.
It’s not unavailable to you. You can pick literally any other time but that four hours, like any other well adjusted adult would do.
You would say this, then, about a whites only 4 hours at the same museum, then, right?
Are you this opposed to women’s shelters not allowing men in order to provide a safe space for women?
No, because women’s shelters are not a public venue to begin with.
No, as that would be completely ignorant of the contextual reality of the situation.
‘Context’ is not a ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ card. Malcolm X’s pre-Mecca racism, for example. was far, far less heinous than the racism of the America he lived in due to context - but that does not mean it wasn’t bad. Likewise, othering a race with benevolent intent is still, at its core, othering a race of human beings.
And in any case, the point is meant to refute the idea that “you can pick literally any other time”. That you can pick another time does not mean that the circumstances which force you to do so are right. Even if you still think it is correct to continue this practice, that “It’s only 4 hours” is not a valid argument regarding whether the principle of the thing is moral or not.
“The other water fountain is right there, boy.”
Nice false equivalence. That’s not what’s going on here.
Just letting you know what you sound like.
Take a moment to think about what brought you to defend discrimination based on skin color. Then consider if that’s a positive for humanity.
Here I thought we settled this bullshit already but I guess some have some catching up to do. We really were too lax on the South when we beat their ass.
All the people in this thread standing up against “racism” for the most minor of limitations to the dominant racial group.
The proportion of comments here against an exhibit on colonialism being reserved 1 day a week for the victims of colonialism is disturbing.
And this is just a manufactured rightwing “controversy”. The museum had been doing this for months (it’s literally just 4 hours a week) without issue until a radio station associated with Germany’s far-right saw something they could spin as anti-white to rile up the “oppressed” white whiners on far-right Twitter.
The German version of this story has more information, but frankly it should have been obvious to all these “reverse racism” whiners that it was just a BS rightwing controversy regular people shouldn’t give two shits about. The associated party, AfD, is Germany’s far-right racist party, which has been ruled in court to be legitimately suspected to be a “threat to democracy”.
The fact that it became an issue “on social media” only after a white journalist documented that they were refused admission sort of tells you the whole story here.
Nobody cared, until angry racists made a big deal about it. It’s likely that, on balance, the vast majority of people don’t care and aren’t paying any attention to the racists. But if it involves angry racists, it leads, because that shit generates clicks and controversy. JOURNALISM.
You can fix racism with racism trust us
This is incredibly dumb, but tbh I understand their intention. In Germany you’ll meet the worst kind of racists.
Once in Starbucks, a white
cuntwoman filled my coffee mug with trash while I was in the bathroom… Less extreme, but I think every Asian descendant was at least once told to go back to China. I have been mocked for my Asian eyes, etc.Seriously, many of their grandparents were okay with locking Jews in camps, the population as a mass grabbed and shared Jews’ properties, and then officially killed them in gas chambers.
You sound pretty racist yourself when you generalize the whole german population like that, based on one asshole messing around with your coffee …
I didn’t. If that’s your take from this text of mine, I don’t know how I could explain that to you.
You’re not alone in being called a bigot here for describing bigotry. It’s absolutely nuts.
So, maybe I edited my comment and they are replying to an old version which could’ve indeed been poor, so I don’t blame them too much.
Anyway, I’m finding out that those people who complain on the web often can’t read. Especially the type who thinks in black or white basis. They can’t see nuance. If people do see nuance, they often wouldn’t attack unless I write something really stupid.
Simply put, that type of people can’t be argued with. They won’t see the complexity of reality. Hence, it follows that they can’t read. Maybe they are teenagers who love to write on Steam threads or something (god forbid, I love that too).
So I often tell them they are wrong, with some explanation, yet also tell them I don’t intend to convince them (because they aren’t ready) and maybe that they have to read my text again (which they can’t).
I actually see the value in providing a safe space for oppressed or marginalized communities, such in the way that women’s shelters don’t allow men.
I don’t know what the answer is be here, but it’s not nearly as black and white (no pun intended) as commenters here seem to believe.
This seems fine to me? Why shouldn’t they have a specific day to go and reflect without me being there?
Maybe that’s the only day of the week you have available to go. Maybe it doesn’t help inclusionary cultural practices to intentionally separate races.
Oh no i cannot go to a museum in the only 4 hours that i am free during the whole week. Discrimination!
“No, it’s okay, our ‘Whites only’ event is only 4 hours a week.”
LMAO, snowflake cannot handle not being welcome at an event theyre not welcome at.
“But muh racism”
“Hurr durr i cannot go to the safespace”
You sound like a little whiny bitch. Just go sunday loser. Or any of the other days theyre open.“But muh racism”
Sorry, I didn’t realize I was talking to a racist. I’ll be sure to remember that you’re a far-right chud in the future.
Yeah, come back when we are talking about an Event you actually want to go to. You’re just repeating far right talking points.
Theres also safe spaces for women. Womens shelters. How come you’re not ranting and raving about not being allowed in there?
Is that not discrimination?
Isn’t that also worthy of you to make an argument?
How about white only spaces that are white only 24/7?
Where’s your activism about them?Yeah, come back when we are talking about an Event you actually want to go to. You’re just repeating far right talking points.
Not that I have the chance since international travel is expensive, but I would love to go to an event on the crimes of colonialism in a museum. Sorry that I find it deeply uncomfortable that I would either be excluded on the basis of my race, or included because my blood quantum was the right ratio to please the council of racial purity?
Theres also safe spaces for women. Womens shelters. How come you’re not ranting and raving about not being allowed in there?
Because women’s shelters exist for the purpose of providing aid to a specific demographic. They aren’t public venues. Why is this so hard to understand?
How about white only spaces that are white only 24/7?
Where’s your activism about them?What the fuck space in the modern day is white only? I ask at least in the US.
It’s not even a day, it’s 4 hours Saturday morning.
“Why can’t we exclude some races sometimes guys?”
