How is "whitness" the way you describe it not just a very complicated and convoluted way of talking about racists and conservatives?

The whole problem with putting the label "white" on it is that it implies people who look white. Yet once you dig into it it becomes apparent that is not even what it means. It is more about power structures of the established society working against certain minorities.

This gives the impression that there is a power struggle between whites on one side and everybody else on the other side.

That is just pure nonsense and obsures a complex topic. I have talked to a lot of people about issue related to racism and how especially black people get treated in America.

What I notice is that what primarily separates people is their political leanings not their skin color. Some of the most racist people who have insisted most strongly on rejecting the stories African-Americans tell have frequently not been white themelves.

What binds these people together is typicall a strongly conservative ideology.

This insistence on using the term "whiteness" changes what is really an ideological debate into a debate where one assumes everybodys views and positions are governed exclusively by their skin color.

If we are to move beyound racism, then why invent termology which focuses so much on skin color?

Imagine instead of talking about Nazism and Fascism we began talking about "whitness." Instead of focusing on specific concrete ideologies we have suddenly turned the whole thing into an argument that implies all white people are somehow bad.