The valuable and thoughtful responses to my essay, “Whiteness and the Historians' Imagination,” illustrate the existence of a wide range of opinions on the emergence, claims, and methodologies of the whiteness genre in US and US labor history. Like Eric Foner, it is my hope that this scholarly controversy will mark the beginning of a much longer discussion that will draw in many more participants from history, American Studies, political science, and other disciplines. This is a debate that I believe is long overdue. While David Brody is certainly correct to note that readers have not been so “dazzled” that they could not be critical of whiteness scholarship, serious historiographical assessments of the genre's strengths and weaknesses have been scarce. This scholarly controversy, which aims at providing such an assessment, will not and should not be the final word on the subject. In this response, I welcome the opportunity to address a fraction of the many important issues raised by James Barrett, David Brody, Barbara Fields, Eric Foner, Victoria Hattam, and Adolph Reed.