Debra Dickerson's Slate article on racism sparked a predictably anxious debate in their Fray. Below, I have excerpted some highlights of the interactions I had with some folks in response to her piece.
Subject: RE: Racist like???
From: roadwarrior
Date: Aug 12 2004 2:39PM
Yes there is damage done by holding ones ethnicity and heritage only in "high" regard. That implies that one is looking down on another's race with low regard. Also, if one is true to the facts, they should also have the strength to look at their heritage and find its weaknesses... don't only look at your heritage with high regard but also with low regard where appropriate. When everyone looks at their race with high regard, then the negativ aspect of racism rears its ugly head... just like the Arian race was supposed to be superior. The negative aspects of racism feed off of each individual's insecurity with themselves and their race. The individual's insecurity causes him or her to use the guise of racism to make themselves feel "better" than someone of a different race.
Subject: RoadWarrior: There you go again
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 3:03PM
You have fallen prey to a common logical fallacy. Self-esteem DOES NOT preclude esteem of others. Consequently, holding one's heritage in high regard DOES NOT inevitably result in holding other's heritage in low regard. It is simply a positive affirmation of one's own worth.For example, my esteem for the scientific and engineering genius of Benjamin Banneker does not negate the respect I hold for Sir Isaac Newton. On the other hand, my disregard for the murderous practices of Idi Amin does not imply an endorsement of the murderous practices of Adolf Hitler.Your overly simplistic mental paradigm exists only in the narrowest thinking of a desperately insecure personality... in short, just like most racists.
Subject: RE: RoadWarrior: There you go again
From: roadwarrior
Date: Aug 12 2004 3:14PM
Congratulations to you for not falling into the trap that so many others in the history of the world have fallen into wrt to viewing their race or ethnicity only with high esteem. Are you able to look at the negative aspects of your ethnicity as objectively as the positive? Most people aren't and that is why we have (had) things like Muslim Supremists, Christian Supremists, KKK, Arian nationalism, ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Rwanda etc.. I am basing my views on the history of the wars and fallicies of ethnic supremecy about which most people can not be objective.... not simplistic paradigms that you are holding onto.
Subject: RE: RoadWarrior: There you go again
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 3:31PM
UHHHH, I never said that outrageous moral indignities had not been thrust upon oppressed people throughout the ages. I stated that weak, insecure personalities are prone to buying the specious argument that self-estimation necessitates denigration of others. In fact, as I stated in my previous post, not only is it possible to hold one's self, culture, heritage in esteem WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY valuing others, it is psychologically HEALTHY. That mobs of people have behaved in a psychologically unhealthy fashion is frighteningly well-documented throughout history. But that doesn't make the behavior correct OR morally defensible.
Subject: Racism defined
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 2:55PM
studentxyz nailed it. Racism without power to enforce it is the proverbial tree that falls with no one to hear it. Further, the institutionalized system of societal "rules" that was predicated on racism has had a devastating social effect in our country.Unfortunately, for every positive Affirmative Action attempt to balance the historical inequities there exists a negative reply of "race-based hiring (despite the years of enforcement AGAINST BLACKS) is unfair!"Internal prejudices (strictly in the sense of "fight or flight" reactions) may be an indelible part of human nature; however, moral people look beyond instinctual reflex and are governed by rational examination of individual character.
(In response to studentxyz's post referenced above)
Subject: RE: Racist like???
From: avery
Date: Aug 12 2004 4:38PM
I don't agree with your definition of racism (racism being a person of one race exercising the ability to wield power over those of a different race), but even if we let it stand, there are problems with your logic. You say blacks don't have that crucial element of power. But isn't that just the author's point? She DOES have power--based on her education, income, and social status. Her power isn't derived from her blackness, nor does her blackness prohibit her having power as you seem to suggest. That is why she suggests that a class system makes more sense than a race system. Because those with power (affluence, education, standing in society) certainly can wield that power over those who don't. Certainly you agree that there are blacks with power and whites without.
Subject: RE: Racist like???
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 4:54PM
You are misquoting and misunderstanding studentxyz's post. The definition included two key elements that your comments ignore. The first is "inordinate" power. Her ability to berate a construction worker illegally parked on her property is not inordinate power. Inordinate power is the ability to deny the vote. Inordinate power is to FORCE one to use seperate and unequal restroom, transportation, education and dining facilities. That this power was wielded in respect to race makes the policies racist.The second crucial element to the definition was that this power is exercised over a "group of people." The discussion of racial "power" dynamics between a single Black woman and a worker who is trespassing is not the same as a discussion of long-standing systemic racist practices over the course of several hundred years. Logic dictates that you confront his arguments with reasonable and accurate assertions.
Subject: RE: Racist like???
From: roadwarrior
Date: Aug 12 2004 2:39PM
Yes there is damage done by holding ones ethnicity and heritage only in "high" regard. That implies that one is looking down on another's race with low regard. Also, if one is true to the facts, they should also have the strength to look at their heritage and find its weaknesses... don't only look at your heritage with high regard but also with low regard where appropriate. When everyone looks at their race with high regard, then the negativ aspect of racism rears its ugly head... just like the Arian race was supposed to be superior. The negative aspects of racism feed off of each individual's insecurity with themselves and their race. The individual's insecurity causes him or her to use the guise of racism to make themselves feel "better" than someone of a different race.
Subject: RoadWarrior: There you go again
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 3:03PM
You have fallen prey to a common logical fallacy. Self-esteem DOES NOT preclude esteem of others. Consequently, holding one's heritage in high regard DOES NOT inevitably result in holding other's heritage in low regard. It is simply a positive affirmation of one's own worth.For example, my esteem for the scientific and engineering genius of Benjamin Banneker does not negate the respect I hold for Sir Isaac Newton. On the other hand, my disregard for the murderous practices of Idi Amin does not imply an endorsement of the murderous practices of Adolf Hitler.Your overly simplistic mental paradigm exists only in the narrowest thinking of a desperately insecure personality... in short, just like most racists.
Subject: RE: RoadWarrior: There you go again
From: roadwarrior
Date: Aug 12 2004 3:14PM
Congratulations to you for not falling into the trap that so many others in the history of the world have fallen into wrt to viewing their race or ethnicity only with high esteem. Are you able to look at the negative aspects of your ethnicity as objectively as the positive? Most people aren't and that is why we have (had) things like Muslim Supremists, Christian Supremists, KKK, Arian nationalism, ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Rwanda etc.. I am basing my views on the history of the wars and fallicies of ethnic supremecy about which most people can not be objective.... not simplistic paradigms that you are holding onto.
Subject: RE: RoadWarrior: There you go again
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 3:31PM
UHHHH, I never said that outrageous moral indignities had not been thrust upon oppressed people throughout the ages. I stated that weak, insecure personalities are prone to buying the specious argument that self-estimation necessitates denigration of others. In fact, as I stated in my previous post, not only is it possible to hold one's self, culture, heritage in esteem WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY valuing others, it is psychologically HEALTHY. That mobs of people have behaved in a psychologically unhealthy fashion is frighteningly well-documented throughout history. But that doesn't make the behavior correct OR morally defensible.
Subject: Racism defined
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 2:55PM
studentxyz nailed it. Racism without power to enforce it is the proverbial tree that falls with no one to hear it. Further, the institutionalized system of societal "rules" that was predicated on racism has had a devastating social effect in our country.Unfortunately, for every positive Affirmative Action attempt to balance the historical inequities there exists a negative reply of "race-based hiring (despite the years of enforcement AGAINST BLACKS) is unfair!"Internal prejudices (strictly in the sense of "fight or flight" reactions) may be an indelible part of human nature; however, moral people look beyond instinctual reflex and are governed by rational examination of individual character.
(In response to studentxyz's post referenced above)
Subject: RE: Racist like???
From: avery
Date: Aug 12 2004 4:38PM
I don't agree with your definition of racism (racism being a person of one race exercising the ability to wield power over those of a different race), but even if we let it stand, there are problems with your logic. You say blacks don't have that crucial element of power. But isn't that just the author's point? She DOES have power--based on her education, income, and social status. Her power isn't derived from her blackness, nor does her blackness prohibit her having power as you seem to suggest. That is why she suggests that a class system makes more sense than a race system. Because those with power (affluence, education, standing in society) certainly can wield that power over those who don't. Certainly you agree that there are blacks with power and whites without.
Subject: RE: Racist like???
From: AltonDarwin4
Date: Aug 12 2004 4:54PM
You are misquoting and misunderstanding studentxyz's post. The definition included two key elements that your comments ignore. The first is "inordinate" power. Her ability to berate a construction worker illegally parked on her property is not inordinate power. Inordinate power is the ability to deny the vote. Inordinate power is to FORCE one to use seperate and unequal restroom, transportation, education and dining facilities. That this power was wielded in respect to race makes the policies racist.The second crucial element to the definition was that this power is exercised over a "group of people." The discussion of racial "power" dynamics between a single Black woman and a worker who is trespassing is not the same as a discussion of long-standing systemic racist practices over the course of several hundred years. Logic dictates that you confront his arguments with reasonable and accurate assertions.
Comments