Steele's insight

Dr. Helen reviews White Guilt, here.

Here's the quote which caught my eye:

Oppression, says Steele, does not push people to rage or revolution. "Anger is acted out by the oppressed only when real weakness is perceived in the oppressor. Anger in the oppressed is a response to perceived opportunity, not to injustice." This makes sense: people who act out angrily usually do so when there is no threat of being punished and every indication that their anger will get them what they want. This is not always such a bad thing, of course, but black anger and the responding white guilt is not the psychological dynamic of freedom. It is a deal between the power hungry left and black leaders who care more about being thrown a bone and offering fake opportunity to their followers than they care about freedom, autonomy and excellence.

This is truly insightful, independent of the rest of Steele's thesis.

Start with the basic principle underlying Steele's point, which is not dependent on any distinction between "civilization" and "oppression". Or "good parenting", for that matter.

Both civilization and oppression constrain behavior. People don't like constraints on their behavior (they like constraints on everyone else's behavior). If and when the authority behind such constraints is perceived as weak, violence occurs. Violence against oppression, or violence against civilization, all the same.