By Kody Fairfield

The University of Wisconsin- Madison (UW) often finds itself immersed in political drama. Whether from its attachment to the Affordable Care Act, or the school’s incessant need for political correctness, it rarely shies away from controversy. This standard is being upheld by the introduction of “The Problem of Whiteness,” to its curriculum.

Unfortunately, that is not a misprint: the class is in fact named “The Problem of Whiteness.” It is taught under the African Cultural Studies program class 405, at the university’s College of Letters and Sciences, by Professor Damon Sajnani. The description of the class, as released by the school explains,

“There is no Negro problem in the United States,

There’s only a white problem.”

-Richard Wright “How does it feel to be a problem?”

-Du Bois Have you ever wondered what it really means to be white? If you’re like most people, the answer is probably “no.” But here is your chance! In Frantz Fanon’s famous Black Skin, White Masks (1952), his chapter “Look, a Negro!” interrogated the meaning and experience of coming to know oneself as Black under the constant scrutiny of the white gaze. It is an experience concomitant with W.E.B. Du Bois’s observation that under systemic racism, even well-meaning whites are constantly asking, in one way or another, “what is it like to be a problem?” But, Like Richard Wright’s quote above, philosopher George Yancy’s book, Look, a White! (2010), turns the question around, and rightly returns “the problem of whiteness” to white people. After all, since white supremacy was created by white people, is it not white folks who have the greatest responsibility to eradicate it? Our class begins here. We will come together with our socially ascribed identities of Black, white, mixed and other and, with the problem properly in its place we will ask ourselves and our allies, what are we going to do with it? Critical Whiteness Studies aims to understand how whiteness is socially constructed and experienced in order to help dismantle white supremacy. Our class will break away from the standard US-centric frame, and consider how whiteness is constructed globally, with particular attention to paradigmatic cases like South Africa. Whereas disciplines such as Latino/a, African, and Asian American studies focus on race as experienced by non-whites, whiteness studies considers how race is experienced by white people. It explores how they consciously and unconsciously perpetuate institutional racism and how this not only devastates communities of color but also perpetuates the oppression of most white folks along the lines of class and gender. In this class, we will ask what an ethical white identity entails, what it means to be #woke, and consider the journal Race Traitor’s motto, “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.”

The class will include readings such as: W.E.B. Du Bois on “The Souls of White Folk,” and an article authored by Prof. Sajnani on Rachel Dolezal.

Based on the evidence, it appears that this class has the sole intention of creating more racial division, and less unity and understanding. More unfortunate still is the fact that the presentation of this class is not all that shocking, as universities around the nation tend to be big on “safe spaces,” political correctness, “identity” politics and “tolerance” for a select few.

Recently, the class has come under fire from Republican politicians from the state of Wisconsin. CNN reports that Wisconsin Representative Dave Murphy, who is also the chairman for the committee on Colleges and Universities, has asked the school to stop the class on the grounds that it promotes racial division.

“I am extremely concerned that UW-Madison finds it appropriate to teach a course called, ‘The Problem of Whiteness,’ with the premise that white people are racist. If UW-Madison stands with this professor, I don’t know how the university can expect the taxpayers to stand with UW-Madison,” Murphy said in a official statement.

The University has responded to the criticism in their own official statement.

“We believe this [The Problems of Whiteness] course, which is one of thousands offered at our university, will benefit students who are interested in developing a deeper understanding of race issues. The course is a challenge and response to racism of all kinds,” it read.

Rep. Murphy has also criticized the school for allowing Prof. Sajnani to teach the class, explaining, “Even more troubling, the course is taught by a self-described ‘international radical’ professor whose views are a slap in the face to the taxpayers who are expected to pay for this garbage.” Murphy sourced his claim of radicalism off of previously tweeted comments about police brutality and the Ku Klux Klan. His sentiments were shared by Milwuakee Sheriff David Clarke who tweeted,

This is racism against white people. ALL racism is wrong. This garbage is being taught at a state funded school. https://t.co/f4Jo02xROP — David A. Clarke, Jr. (@SheriffClarke) December 21, 2016

Prof. Sajnani did responded to his “haters” by taking to twitter decreeing,

Good day haters! Keep fueling me with your Tomfoolery.The angrier whites are about interrogating their identity the greater is the need 4 it — ProfessorD.us (@profd) December 22, 2016

From all of this, the question should not be how do we stop the class, as students can make the decision to take it, and conversely not to. The question should be about the pervasive teaching bias on college campuses nationwide, the victimhood mentality that breeds tribalism, and about the blatant hypocrisy that is called “tolerance” or “understanding.”

This all begs a larger question: would this class be taught if it was called “The Problem of Blackness?” Would it be taught if it was a critical class about how classes such as Prof. Sajnani affect our culture, but dividing individuals into identities instead of individuality? Or to be more inflammatory, would they allow a class to be taught about the Ku Klux Klan?

The straight answer is obviously NO.

No, the University of Wisconsin- Madison, along with the majority of campuses in the United States, would never challenge the “safe space” of those whose opinions fit their narrative. They have no intention of brooding real critical thinking through honest dialogue. Rather, they choose to shout down, censor, and worse, they have been known to punish those who have individual opinions. Examples of this are rampant.

These actions create weak individuals, which build even weaker communities.

Let’s grow up. Let’s have adult conversations. Let’s understand that we are communities of strong individuals, not a single-thought collective. Our uniqueness is what unifies us all, not “identity” politics.