(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Jonny writes to me on a private message and says that he will pat me if he sees me on the street. He writes that I am "an ugly Negro asshole," and asks me to leave the country.
Andreas had a different style. Night to a Saturday – it was 03 – he found it quite natural to send me a message telling me that I was a hypocritical racist because I had written that Kjetil Rolness used a "white language". Don't you agree? asked Andreas. No, I answered. Then Andreas said he no longer had any respect for me. He told my wife, who was involved in the discussion, that we should be grateful that we get the opportunity to be married here in Norway. Yeah, like he's the one who made it. He used the real name of my wife – a name she does not use on Facebook – when he wrote her message. Not really in a threatening tone, but obviously to let her know that he knew who she was. The effect of that was that we felt a little more secure in our own home.
Power Bias. Andreas and Jonny send me private messages after participating in a public debate about everyday racism. They both demand something from me both, but express it in very different ways.
I would assume that most of us can agree that Jonny poses a real problem for the speech room for vulnerable groups. Many would also agree that I did the right thing in reporting him to the police.
Andreas, on the other hand, has a greater disagreement. He does not threaten. But he requires a reply from me at three in the night from my private message inbox. He sees it as his right to get an answer when he has read something he dislikes, and it is within his jurisdiction that I should enter into a private exchange of views with him to regulate his sense of resentment. If you speak publicly, you should withstand such messages and comments. You will even stand there as long as the debate demands of you.
While many view racism as a "card" one can draw, or a curse word, there are others of us who are unable to relate to racism at the abstract level.
Racism is a historical phenomenon and a construct that naturally changes the form of expression as time goes on. It's not just something that can be associated with an individual or organization with violent or explicit back thoughts. It is a system that is expressed in our everyday practices. A continuous process that makes me "the other" with a negative sign because my skin, mother tongue and birthplace dictate it. While many view racism as a "card" one can draw, or a slander, some of us are unable to relate to racism at the abstract level – and who experience racism as an everyday element of food procurement, job meetings and training. It is a skew of power that becomes a natural consequence of a "we" – majority Norwegians – being given the opportunity to be neutral, to be the norm.
This can be compared to the fact that women systematically earn less than men. Of course, one can look at individual factors. For example, when you say that women are less able to negotiate wages and believe that this is why the difference exists. However, this model of explanation omits all the small influences that, in sum, form a society where men are seen as more worthy than women.
The guest and the host. Social anthropologist Marianne Gullestad referred to "us" and "them" as the host and guest: Ultimately, the host can always put his foot down, and the skew of power is always underlying.
It is especially when I challenge this boundary and take up space as if I were a host and not a guest, that I get reactions. They come as a grip to put me back in place, as a reminder that I as a guest do not have the same room of expression.
Both Jonny and Andreas want me to be grateful paranormal gifts I have been allowed to live in Norway – again as if they themselves have provided for it. A gift that makes me, and maybe even my children, eternal debt slaves. For no matter how much tax I pay, no matter how good Norwegian I speak and no matter how many years I have lived here, I am expected to be grateful for the gift: the guest room.
Then some might think that is true. True, I am still a guest in a country owned by those who are genuine Norwegians: the ethnic Norwegians. If so, this is what we should discuss – and what it means to divide us in this way.
Allemann Victory. So who are Jonny and Andreas? They are men who themselves believe that the content of their comments is informative in debates. They see it as, among other things, the dissemination of knowledge about their group or ideology. Not only are they individuals, they also form a pattern of social control. A pattern that threatens many women and minorities to silence in public space.
What is unique about our time is that the public has in many ways become public ownership. You can even be editors and publishers of your own opinions. Everyone also has a digital mailbox that any Jonny and Andreas can write to anytime of the day. And although we must take these individuals seriously, we also need to shift our focus to the social, cultural and political climate otherwise in society.
