If you are
reading this because you think it is going to be about some evil soldiers and
missionaries giving small pox laced blankets to Native Americans in the 1800’s,
you will be disappointed. In fact, that
episode never happened, and falsely claiming that it did is one of the reasons
that Ward Churchill got drummed out of academia.
But I
digress. The point of this essay is racism, and how we might end it. The connection with small pox will be
revealed in a little bit.
Early on in
the Obama administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said we are a “nation of
cowards” for not having any real dialogue about race relations in this
country. I agree with him, it is a shame
that we don’t talk much about one of our biggest problems. But then, he and his boss haven’t done much
to move things along, have they?
I think the
biggest obstacle to an open and honest discussion about race relations is that
we are burdened with a flawed definition of racism. While you can look it up, and find a bunch of
definitions that say judging folks or favoring them based on their ethnic
heritage is racism, the definition the intellectuals use says that racism is a
combination of prejudice and power. This
means institutional power, like in government, corporations, etc. So that second definition, the flawed one
that we are burdened with, basically says that racism is something that only
white people do. Thus, we are stuck with
a situation where racism is considered the sin of all sins, but only white
people can commit it. You can see this perspective confirmed at websites like
stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com. Be
forewarned though, if you go there be ready for a convoluted, hard to follow
logic.
The
connection with small pox comes up now, because as far as we can determine,
small pox has, happily, been wiped from the face of the earth. After years of careful research and hard
work, that horrible, deadly disease has been eliminated.
This
pertains to racism since we arrived at this happy outcome regarding small pox
only because we went after it no matter where it showed up. Even though some ethnic groups have less
resistance to it than others, the only way we could completely eliminate it was
to identify and attack it wherever it showed up. If we had dealt with the physical disease of
small pox in the same way that we are dealing with the emotional disease of
racism, by trying to stop it only when it infects white people, then small pox
would still be a scourge on humanity.
Today, in the
world as a whole (America
included) racism is still a scourge, and I think that is due, in large part, to
the fact that we are afflicted with that flawed definition. The analogy with small pox goes further. Since, at least in intellectual and
governmental circles, it is thought that only white people can be racist, the
problem isn’t even looked for in other cultures, and it is mis-identified in
white culture. It is as if small pox had
been thought of as a disease affecting only whites. Not only would cases in other groups be
ignored, but other diseases, such as measles, chicken pox, pimples, and even
just freckles occurring in whites would send the authorities into frenzies of
outrage, shouting about small pox.
That is how
it is today with racism. A lot of
innocent, non-racist comments by whites send authorities and pundits into
frenzies of condemnation and ridicule, and yet some deeply racist stuff, such
as the kind of things Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton say gets accepted without
comment. Words like ”Chicago”,
“Hussein”, “inner city”, “angry”, “Constitution”, “food stamp president”,
“experienced”, and etc. are considered (by some liberals) coded racist words
when uttered by (conservative) whites, and yet Farrakhan can call Judaism “a
gutter religion” and he still gets accepted in polite company. This kind of
uneven playing field will not bring about reconciliation, but it will keep the
scourge of racism and racial division alive.
The
solution is for the mass of people to ignore the intellectuals, and use some
common sense. The best definition of
racism I know of says that any thinking which determines the moral weight of
any action based on the ethnic heritage of any of the participants is racist. Consider how that definition gets applied. Slavers said it was okay to enslave them,
because they were black. It was okay to
lynch them, and deny rights, for the same reason. Native Americans were denied rights because
they were Indians. The perpetrators couldn’t be prosecuted, because they were
white. In all these examples, the moral
weight, the right or wrong of an action, was determined based on the ethnic
heritage of the participants. That’s
racism.
Now,
consider a more modern example. A young
man of one ethnic group gets assaulted by three young men of another group,
because of race. If the single guy is
black, and the three are white, we all agree it was racism in action. But if the single guy was white, and the
three were black, the intellectuals say it wasn’t racism, because the blacks
don’t have institutionalized power. I
say, that if you use my definition of racism, the intellectuals are being
racist, because they are determining the moral weight of an action based on the
ethnic heritage of the participants.
So that is
where we are today, unable to make much progress toward ending racism because
we are saddled with a flawed definition of racism that is itself essentially
racist. Look into it. Even though it is
hard for normal folks with common sense to believe; that really is the
definition that intellectuals and government bureaucrats use.
If we
started using a different, more honest definition of racism, I think we would
find that it exists in every group. Yes,
we might find that white folks have more of it than others, or maybe not. But if we did start honestly identifying it
wherever it pops up, we have a chance of ending it the same way we eliminated
small pox. That would be a very good
thing indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment