We asked a ‘most dangerous professor’ about the Problem with Whiteness class

Professor Joe Feagin, a sociology professor at Texas A&M, has been focusing his research on racial and ethnic studies in this country, working with inequality issues.  He was deemed one of the most dangerous professors in America with his research in 2006.  With the national attention the ‘Problem with Whiteness’ class at UW-Madison has received, we reached out to Professor Feagin.

Why do you think this class, of any like it’s kind, is getting negative national attention?  You mention a class in University of Connecticut received similar feedback, but why do you believe it is still an issue twenty years later?

“The main reason is that the Trump campaign and related events have liberated a lot of the white conservative/white supremacist groups to attack research-based courses on racial issues.  Trump attacked so called political correctness and opened up the commentary for racial commentary on academic courses based on research”

Do you believe the name of the class should be changed?  Is that an issue?

“It’s a qualified yes.  The reason it’s qualified, is there are 200 faculty members that have taught a course with a title something like that.  He had to battle faculty at the university, politicians in Connecticut.  Some journalist sat in on the course, and saw just how rigorous and academic this course was.  Even some of the white students who were skeptical told the media that it was a very hard, very rigorous fact-based, empirical course and they liked it.  One journalist went in skeptical and saw how much reading, study, fact analysis the students had to do, and the professor won the debate.

“A young black faculty member without tenure, and that’s gutsy.  Especially now that there’s this whole movement of white supremacist and their ideas coming back into vogue.”

If this class was named something less provocative, do you think it would have stood a chance?

“‘The Problem with Whiteness’ is pretty tame compared to titles like ‘White Racism’, for example.  The titles are accurate!  If you don’t like it, come in, I’ll show you all the research.

“And if you title a course something that the opponents of it consider too flamboyant a title, they will attack it.The men who fear change would be the attackers.  But it doesn’t go away if you just want to name it correctly.  The ‘Problem with Whiteness’ title has been around for at least 22 years; I’ve been teaching classes like this for 22 years.  These courses and titles have been around for two decades, so why then is there new attack on them?

“The class you’re talking about has famous authors and great readings, nothing especially radical.  There’s one popular author, Tim Wise, but he’s a scholar, I’ve helped him with his research over the years.  The most famous, W.E.B. Du Bois is one of the most famous African American authors/social scientists.  We name our main career award after him.  This is not some extremist group plotting the overthrow of the government.  It’s absurd to say that this course is radical based on the readings.  And this is a junior faculty member too, that’s gutsy.  Some faculty who have taught a class like this and come into tenure get resistance.”

Why is this class important to UW-Madison curriculum?

“There are a variety of reasons why there are so few courses.  Pressure from even alumni who don’t want racism, sexism, critically analyzed because the people of power have created these systems.  They don’t like critical analysis of it.  It takes some guts to teach subjects like this, and it’s risky.

“And these courses on white privilege and white racism are really grappling with the data on the systemic racial repression.  And there aren’t very many of these courses.  If you don’t have tenure, free speech protection, it is dangerous to do critical analyses on things that are problematic in this country.  These courses are fairly rare because of pressure on faculty members for all kinds of punishment and lash back.  Just my research over the years has earned me some death threats.”

What would you tell those fighting against this class?

“I have been doing this research for 54 years now, and my own views on this come out of research, empirical research in the field.  I’ve interviewed 1000s.  My 80 grad students and I have gone into the field to observe racial discrimination in the field, mostly by white people.  That’s just a fact.  That’s not an opinion, it’s based on research.  So in this current debate, somehow in this country we have gotten away from research and data and facts to anyone’s opinion that goes against anyone’s research on a topic.

“If you have some power, particularly true in politics, they can make a claim on something based on no data.  This is a big danger for this country.  I am 78 and I cannot believe we have dropped so far that someone without any knowledge of the subject is balanced with someone who has no knowledge of the subject.

“You can describe it as white racism, or white racial oppression, it is an 83% of this country’s 409 years has been extreme racial oppression.   Elite white men of power created this system, and that’s an empirical fact.  So we have been an officially free country for 48 years, about 17% of our history.  Now if you understand this, you understand why it is hard to change, to truly become an egalitarian society.  Because for 20 generations, we whites built up huge amounts of unjust enrichment.  And we pass that on to later generations.”

Do you have any thoughts about Senator Steve Nass taking this chance to defend masculinity in the same vein?

“We have something called the 1st Amendment and something called Academic freedom.  It’s one of the great things about this country.  The only people who count are the ones who argue on the basis of facts, not opinion.  There are 1000s of courses taught in this country where some crazy person believes that his opinion trumps fact.  What’s the big deal about that?  That sounds pretty tame to me, even if it’s not based on research.  If someone wants to offer a course debating masculinity, I hope it’s based on research, but that’s what universities are for.  Even if i don’t like the perspective of the professor, it’s our First Amendment right.

“But it sounds like the politician hasn’t looked into the course in detail, and he’s tossed off the top of his head, unreflectively, this kind of political response because he knows there’s a base out there that believes all these dangerous professors are making our children think.”