The west is no longer a geographic location but a cultural “in group” that is allowed humanization and complexity– where those in the “in group” are allowed to be a source of cultural and intellectual revolutionizing. Non-westerness (and by extension non-whiteness) is no longer a natural or neutral phenomena but a state of dehumanization and victimization where the west ensures that any cultural or ideological revolutionizing is swept under the rug.
Those who are victimized by the west through imperialism have resulted in a unique dehumanization where one’s culture should only be experienced through the lens of western fetishization. The culture being consumed is not seen with complexity, whereas being in a “western” state means having the privilege of the world acknowledging it's periods of victimhood and victimization.
The west has painted itself as a machine capable of generating revolutionary thought while also being able to proudly embrace one’s history. People that have a heritage of whiteness are allowed to be impoverished yet complex and human. To be seen an imperialist victim, victimhood is all that you are characterized as, due to history and culture setting implications of ideological thought being rooted from a specific set of physical traits. Meaning that any revolutionary thought is marked as exceptionally western in a non-western individual, and said thinking should not belong to the victim. The victim must be marked by the gift of having a kind of western genetic mutation or influence. All interactions will begin and end with a unique suffering– as it is all that you are defined as.
Non-whiteness and its subjugation from the west is seen as something deserving (like a feral animal whose presence is tolerated in the western world). The west sees non-whiteness as something that should be controlled and even degrading to interact with. A non-western “wildness” and “untamability" holds a kind of pervasive dehumanizing force with everything it touches. This means any lens of consuming non-western culture will be either blindly glorifying or condemning all aspects of the culture instead of on a holistic level. Westernization in contrast is seen as both harmful for its previous actions and how it conquered through superior thinking but a martyr for enduring the non-western human to be tolerated and integrated within their society.
When one exists in a group defined by non-complexity and victimhood, it is subconsciously assumed that all of those who exist in said group are complicit or even deserving of their victimization. Whereas existing in the group that is the victimizer, it is characterized by a complexity to be able to be harmed and to enact harm.
In the end, any characterization that flattens a group of people as all good or all bad is inherently dehumanizing as complexity is a gift given to those who had the power to protect evidence of diverse accounts. It is the result of resource expensive endeavors to provide continuous exposure for multiple narratives of a single history.
I’m aware of the “white” ethnic groups that have been systematically oppressed, however this writing is coming from the lens of globalization, specifically American globalization. Where whiteness is not a trait shared among diverse ethnic groups but a category used to elevate a group of people. This perspective is a downside of writing this entry due to its limitations (alongside my other entries that come from an American perspective) however I still feel like looking at the lens of victimhood as some kind of dehumanization for its sole identifier of a person rather than seeing an entire individual. It’s a kind of analysis that I don’t see discussed too often.