If you've ever heard someone say 'I don't see colour', or you think maybe you’ve said something along those lines and you're not sure why it’s a little bit racist, then this is for you.

It's essential to note before we get into this topic or any part of the Anti-Racism and Decolonisation conversation that we're all always learning in this process; People of Colour and Allies alike. We all have different roles, capacities and responsibilities, but we are all still learning. The lived experience of People of Colour, (by which I mean Black, Indigenous and People of Colour) will no longer be diminished or silenced by fragility or umbrance, but we too are all still learning how to decolonise our own lives and advocate more effectively for sovereignty and racial justice. 

The number of friends and colleagues, racial justice advocates and anti-racism trainers who have reached out to me recently for consultation and guidance with unpacking phrases like this, tells me that we are ALL still learning. 

And when BIPOC Anti-Racism trainers can say that they're still learning, try and imagine how ridiculous and absurd it would sound for an ally to take offence at being corrected or educated. Let that sink in for a minute, and take that message with you from this article, if nothing else.

Allies, please know that you will absolutely, 100%, without a shadow of a doubt, make mistakes in this learning process, and it's really, really important to not be precious about that. It is essential to not take offence or become defensive when corrected or lovingly assisted on this learning journey. To think that you won't make mistakes is to think you know all there is to know on the subject, and that would be absurd. And definitely not a productive or constructive mindset to bring into the racial justice movement.

Anti-Racism trainers with decades of experience will still make mistakes in their personal and professional lives, and they will continue to do so and continue to learn from them; just listen to Dr Robin DiAngelo if you want to know more about that. 

Now, let's get into the topic of - "I Don't See Colour"

To analyse this phrase and understand the impact it has both on individuals and on society, I have decided to analyse it in four parts, as shown below. 

1. How does this phrase come across?

2. What function does it serve in a conversation?

3. How does this phrase serve the person saying it?

4. What is the long term impact of these words?

Each one of these points can be elaborated into Infinitum, but I will be brief with this particular analysis, and offer further articles to explain specific points in greater depth at a later date. 

1. How does this phrase come across?

Well, the fact is, we all see colour, including people of colour. "I don't see colour" is not something any person of colour ever really says. Though the sentiments of racial unity and 'Oneness' are held by many, that's not what this phrase is saying; consider how it's only ever people who identify as 'White' who say this particular phrase in this way? 

Consider how in India, and other parts of the world, skin bleaching cream is used in an attempt to feel more socially acceptable; African-American grandmothers speak of how they will worry more for certain grandchildren than others knowing they're at higher threat of police violence due to the complexion of their skin; minority groups in any society will be fully aware of the other minority groups and conscious of what differences exist between their respective experiences; (we all see and acknowledge 'the gradient'). 

Further to the fact that 'race' or 'colour' and even the gradient of colour is a very real part of the daily lives of billions of people, research has even shown that even being literally blind, is still not a barrier to recognising differences in race and culture. People who cannot see with their eyes are still able to acknowledge and understand variance in culture from non-visual keys.

Not only is there sufficient evidence to suggest that recognising 'race' or 'colour' does not require eyesight, but further to that, the idea of being 'not prejudiced' is debunked by the vast body of research that speaks of unconscious racial bias in adults and children alike, and even with children of colour towards people of colour. To understand that part further see Effects of #SystemicRacism or #InternalisedRacism.

So it becomes clear that the sentiment of not seeing colour is not just a lie but a scientifically proven impossibility. But further to that, it is offensive and contrary to a person's lived existence, it tries to deny a person's very real and tangible physical existence, their appearance, their cultural heritage, their reality and distinctness; something that all people should all be able to acknowledge, assert, and share openly with joy and confidence.

Even more deeply damaging than the denial of a person's physical distinctness and their cultural heritage is dismissiveness and insensitivity around the lived experience of all people who have been subjected to systemic racism, in a society that has disadvantaged them at every conceivable level and in every possible moment. 

This statement of not seeing race or colour may seem as though it is benign, innocent and well-meaning, but it's actually just another attempt at the erasure of cultural heritage and diversity; a mechanism which the colonial project employed with such devastating repercussions that Indigenous people all over the world are still reeling from its effects.

It's not too hard to understand how the erasure of culture, language, diversity and uniqueness can come across as offensive and insensitive; I assume everyone reading this is familiar with the whole colonialism, slavery, White Australia policy, One Drop policy, white-washing of history thing, yeah?

After five hundred years of cultural genocide, it would be just great if there were no more attempts of acculturation and assimilation, for the comfort and ease of the ruling class. 

*NOTE* Offering the above explanation to someone who says they "don't see colour" will sometimes trigger them into saying something along the lines of: "but that's not what I mean", or "you're misunderstanding my words", or "that wasn't my intention", right? It's usually the response we get in everyday conversations and training workshops.

And this is when we can look into the theme of narcissistic traits, denial of harm and victim-blaming for further clarification. I will elaborate at a later date on this theme of not listening to people and insisting that intention is what matters and not the outcome; it is essential to remember that one's intention does not dissolve culpability. 

But for now, we will continue with this discourse analysis and look into what function the phrase serves in the context within which it is being used.

2. What function does it serve in a conversation?

If we look at the words, in the context that they are used, we see that they don't usually just pop up in a vacuum, but rather when the topic of racial justice is being discussed. And it's not usually used to admonish an openly racist person in explaining that all people are equal and should be treated with respect and love. No, the context in which it comes up, and the context within which we are unpacking it, is in that of a conversation with other Allies and People of Colour, about racism and racial justice. 

A person saying that they don't see race or colour in a conversation about race relations and racial justice is not the same as a bumper sticker that reads "Humanity is One" or a t-shirt that proclaims "There's Only One Race, The Human Race"; right? That's not what we're talking about here, and no one is that naive to not understand the nuance here. 

Much like the case of the statement 'All Lives Matter' being technically correct, but when spoken as a response to 'Black Lives Matter,' it becomes a retort and dismissal, and not a proclamation of universal oneness. That much is very clear.

The other two examples of "Humanity is One" or "There Is Only One Race" are both proactive, and standalone statements which act to create a positive impact on society and lead to unity, oneness and togetherness. They are statements that we put out into the world, outside of the context of a conversation about systemic racism, and they have a productive outcome.

In the context of a conversation about racial justice and systemic racism, the phrase "I don't see colour" serves a function... it is not harmless or benign, and it certainly is not helpful.

Think about it; what does it DO in that moment? What function does it serve? What is the effect it has on the dynamics of conversation? 

It acts to derail the conversation... 

It is not a comment that furthers the discussion on how to address racism in society but stifles it instead. And behind that intention of derailment, we see how it acts as a defensive mechanism for the person saying it. 

But why would a friend or ally ever want to derail the conversation, you ask? Well, because it's a round-about way for them to say "I'm not racist" or "I'm progressive", or "I'm not at fault here" or "can we move on from this conversation, because I'm not comfortable discussing the disadvantages and injustice that you have had to overcome to get yourself to exactly the same place as me". 

And though all of the above may be perfectly true, it is all entirely beside the point and not at all helpful. Further to that, it is slightly narcissistic when you consider that in response to "Let's discuss systemic racism" a person would say "I'm not racist" or "I'm not at fault here" as if their personal 'progressiveness' outweighs the lived experience of racism for billions of other people.

It is really straight-forward to understand how all words spoken, have an underlying purpose or intention in their expression, and that is what a Discourse Analysis seeks to understand; what's actually being said here?

Subconsciously we are all aware of the underlying purpose of our sentences when we speak, and to communicate effectively and comprehend clearly, we should decipher the meaning and respond appropriately to the subtext. Failing to do so leads to miscommunication, misunderstanding and confusion. 

3. How does it serve the person expressing it?

So now that we have recognised that the underlying function of the statement "I don't see colour" or "I don't see race" is to derail the conversation, we are left with the next question; why would a person feel the need to derail the conversation when they are themselves 'not racist'?

Why would someone feel the need to express that they are 'not at fault' or that they are progressive and open-minded when in the middle of a conversation about systemic racism? 

Why, when discussing the historical and current injustices faced by Indigenous populations or African-Americans, or the treatment of refugees, would a person share that they don't see race or colour? 

What is the point of this derailment?

Well, because it's an inherently uncomfortable conversation to have as it shines a light on things we would rather not have to look at; a derailment is an act of self-preservation. The truth is we know, consciously or unconsciously, that failing to engage with issues of racial justice is neglectful, and our inaction in the past is what contributes to our shame in the present moment. The derailment of the conversation by asserting one's innocence or blindness to colour relieves us of that uncomfortable feeling that comes up when discussing racism. This derailment and deflection, allows people to feel OK about their lack of engagement with an issue.

This sentiment of not seeing race or colour doesn't just work to dissolve and remove the discomfort and squeamishness that comes up, but more damaging than that, it's an attempt to absolve any need to act or relieve any moral obligation to engage.

This attempt to assert ones "progressiveness" along with other examples like anecdotal evidence of proximity to colour, such as nieces and nephews or friends and colleagues, or some unnamed 'Indigenous Elder' they once met, or a one-month volunteering trip to Bangladesh, are all broadly referred to as virtue-signalling.

Virtue-signalling can range from naive attempts to form a connection or establish some sort of 'credentials', or it can be damaging and destructive statements like "I don't see colour" that derail and deflect. 

4. What are the long-term impacts of the sentiment, “I Don’t See Colour”?

Let's consider this same type of sentiment as expressed in a very different but parallel context; the movement for Gender Equality. Imagine you're in the middle of a conversation around the wage gap or domestic violence, or patriarchal control of the female body etc.

If a male-identifying person were to say in that context, "I just don't see gender" or "I treat everyone the same", how naive, narcissistic and tone-deaf does that sound? 

Even though this person does not see the deep gender inequality in our society, or even if their 'personal values' advocate for equality and equal opportunity, it doesn't negate the reality and lived experience of gender inequality. It is not a respectful or intelligent thing to say in that context.

So let's apply that same logic to racial justice. 

These types of dismissals are not only offensive and insensitive, but they are also counter-productive and oppressive. 

In short and simple terms, "I don't see colour" dismisses the reality of a person's physical existence, denies their lived experience of racism, derails the conversation on racial justice, and deflects our responsibility to undo systemic racism.

Though technically, it is not a 'racist' thing to say, there are many ways in which it supports, condones and perpetuates racism. The phrase "I don't see colour" is insensitive and dismissive of cultural diversity and the nuances of our existences; it is wise to remember that though the construct of 'race' is not real, the concept of culture still very much is... 

It is also both naive and narcissistic in that it wishes to ignore the lived experience of billions while establishing one's moral high ground and 'progressiveness' as a response to the injustices faced by others. But worst of all, it is destructive and counter-productive in that it allows systemic racism to continue by virtue of the fact that it derails the conversation and stifles the possibility of progress and change. 

The belief that it absolves moral obligation is false; it does not. The idea that it helps to establish trust or comradery with people of colour is again wrong; it raises alarm bells. The premise that it is a progressive and open-minded way to see the world is also misguided; it's obvious it's in retort and not in support of the movement for racial justice. And finally, the assumption that it is benign or innocent can also be dismissed once we understand all the damage and hurt that is done. 

Saying "I don't see colour" does not make someone a bad person, it just means that there were misunderstandings that needed to be clarified. Having resorted to saying these words in a conversation about racism does not make a person a monster, it just means they felt threatened and insecure. Using this statement as a way to deflect shame and deny fault, does not make a person racist per se. Still, it does allow racism to continue in society. 

So, there you have it. An explanation on why we should not express that sentiment in that particular way, and enough analysis to help us explain to our friends and family why they should avoid that phrase and deeply reflect on where the sentiment is coming from.

We might not have created racism, but we certainly are responsible for dismantling it. And even if dismantling it is too much to ask of some of our friends and family, at the very least we can lovingly explain to them how they can ensure they no longer support or perpetuate it.

With Love.

#RacismStopsWithMe

#AntiRacismTraining

#BlackLivesMatter

#IndigenousLivesMatter

About the Author

Erfan Daliri is a social change consultant and educator with a Masters in Communication for Social Change from the University of Queensland. He has worked for 20 years in a diverse range of areas, including participatory community development, social justice advocacy, cross-cultural communication, settlement services and systems thinking for social change.

He is the founding director of Newkind Social Justice Conference, programme coordinator of the National Unity in Diversity Conference, and consults and advises on systems change, communication design and racial equity for companies, NGOs and universities across the world.

Erfan is passionate about empowering organisations and communities to address issues of social, environmental and economic justice and to help them build a more inclusive, cohesive, sustainable and equitable society.