silveradept | Tapping the Great Wisdom - The inherent racism of assimilationist rhetoric?

First of all, thanks muchly to those of you who responded to the recent Tapping of the Great Wisdom. That prompt is still open, even though the previous set of suggestions have been collecteed and sent on. Soo....

Time to tap the Great Wisdom again! It has been brought to our attention that we have not been pulling weight appropriately in discussion of the ill effects of assimilation or why rhetoric that demands such assimilation has implied racism and frowns heavily on those they believe won't or don't assimilate. As part of our continuing quest for knowledge (Nollij) and polymath status, we're asking for your best resources on the subject. While We Are Not Unbiased, if you are of the opinion that there is no inherent racism in the argument, I will accept your sources as well. A good mix of 101 and Advanced Class resources will be most helpful to myself and to anyone else who feels the need to Get Educated on the issues, and those bringing their scholarship and scholarly resources to the yard will do everyone favors.

Then, underneath the cut, a short journey of mind wherein we struggle with conceits, societal expectations, personal failings, and the way we talk about stuff, although not necessarily in that order or in equal parts.
So, when someone says that your understanding of something is deficient, there's several reactions that can possibly happen, and in this case, I think I covered some standard ones. F'rex:

Defensiveness: "Did that person just say I was stupid?" Absolutely not. Misinformed, maybe, not aware, definitely, but not stupid. Most of the time, if someone's taking time out to try and educate you on something like that, it's because they believe you're bright enough to understand what's going on and will be able to correct the errors. If the response you get is something more akin to "I can't believe you just said that!" and a full stop, or "Clearly, this person is a troll", then they're calling you stupid., because they're not even taking time out to try and correct you. (They may also be on a Nuker warpath, but from collected anecdata, being Nuked is the surest way to ensure that nobody learns anything until after the fallout has settled, because everybody is entrenched in their bunkers and on high misinterpretation alert.) Manifestations of this position can include the F-Bomb-ing Tone Argument. When part of your tradition is that all things are perfectable, the presence of an error or a defect triggers either defensiveness or despair, depending on how big the gulf is. Neither is particularly helpful to bridging the gap and getting the missing knowledge.
Disinclination? Inertia? (could be Privilege): "Ugh. Why should I learn about this?" This emotion, though, is often tied in with Defensiveness. For someone starting out on the path of Getting Educated, though, there's always some resistance there. You know those people, the ones in the mandatory demonstrations who look utterly disinterested in the whole affair? That's this principle at work. A good instructor can make bad material engaging, but a bad instructor can kill even the coolest of topics. In my own case, the longer I stay in the polymath tradition, the briefer those flashes get, because knowledge becomes more interesting intrinsically. I'm fairly glad that this was entirely related to the defensiveness spot. Once I got to the point of "No, you're not being personally insulted", any resistance to picking up the information vanished with it.

There's also the Nitpicking position, where it seems like the person trying to get your attention is pointing out things that are, from your persepctive, too small to care about, even though they mean important things to the person trying to educate you. It's things like using the wrong pronoun for someone. Or pulling out the Bigger Fish To Fry, Your Point Is Inconsequential argument, both of which usually serve to generate heat rather than light (and then you do get called stupid, because after a while it becomes clear that you're either too lazy to change or deliberately doing it to insult them). Didn't run into this at this point, as we strive to be a more useful linkspammer/news source to our audience. Delivery is important for content to be absorbed.

So, it's hard to be able to get someone information that they will actually listen to, remember, and then apply to their daily lives. I realize that, and I appreciate people who try anyway, despite the knowledge that the chances aren't great that thing will work out, and are great that you will be dismissed, ignored, or actively hostile'd at when trying to help make the world a better place.