Megan Burke

Justin Gross
Caroline Lanford
White Liberalism and Its Detrimental Effects on People of Color
Abstract
We often see white liberals investing copious amounts of time and energy into appearing as
racially sensitive as possible. This commonly manifests itself as liberal individuals disavowing the racist
actions of their peers, and atoning for the sins of their racist ancestors. On many social media sites, these
white liberals will call out the prejudicial actions of others, hoping to gain notoriety by appearing socially
conscious, or “woke,” to the public. They offer their time and services to charities and organizations
designed to provide aid to people of color within the country and abroad, and even gain positions of
power within these organizations. By doing this, white liberals hope to alleviate their guilt.
Despite these white liberals doing everything in their power to distance themselves from racism,
their actions are ultimately more racist than their bigoted ancestors and peers. Though their intentions
may be pure, their racism takes a far more sinister shape than any overtly racist act or verbal assault.
White liberals, in both their actions and their speech, manage to further perpetuate racist systems and
ideas rather than helping alleviate them. Their need to atone for yet distance themselves from the
atrocities committed by their ancestors only serves to place themselves at the center of dialogues on race,
rather than contributing to any real racial progress. Calling out their racist peers on the internet (and
identifying themselves as “woke as a result) is often only a method to gain some sort of social standing—
almost as if being “woke” is some sort of competition amongst liberal whites. Even actions as seemingly
harmless as charity work have roots in racism, as it is done in an attempt to temporarily ameliorate any
guilt held over the actions of one’s ancestors rather than than for the benefit of others. These actions show
the true nature of white liberalism. White liberalism is, at its core, a means to continue to place sorrowful
whites at the center of American society and racial dialogues. It serves to perpetuate racist attitudes while
halting any productive discussions one race halted in the name of protecting white feelings.
This paper explores the nature of white liberalism, its historical and psychological roots and
manifestations, and explores the ways in which it is detrimental to people of color in both the United
States and abroad.
Introduction
Racism, as it is commonly understood, continues to permeate our society and benefit those in
power while simultaneously oppressing racial minorities. Racism takes on multiple forms, including
larger systemic forces as well as personal attitudes.
 The term “systemic oppression” describes a form of racism that manifests itself in the institutions
of our country. According to Sociology professor and author Joe Feagin, America is a “total racist society
in which every major aspect of life is shaped to some degree by the core racist realities” (“Joe Feagin”).
This implies that every aspect of American life is dictated by an individual’s skin color. For white
americans, this is seen in the social and economic advantages offered to them in America; commonly
known as “white privilege.” The lives of American racial minorities are characterized by a distinct lack of
these privileges. In America, racial minorities have both their safety and economic security threatened by
this “total racist society.” Author and journalist Ta-Nehisi Coates describes the toll of this injustice on
black Americans in his book Between the World and Me:
The law did not protect us. And now, in your time, the law has become an excuse for
stopping and frisking you, which is to say, for furthering the assault on your body, But a
society that protects some people through a safety net of schools, government-backed
home loans, and ancestral wealth but can only protect you with a club of criminal justice
has either failed at enforcing its good intentions or has succeeded at something much
darker (Coates, 17-18).
The corrupt criminal justice system and continued police brutality against black people, specifically black
men, is only one of the threats against people of color caused by institutionalized racism.
Another effect of systemic oppression is the lack of socioeconomic mobility that can extend and
renew the cycle of poverty for racial minorities. The median wealth for white Americans as of 2013 was
$134,230, while for African Americans it was $11,030 (Jones). This disparity in socioeconomic status
stems partly from housing discrimination and the resulting lack of net worth held by African Americans.
This segregation and discrimination has also barred black people from educational and employment
opportunities and renewed the cycle of poverty by ensuring that these people lacked the opportunities
given to others (Williams and Williams-Morris, 247).
Another aspect of racism, on the more personal scale, is discrimination and prejudice. This,
especially as an everyday occurrence, can promote anxiety, threaten security, and lower the self esteem of
people of color. This everyday racism commonly includes microaggressions, “brief and commonplace
daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that
communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color” (Sue et.
al). These microaggressions can be anything from directing racial slurs at someone to excluding or
delegitimize the feelings of people of color (Pendler and Beverly). It has been argued repeatedly that
studies regarding discrimination do not sufficiently assess the effects of everyday and chronic
discrimination. In studies conducted with a scale measuring chronic discrimination, this treatment was
shown to adversely affect chronic stress and psychological distress in African Americans (Williams and
Williams-Morris, 255). Racism in America, including both institutionalized racism and everyday personal
discrimination, adversely affect the quality of life for people of color.
White liberals, typically viewing themselves as being “in strong opposition to [racism]” and
“accept the possibility that...inequitable workings of various institutions, may affect variability in group
experiences, resources, and ultimately, rewards” (Lalik and Hinchman, 534). Despite this more accepting
ideology, white liberals consistently undermine the interests of people of color and perpetuate racism.
Historical Context
A running theme in the history of American Civil Rights activism is an inherent disdain for or
distrust of white allies and liberals. Often times, the attitudes and actions of white liberals have been
actively detrimental to the advancement of racial equality rather than beneficial. This is commonly
reflected in the writings of numerous influential black activists and civil rights leaders. A transcribed
conversation between W.E.B. DuBois, Ray Baker, and Cary Wilmer reveals the speech patterns employed
by early white liberals in an attempt to diminish the legitimacy of DuBois’ statements. Baker and Wilmer
repeatedly scrutinize DuBois’ anecdotes on his experiences with racism and discrimination, claiming that
things like segregation are natural, and that DuBois’ experiences with overt racism are invalid due to his
status (Tuttle Jr.). Wilmer and Baker’s invalidation of DuBois’ first hand accounts of racism paint a clear
picture of the natural attitudes of many white liberals. Though the two did indeed have good intentions,
hoping to start a dialogue with DuBois after a lynching in Atlanta, their natural inability to sympathize
with or understand DuBois’ struggles with his race prevented any real progress from being made.
As times changed and the movement for black civil rights progressed in America, so too did the
attitudes of white liberals. Gone now was the outright denial of the racism that Black Americans faced. In
its place, however, was something far more sinister. Martin Luther King Jr. provides a biting
condemnation of white liberals in a section of Letters from Birmingham Jail, outlining many of the
harmful actions of white liberals. According to King, white liberals seek to maintain a sense of control
over Black Americans and their actions. This often comes in the form of setting timelines for the freedom
and autonomy for people of color, and taking positions of leadership in organizations and groups that
were, originally, meant solely for people of color (King Jr.). Malcolm X shared a similar view, arguing
that white people were best kept out of movements meant specifically for people of color. In his eyes, no
matter how well intentioned the white liberal may be, their presence in a movement centered around
racial equality would only serve to delegitimize the movement (X).
In both cases, and even in the case of W.E.B. DuBois’ experience with white liberalism, the
feelings of white individuals have always remained at the forefront of most discussions on race. When
white liberals were included in a conversation about race, those white liberals almost always attempted to
put themselves at the front of the discussion, and often shaped how it would progress. This desire to be at
the center of every discussion on race—to have the conversation retrofitted to suit their delicate
relationship with race—has actively prevented effective interracial dialogues for generations. This desire
is still intensely prevalent in the minds of modern white liberals.
White Centrality
The term white centrality refers to the need for the feelings of white people to be at the center of
discussions about race and prejudice. This need is the result of a subconscious idea that whiteness is the
default for race, and all other aspects of American culture. When white centrality is challenged, whites
tend to feel personally attacked and will lash out at the PoC, sometimes without knowing the true cause
for their anger (DiAngelo). This is such a common occurrence that Robin DiAngelo named the “threat to
white centrality” as a trigger for white people. In her article she writes that an example of this trigger
would be “Being presented with information about other racial groups through, for example, movies in
which people of color drive the action but are not in stereotypical roles, or multicultural education…”
(DiAngelo). This centrality manifests itself it many forms in American society. DiAngelo states that white
centrality is visible in “...our teachers; role-models; heroes and heroines; everyday discourse on “good”
neighborhoods and schools and who is in them; popular TV shows that are centered around friendship
circles that are all white; religious iconography that depicts god, Adam and Eve, and other key figures as
white…”(DiAngelo). Though any person can deny the existence of this centrality, that doesn’t stop the
white person or person of color from internalizing it, and normalizing it.
When white centrality is challenged, a white person who has not realized their privilege is likely
to lash out. This will manifest as verbal assaults (“You’re wrong because..”, use of racial slurs) or
defensive speech (“I’m not racist” or “I don’t believe in…”). Defensive speech is particularly detrimental
because it halts conversation on white privilege. Once a white person feels triggered by a racial
discussion, and begins to defend themselves as a result, any further conversation will be interpreted as
attacking the white person. What is perhaps the most ironic situation, is when a person of color calls out
white centrality in a given scenario, starts a dialogue about systemic racism, only to have the white person
get triggered and while denying white centrality, make the conversation about themselves again through
defensive speech. This type of denial and triggering is most commonly seen in whites who have not
undergone identity development, however similar types of triggers are still visible in racially educated
whites or “white liberals”.
White Guilt as White Narcissism
In the post Civil-Rights era, almost all whites are conscious of the atrocities that whites imposed
on people of color for centuries. Slavery is known by all white americans, however it’s the segregation
and systemic racism that came after—or, at least, the extent of this discrimination—that is disputed.
Liberals in particular will be unsure of how to act on the knowledge that their ancestors were racists, and
thus form a sense of guilt. According to Janet Helms, a research psychologist, this feeling, known as
white guilt, is formed as a result of identity development. This identity development can be broken down
into 6 stages, contact or pre-encounter, encounter or disintegration, reintegration, pseudo –independence,
immersion-emersion and, lastly, autonomy (Helms). These whites who are aware of their inherent
privilege now carry the burden of moral pain from benefitting of a system they know to be wrong.
Emma Lindsay writes in “Anatomy of White Guilt” that “many progressive white people, deep
down, probably worry they are racist due to their upbringing. This is painful to them, especially given our
complete societal ostracization of racists, and they don’t want to believe it.” (Lindsay). This guilt causes
progressive whites to take extreme measures in proving they aren’t racist. When a PoC points out a
comment or action that was racist or racially charged, the progressive white will focus on proving that it
was not, and that they are not racist by extension. Lindsay elaborates on this point saying, “If someone
brings up an incident with racism in it, their [white person] number one concern (as someone desperately
trying to cover their own racism, even to themselves) will be how can I show that I am not like this racist
person” (Lindsay). Progressive whites are so obsessed with proving that they are not racist that they will
inevitably make racial dialogues about themselves. Furthermore, many whites will try to separate
themselves from racism by doing charity work or volunteering for PoC rights movements. When whites
heavily internalize their guilt, and the idea that they must do something to alleviate it, they eventually
revert to their white centrality and make the issue about themselves. Often times, a byproduct of the
narcissistic guilt of white liberals is the need to fix the issues of PoC. This leads many progressives to
develop a “White Savior Complex,” in an attempt to atone for the deeds of their ancestors.
The White Savior Complex
The actions of a white person contributing to charity or doing a good deed for a person of color
specifically for their own well-being is commonly known as the white savior complex. This mindset
stems from white guilt, as oftentimes these so-called heroic actions are the result attempts to be the “good
white person” to alleviate the guilt of the actions of their ancestors (Gbadamosi). It can also be used by
these people to validate privilege (Cole).
As described by author Teju Cole, the white savior performs good deeds shallowly and almost
entirely for personal gain, whether it be emotional or material. Cole begins his article “The White Savior
Industrial Complex” with tweets he posted reacting to the Kony 2012 video. These tweets emphasize this
trivial alliance that white saviors establish with issues: “The white savior supports brutal policies in the Commented [1]: wc
morning, founds charities in the afternoon, and receives awards in the evening...The world is nothing but
a problem to be solved with enthusiasm.”
The biggest problem with the white savior complex, according to Cole, is the actual worsening of
the problems white saviors are meant to relieve. Cole points out that the actions of many Americans, and
specifically white people, in reaction to international tragedies, have the goal of making a difference. But
Cole emphasizes doing no harm over making a difference. Charities started by or donated to by these
white saviors often only treat surface wounds, leaving the true problems to continue to fester. These
incidents, including the abductions of Ugandan children committed by the Lord’s Resistance Army and
Joseph Kony (the basis for the Kony 2012 video), are products of larger problems, such as “militarization
of poorer countries, short-sighted agricultural policies, resource extraction, the propping up of corrupt
governments, and the astonishing complexity of long-running violent conflicts over a wide and varied
terrain” (Cole). White saviors typically do not address these concerns, mainly contributing with monetary
relief and service trips addressing current needs of those affected--actions that sound impressive and
likely attract media attention. In fact, not only do white saviors not address these concerns, but many of
these tragedies and incidents are actually caused by white colonialism and the aftereffects of this on third
world economies and communities.
White saviors typically draw in substantial media attention for their actions, another factor that
attracts white liberals to charity work. Nicholas Kristof, a columnist for the New York Times and a key
target of Cole’s criticism, has been accused of mainly focusing on American or European whites in his
column when traveling to other countries, usually third world, to report on recent events or calamities.
Kristof describes this as using a “bridge character” to capture the attention of an American audience. “The
moment a reader sees that I'm writing about Central Africa,” says Kristof, “for an awful lot of them, that's
the moment they turn the page...One way of getting people to read at least a few [para]graphs in is to have
some kind of a foreign protagonist, some American who they can identify with.”
Not only can this take attention away from the actual issue, but it can paint people of color,
specifically those in developing countries, as helpless and one-dimensional victims. In Chimamanda
Ngozi Adichie’s TED Talk “The Danger of a Single Story,” she describes just that, the closed-
mindedness that can occur from only hearing about something in one particular way, never looking at it
from another point of view. Adichie, born and raised in Nigeria, has experienced prejudice in her lifetime,
and has had prejudices herself. In her TED Talk she emphasizes, “My roommate had a single story of
Africa: a single story of catastrophe. In this single story, there was no possibility of Africans being similar
to her in any way, no possibility of feelings more complex than pity, no possibility of a connection as
human equals.”
The White Savior Complex allows white people to justify their privilege with shallow charity
work, undermines the issue of people of color, and creates a “single story” in which people of color,
especially in third world countries, are not worthy of respect, only pity.
The Bandwagon Effect
 As stated before, in the post-Civil Rights era, being educated or being able to navigate an
interracial dialogue is a highly desired skill. Generations Y and Z have coined the term “woke” to
describe this skill. Social media has significantly increased the popularity of the term. The idea of being
“woke” has allowed White people to contribute to racial progress in a small way, and then label
themselves as such. “#woke” has appeared in numerous posts and bios on social media in an attempt by
white liberals to appear more socially conscious than their peers. In a New York Times article, Amanda
Hess writes about
...a strange little cultural feedback loop that’s playing out again and again on social media. It
begins with, say, a white American man who becomes interested in taking an outspoken stand
against racism or misogyny. Maybe he starts by attending a Black Lives Matter
demonstration...At some point, he might be asked to “check his privilege,” to acknowledge the
benefits that accrue to him as a white man. At first, it’s humiliating — there’s no script for taking
responsibility for advantages that he never asked for and that he can’t actually revoke. But soon,
his discomfort is followed by an urge to announce his newfound self--awareness to the world. He
might even want some public recognition, a social affirmation of the work he has done on
himself. (Hess).
It’s this desire for recognition that has fueled the popularity of being “woke”. In the post Civil-
Rights era, it’s become trendy in many social spaces for white people to broadcast their racial awareness,
as doing so draws validation from other “woke” individuals. Often, comparing levels of“wokeness”
becomes a competition amongst white liberals. Maya Binyam wrote an article titled “Watching the Woke
Olympics” in which she describes said competition. Binyam says the Woke Olympics “is the multi-round
tournament to which these games belong. It’s players, almost all of whom are white, are disciples of the
refrain “stay woke,” a reminder to name racism when it appears, or, rather, to name fellow white folk who
are lagging behind.” (Binyam). Binyam goes on to describe the actions of “the best players” saying that
“[they] are those who accumulate the names of people who ‘are’ racist or of things that ‘have’ racism in
them. Woke Olympians, in other works, are frenetic curators of the most obvious aggressions; they launch
a series of condemnations — in tweets, Facebook statuses, album reviews — and call it cultural critique:
Macklemore is appropriative, Donald Trump is xenophobic, and all of their own well-meaning forefathers
were racist too.” (Binyam). These white people normalize the term “woke”, essentially stripping the term
of its original meaning.

The Bystander Effect

A term commonly associated with bullying, the bystander effect describes an individual’s
unwillingness to help a victim when other witnesses are nearby. Usually, this is due to a diffused sense of
responsibility for one’s actions when in a group setting. Typically, a bystander is associated with
witnesses to overt acts of violence, but more often than not, the effect can be applied to racial harassment.
Dr Joe Feagin conducted a study at a Western college, in which he asked participants to log any
racist encounters they have from fall 2002 to fall 2003. The results shed light on the subtle yet racially
charged comments that are said everyday. On entry said:
“ I was eating dinner with my friend (James) and my boyfriend (John) at Penny’s Diner. James
starts talking about his chicken and how it was “screaming.” We all start laughing at the remark
and (John) begins to tease him. (James) replies “Come on John, haven’t you ever sat at a table full
of black people?” John replies “No (James), I’ve never been to prison.” Everyone laughed,
including James.” (CITATION).
Too often, racist comments slide through a conversation and are defended as simple jokes in a modern
context. Through this, traditional racism seeps into the current post Civil-Rights movement society
without much detection.
Harmful White Liberalism
The main way in which white liberals actively harm communities of color is through subtle
racism. Subtle racism is an ambiguous and covert form of racial discrimination characterized by indirect
actions and words. It stems from negative views or attitudes held by an individual toward people of
different racial groups or ethnic backgrounds. Often, this form of racism is perpetuated by white liberals
who proclaim themselves to be champions of equality (Hanson).
This form of racism is commonly executed through the use of innuendos and microaggressions.
Microaggressions are central to subtle racism and to the ways that white liberals undermine their own
positions as advocates for equality. Rarely do White liberals actively show malice towards people of
color. Instead, they resort to these microaggressions in response to actions or appearances of people of
color that they perceive as negative or threatening (Sue et. al).
For example, Sue describes a situation in which he (an Asian American) and his colleague (an
African American) board a plane and are told they can sit wherever they choose. After taking their seats, a
group of three white men board the plane and are told the same. They sit in front of Sue and his colleague.
When the flight attendant begins her final sweep of the plane before takeoff, she approaches Sue and his
colleague and asks them to move to the back of the plane to distribute the weight evenly. This is an
example of a racial microaggression. Although the reason for her asking them to move was sound, she
singled them out specifically because of their race, although there were white passengers who boarded the
plane after them.
Another form of subtle racism is the use of and desire to use racial slurs by white liberals. Many
white liberals consider themselves able to use slurs like the n-word, a racial slur which has been used for
centuries to demean and dehumanize black people. The rationale behind this idea is that the slur is so
common in popular culture today that has lost its intended meaning and is no longer offensive. Therefore,
white people should be allowed to use it too (Watson). It is also argued that, as long as the word is not
used in a racialized context, it should not be considered racist or offensive (Blay).
These arguments are flawed on several levels. For one, they ignore the painful history of the slur
and that the n-word is still consistently used to degrade black people (Watson). Ta-Nehisi Coates explains
that there are many words that are not typically used based on our relationships to other people that are
unrelated to race. “My wife, with her girlfriend, will use the word ‘b****,’” he says. “I do not join
in...And perhaps more importantly, I don’t have a desire to do it” (Lopez). With this in mind, it is clear
that white people and non-black people of color simply do not have the right to say the n-word. As Coates
explains, many white people are upset at not being allowed to say it because “When you’re white in this
country, you’re taught that everything belongs to you.” The experience of not being able to say the n-
word “is actually very, very insightful. It will give you just a little peek into the world of what it means to
be black. Because to be black is to walk through the world and watch people doing things that you cannot
do, that you can’t join in and do” (Lopez).
A large part of the n-word argument stems from colorblindness, or is wilful ignorance to how
systemic racism affects the experiences of PoC. Many people, when proclaiming their lack of racism, say
“I don’t see color.” In their minds, colorblindness means treating people equally without regard to their
race or ethnic background. This, however, is not true. The colorblindness excuse allows white liberals to
deny their own internalized racism, while excusing them from unlearning it by stating that they treat
everyone the same, regardless of color (Sachs). Not only does it allow them ignore their own racism, it
also allows them to ignore institutionalized racism, and does not require them to face their own privilege.
Colorblindness asserts that race does not matter (Williams). Ironically, this is only true for those who are
so privileged that they see themselves as “unraced” (DiAngelo). The only way to unlearn racism and set
about correcting racist institutions is to acknowledge the social ramifications of being a person of color in
America, and for white people, this means acknowledging their own privilege.
Conclusion
It starts with white centrality. The idea that white is the default manifests itself into white people,
continuing even after their identity development. Once the white person realizes the weight of their
ancestors, they feel an immense guilt. They may try to alleviate this guilt by contributing to a cause or
attending a protest, but the underlying white centrality will manifest into the White Savior Complex. This
complex allows a white person to receive media attention for work they’ve done, when they’ve either
done nothing, or have made the problem worse. With the newfound media of the era has also come the
normalization of the term “woke” which is used by whites to label themselves as not racist without having
to confront their inner biases. This contributes to the invalidation of people of color who state that no
good is being done. On an everyday scale, many racist comments will slip by, even if two whites liberals
are talking. Whites have a tendency to not call out others racist remarks, further perpetuating racism
through the bystander effect. Racism is also perpetuated by white liberals through use of racial slurs and
microaggressions. Many white liberals believe that they can use the n-word because they’re “woke”
enough, completely ignoring the dehumanizing nature behind the term. Though the term is used widely in
mainstream media, it does not remove the derogatory context of the term. Through these methods, white
liberalism continues to place distraught whites at the center of all racial discussions. A white person
needs to fully understand their history and privilege in order to start helping people of color and they need
to learn how overcome their deeply rooted narcissistic biases.

Works Consulted
“The Anatomy of White Guilt.” Racial Equity Tools,
www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/anatomy_white_guilt.pdf. Manuscript.
Arellanes, Abby Steven. “I Don’t Want to Be ‘Woke’ Anymore.” Latino Rebels,
www.latinorebels.com/2017/01/06/i-dont-want-to-be-woke-anymore/.
Ashlee, Aeriel A., et al. “We Are Woke:A Collaborative Critical Autoethnography of Three
“Womxn”of Color Graduate Students in Higher Education.” International Journal of
Multicultural Education, vol. 19, no. 1, www.ijme-
journal.org/index.php/ijme/article/view/1259/1172.
Baldwin, James, et al. “Liberalism & the Negro: A Round-Table Discussion.” Interview by
Nathan Glazer. Commentary, 1 Mar. 1964, www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/liberalism-
the-negro-a-round-table-discussion/.
Bell, Carl C. “Racism: A Symptom of the Narcissistic Personality.” Journal of the National
Medical Association 72.7 (1980): 661–665. Print.
Blay, Zeba. “Why Explaining ‘The N-Word’ To Non-Black People Is So Damn Exhausting.” The
Huffington Post, www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-explaining-the-n-word-to-non-black-
people-is-so-damn-exhausting_us_5910cb2de4b0d5d9049eef86.
Cole, Teju. “The White-Savior Industrial Complex.” The Atlantic,
www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/the-white-savior-industrial-complex/254843/.
Collins, Shae. “5 Bad Habits “Woke” People Need to Break.” Ebony, www.ebony.com/news-
views/stay-woke-bad-habits#axzz4yGkXKSJr.
DiAngelo, Robin. “White Fragility.” International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, vol. 3, 2011, pp.
54-70.
Gbadamosi, Faridah. “The Hard Truth That Good White People Need To Hear About
Charlottesville.” Bustle, www.bustle.com/p/the-hard-truth-that-good-white-people-need-to-hear-
about-charlottesville-76372.
Hess, Amanda. “Earning the ‘Woke’ Badge.” The New York Times Magazine,
www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/magazine/earning-the-woke-badge.html.
“Joe Feagin.” Discover the Networks,
www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2202.
Jones, Janelle. “The Racial Wealth Gap: How African-Americans Have been shortchanged out of
the materials to build wealth.” epi, www.epi.org/blog/the-racial-wealth-gap-how-african-
americans-have-been-shortchanged-out-of-the-materials-to-build-wealth/.
King, Martin Luther, Jr. “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.” African Studies Center, University of
Pennsylvania, www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html.
Lalik, Rosary, and Kathleen A. Hinchman. “Critical Issues: Examining Constructions of Race in
Literacy Research: Beyond Silence and Other Oppressions of White Liberalism.”Journal of
Literacy Research, vol. 33, no. 3, Sept. 2001, pp. 529–561.
Lindsay, Emma. “White Guilt is actually White Narcissism.” Medium,
medium.com/@emmalindsay/white-guilt-is-actually-white-narcissism-ac6a29e9e995.
Lopez, German. “Ta-Nehisi Coates has an incredibly clear explanation for why white people
shouldn’t use the n-word.” Vox, www.vox.com/identities/2017/11/9/16627900/ta-nehisi-coates-n-
word.
The New York Times. “Q3: NYTimes Columnist Nicholas D. Kristof Answers Questions.”
Facebook, www.facebook.com/nytimes/videos/424427794200/.
Pendler, Paul, and Phillip Beverly. The Racism Root Kit: Understanding the Insidiousness of
White Privilege. Sachs Center, sachscenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/PaulPendler-Root-
Kit.pdf.
Sachs, George. “10 Ways White Liberals Perpetuate Racism.” The Huffington Post,
www.huffingtonpost.com/george-sachs-psyd/10-ways-white-liberals-pe_b_8068136.html.
Sue, Derald Wing, et al. “Racial Microaggressions in Everyday Life.” American Psychologist.
Tuttle, William M. “W.E.B. DuBois’ Confrontation with White Liberalism during the Progressive
Era: A Phylon Document.” Phylon (1960-), vol. 35, no. 3, 1974, pp. 241–258. JSTOR, JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/274549.
Tuttle Jr., William M. “W.E.B. DuBois’ Confrontation with White Liberalism during the
Progressive
Era.” Phylon, vol. 35, no. No.3, Summer-Fall 1974, pp. 241-58.
Watson, Elijah C. “Bill Maher’s Faux Wokeness And The Problem With White Liberalism.”
OkayPlayer, www.okayplayer.com/culture/bill-mahers-faux-wokeness-white-liberalism.html.
Williams, David R., and Ruth Williams-Morris. “Racism and Mental Health: the African
American Experience.” Ethnicity & Health, 2000, pp. 243–268.
Williams, Monnica T. “Colorblind Ideology Is a Form of Racism.” Psychology Today,
www.psychologytoday.com/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-
racism.
X, Malcolm, and Alex Haley. The Autobiography of Malcolm X. New York: Grove Press, 1965.
Print.
Zamudio, Margaret M., and Francisco Rios. “From Traditional To Liberal Racism: Living
Racism in the Everyday.” Sociological Perspectives, vol. 49, no. 4, 2006, pp. 483–501.