Posted on 02/21/2003 2:29:38 PM PST by G. Stolyarov II
Discrimination
The act of discriminating The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners.
In the words of the immortal Sesame Street, one of these things is not like the other.
Specifically, the first two definitions of discrimination are correct, and the third really means:
Racism
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
Discrimination is a good thing, and is a function of an healthy human mind. Without discrimination, we wouldn't be able to live, as we wouldn't be able to act upon the nature of things. For example, choosing between foods isn't easy; one must consider health, taste, availability and price. In other words, one must clearly discriminate between foods, based on their objective properties. Unfortunately, in modern parlance, the terms 'discrimination' and 'racism' are used almost interchangably.
Consider the infamous John Wayne quote, "I believe in white supremacy until the blacks are educated to the point of responsibility. I don't believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people." Clearly, one could only make a statement like that, if one considers 'black Americans' to be an identity to which attributes such as 'irresponsible' can be applied. Other attributes applied by racists to black Americans include 'violent', 'criminal-minded', 'stupid', and ... 'disadvantaged'.
Indeed, Affirmative Action has as its underpinning the notion that black Americans are somehow disadvantaged. For this to be the case, advocates of Affirmative Action must consider that an individual cannot be judged solely as an individual, that he in fact derives certain attributes from his race. Thus, in effect, the only difference between the NAACP and the Ku Klux Klan is their choice of attributes they associate with all black Americans - effectively, one group chooses 'disadvantaged', the other 'inferior to white Americans'.
So, what is the cure for racism? Individualism. If one thinks of a person as an individual and judges him by his actions alone, then racism is impossible. The catch is that this will never happen as long as pressure groups keep insisting that people think of others in terms of their race. In order to destroy the philosophical foundations of racism, groups like the NAACP will have to give up their support for Affirmative Action, and start denouncing it instead.
(C) 2003 Duncan Bayne The article is licensed under the GNU FDL and may be distributed under its terms. See http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html for details.
I disagree that individualism makes racism impossible. Individualism does not punish other persons sufficiently for not being individualists. It can even be advantageous for an individualist to pretend racism.
Consider a population of some 10,000 people, pretty much the same but not identical. Let 80 percent of the people be green, 20 percent be red. If everyone is an individualist and ignores the coloring (unless a green stage actor is needed or person color is otherwise directly relevent), then things are fine. But if, say, 1000 of the green people are racist-- will only interact with green people-- then the 2000 red people will find their chance for interaction reduced by 10 percent while the green people will see no effect. The green racists will reduce their chance for interaction by 20 percent, so they are worse off.
If the green racists further insist that they will not associate with green people who associate with red people, then things get interesting. An individualist will not let his choice of associations be limited by another person and the green racists will be excluded by everybody else.
But most humans are not individualists. They just go along with whomever is in charge at the time. Lets call them sheep. Let another 50% of our 10,000 be sheep (4000 green sheep, 1000 red sheep). If a green racist gets hold of an an influential position then he could temporarily 'convert' some of the green sheep into green racists. In the worst case, the red people and green individualists will not be able to interact with over half the green population (1000 racist + 4000 sheep = 5/8ths of green population, 1/2 the general population) as long as this green racist holds his position. The green individualists must decide whether to follow this one green racist or stand with the other individualists. They get the same interaction either way. In particular, the green racist can now interact with as many people as any other person can.
At some point an individualist person will decide that being cut off from half the population is bad and remove the racist from his position. Such things have happened in real life, but don't hold your breath.
In order to destroy the philosophical foundations of racism, groups like the NAACP will have to give up their support for Affirmative Action, and start denouncing it instead.
Although this statement is logically and morally sound, it illustrates what is at the base of many of our current social and political problems - it addresses a red herring. The NAACP is interested in fomenting racism and class division rather that fighting it. Our attempts at reason and logic meet frustration because we are constantly fighting shadows, those illusions put up as the true complaint.
Until we start more directly facing our true problem, the drive by the left and their associated groups to undermine and then control our government and our society, we will not find success. However, the left with their use of well honed pyschological ploys and disinformation, such as rabidly attacking each individual or group who oppose them, have even cowed the likes of Rush Limbaugh into submission. Rush yesterday, in response to "Boris" an immigrant from a former Communist country who made this very point, readily admitted that he was willing to call certain people socialists but that he studiously avoided the term Communists. I can't speak for Rush but many people avoid that term because of the fear of vicious attacks and condemnation by the Democrats, groups like the NAACP, and the mainstream press. That is part of their MO.
People like David Horowitz, who were once in the belly of the beast themselves, are good examples of what happens to those who speak the truth. It is de facto tyranny by the few.
If the goal is actually to destroy the philosophical foundations of racism, wouldn't groups such as the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucas need to be disbanded altogether. It seems obvious to me that racism is inherent in such groups and organizations.
That is about as clear as I can make it but I apoligize for not communicating better since you seemed to have totally missed my point. I did not say that racism was a shadow but that the NAACP's facade of fighting racism was a shadow, or a false image.
Other than that, I am confident that we are in agreement.
Jesus said, "Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a house divided against itself falls." (Luke 11:17) Few conditions or attitudes have caused greater division than racism, certainly in America, and what good has it ever accomplished? Is a red rose better than a yellow one just because the quality of their beauty is different? Did God make a mistake or could it be that He is a greater artist than many of our finite minds can appreciate? His magnificent creation of which we are a part is a myriad of color and infinite variety and I sometimes find it puzzling that we are the crowning glory of His creation, created in His own image. We certainly don't behave as if that were true many times.
1 Samuel 16:7 says, "God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart." Jesus further says (Matthew 7:1) "Judge not lest you be judged." While we ARE our brothers' keeper, we are not to be his judge. Judgement of another is reserved for God alone for only God truly knows the heart. Certainly we are to judge certain behavior as right or wrong and make good judgements on the company we keep, but any time we take a stand against a particular group of people because of how they were made, we are taking a stand against the God who created them in His own image even as He did us. God's only admonition in Scripture regarding race was the warning that His people were not to intermarry with those of surrounding nations, not because of their color, but because they would lead God's people away from truth and into idolatry. Even Jesus was ostracized because of the people He hung out with. Was He making bad judgements? I think not. He was the one person who lived in this world knowing exactly what He was doing at all times, and why and it is He who we are instructed to emulate. Obviously, a great many people calling themselves Christians, fail to take Him at His word. Who are we to criticize the Master's work within the framework of our own limitations?
In the very nature of our foundation, we are a nation of mongrels. Show me someone who claims his or her race is pure and I'll show you someone who is either ignorant or a liar. Most people have limited knowledge of their own ancestry and the history surrounding it and no matter what it happens to be, we are all of mixed blood even though at the same time we can all claim common ancestors.
It is interesting to look at skin color in light of God's practicality. Before mass migration became common, the variations in skin color were geographically ideal in relationship to available sunlight. The darkest skinned people were those closest to the equator, gradually becoming lighter the farthur away they were with those nearest the poles being extremely fair. The dark skin was pigmeted to provide protection against the extensive exposure to the brutal summer sun through most of the year while the near absence of pigment in the people near the poles served to maximize absorption of the limited available sunlight. What is so difficult to understand about that?
When I was in college in Georgia, we did a simple experiment in an antropology class in which two students were instructed to line up the 50-60 students in the class in a large semi-circle around the room in order from lightest to darkest. We were then asked where one race ended and another began. It was impossible to tell, because there were "blacks" on the lighter side and "whites" on the darker end who, along with other "racial" groups, were represented throughout. It was an interesting and valuable exercise which made a lasting impression.
Since each of us has a unique relationship to history because of our ancestry, I can only speak from my own experience, but would assume that it is not so different from that of others, in general terms anyway. Part of my heritage on both sides of my family is Dutch. I know that many of my ancestors came here to farm and find religious freedom only to find themselves persecuted in their new homeland and driven out by Calvinist puritans because they were Dutch Reformed. Others, who sought to compete in the fur trade, had only the alliance of some of the Iroquois tribes to protect them from the violent greed of the French. They were outcasts, even among other "whites". Some of my mother's ancestors were French. Having originated in Calle, France, they migrated to England, presumably to escape persecution, only to later flee religious persecution in England at the time of the Reformation and settle in the New World. On both sides of my family, I am also Cherokee and from the Cherokee perspective, if you have Cherokee blood, you are Cherokee. So am I Indian or white? Am I Dutch or French? The point I am trying to make is that it doesn't really matter. All of my ancestors contributed to the person that I am and I have at different points in my life identified, more or less, with all of them.
I was raised as a white child in a small rural town in southern Virginia where prejudice (as we called it) was the norm. Even when I was little it was something I was very aware of and my heart knew it was wrong. Our little town was racially mixed, but clearly there were invisible boundaries not to be crossed by either side. I was taught that there were n*gg*rs and there were colored people. The n*gg*rs were lazy and dangerous and not worth a d*mn. The coloreds were decent and clean and should be treated with respect as long as they knew their place and stayed in it. Everything was separate then and such was life in the pre-civil rights south.
The white kids in my neighborhood were often obnoxious and even cruel and I didn't like to play with most of them. Usually I preferred to play alone instead. The "black" kids were nicer. Of course, we didn't call them blacks then. Until I was 9 years old when Nanny (my great-grandmother) died, my mama, grandma, and nanny all lived on the same street. Mama lived in the house with an adjoing yard to the corner house facing the cross street. Technically, I lived with her. My grandparents lived directly across the street next to a large vacant lot on the corner. This was at the south end of the street and at the time was all white. Nanny lived about 2/3 of the way to the north end of the street where more of the "colored" people lived. It was here that I spent probably the majority of those 9 years. She lived on the "dividing line", so to speak, so her next door neighbors to the north were "colored". There was a long fence between their properties running all the way from the sidewalk clear out to the back fence out behind the garden. They had a little girl a couple of years older than I was and because Nanny thought they were nice colored people I was allowed to be friends with her as long as we each stayed on our own sides if the fence. It didn't make sense to me, but that is just the way it was. She became the first real friend I remember.
She was a beautiful little girl with smooth, light brown complexion, dark, expressive eyes, and black hair which she always wore in 2 long braids. She was also very sweet. We really enjoyed talking together and we'd sit for hours in the grass with the fence between us just talking and playing. On my side of the fence in the back we had an apple tree and sometimes I'd climb up and pick apples for us. When we played in front we liked to pick clover and chew on the stems or sometimes we'd pick apart the the weather worn fenceposts as we chatted. In summer we would wait together each day for the ice cream man, then try to eat our treats before they melted in the hot summer sun. Those were some good memories of my childhood and I still think of her fondly. Not once in all those years did either of us ever see the inside of the other's home. It always seemed odd to me to have that kind of separation as a part of everyday life and then go to Sunday school where we often sung this song:
"Jesus loves the little children
All the children of the world,
Red and yellow, black and white
All are precious in His sight.
Jesus loves the little children of the world."
Race is not a club; it's not an excuse; alone it justifies nothing. Of course what has happened in the past has made us what we are today, but as a priest once told me, "you may not be responsible for what was done to you in the past, but you ARE responsible for what you do with it in the future." I believe the same principle applies to racial issues. It is time we go forward with the focus on being part of the human RACE and on being Americans without hyphens. We need each other to defeat our common enemies, not only foreign and domestic, but spiritual as well. There is a reason whenever one's path crosses that of another and we should use those opportunities to share, to learn, to rejoice and to grow for it is these points of contact from which the fabric of our lives is woven.
So true. The liberals are so sure that all minorities must lock-step into affirmative action and government entitlements, keeping the minorities forever on uneven footing. Unfortunately, no one will call the democrats what they truly are.....racists!
sweetliberty: great post further up. Many of us, as children, had similar positive experiences. It took the "wisdom" of the liberal buttheads to shatter the innocence of children.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.