A question about racism

[anigo]

I am a racist.

Woah, what an opening line, eh?



Dictionary.com says a racist is: The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

By that definition I am not a racist.

You see, ideally in my world, it woudn't matter where you came from, or what you looked like or anything like that. Regardless of these issues, when you applied for a job, you'd get it based on your merits. You wouldn't be teased, maligned, judged, anything.

Racism can go both ways. Racism is not serving a person first because of the way they look, or it's also giving a person preferential treatment for the same reason. I feel affirmative action is as much racist (and contributes to racism... but that's another paragraph) as not hiring somebody based on their heritage.

But here's my question.

I have been brought up in a society where people who are different are noticed. They stand out. (According to Statistics Canada, and some quick math, less than 1% of Nova Scotians are Black) And, yes, minorities tend to be given the short end of the stick. Now here's where my question comes in. If one is brought up in a society that thinks that people who look different *are* different (and not obscenely, there are no lynchings, there is no segregation) however one recognizes that this belief is wrong and refuses to bow to it, but still somehow finds oneself straying toward this thought... finds oneself judging and then admonishing oneself.... Is one still a racist?

If one makes every effort to ensure equality in her actions (and thoughts), regardless of sex, race, religion, whatever; however if one still finds one's thoughts (but not actions) straying? Is one still a racist? An argument to this is if ones thoughts are racist, ones actions must therefore follow, but I don't know if this is necessarily so.

However, if that's the case, how does one NOT be a racist?

And if acknowledging differences is a good thing, is one still a racist?

Which leads me to affirmative action.

Which I think is bad and counterproductive.

If you get a job because of your heritage, because hiring you meets a quota, yet I was the preferred candidate strictly on my qualifications alone, I think that is going to create animosity. Granted, the reason that my qualifications may be better than yours is because I may have been brought up in a privileged society and you may have not - but is the answer to right that wrong to create another wrong by giving you preferential treatment? Or is the answer to start from when you are young and give you the chance to get a better education. But would subsidizing your education, again give you preferential treatment? Where does it start? Where does it stop? What is the answer? Basing subsidies on race isn't it though. Nor is hiring quotas. Subsidies on low income may be one solution. Raising all underprivileged up to a higher level based on their economic status and not on their heritage.

I will support equality to my dying breath. You are as good as I, and I as good as you, regardless of how we look, or where our parents were from, or what god either one of us believes in.

But if, inside, I see a group of guys of a different race standing on the corner of Gottingen street and automatically assume that they're up to no good, (Assume, mind you - not act, not say, not anything) does that make me a racist? And if so, how do I fix it?

Nova Scotia has a fantastic contingent of black gospel singers. Is that racist? To say that they are black? Couldn't I just say they're gospel singers and leave the colour out? But that's part of who they are. You can hear their history in their voices and that gives them something special.

Above all of this I am a peaceful soul. I want harmony. I want equality. I want peace. Regardless of colour or heritage or anything. I want to live next to a person of colour (black person? African Canadian?) and be of the mind where I don't even notice his skin tone. He's just Bill. But I notice that the lady next door has brown hair. Or the lady two doors up is overweight... where does one draw the line?

Maybe racism is a Darwinian thing. Survival of our own culture. I dunno.

Comments?

Comments

[gogoman.livejournal.com]

This is one of the most interesting posts I've seen in the short time I've been on LJ.

First; you are no racist. People of different races do have certain identifying characteristics. And it's dishonest to pretend they don't exist. A black gospel choir sounds a lot different than the choir in the mainstream Methodist church I attend. That difference should be celebrated. An African American can usually be identified by his telephone voice. Why pretend that this distinct tonality doesn't exist?

A racist will perceive some deficiency, then apply that generality to individuals of that race. A racist wants to have somebody to be better than, and he'll create a paradigm to maintain that belief.

In a perfect world, the University of Michigan Law School would have the same percentage of African Americans as the population of Michigan. But Affirmative Action is not a good way to force that outcome. I think it's racist to assume that standards have to be lowered for African Americans. That really says they aren't the equal of other applicants, so lets give them an advantage. I wish I knew how we get to that perfection, but I certainly do not.

You might enjoy reading "Hellfire Nation" by James Morone.

[tigermorph.livejournal.com]

In a perfect world, the University of Michigan Law School would have the same percentage of African Americans as the population of Michigan. But Affirmative Action is not a good way to force that outcome. I think it's racist to assume that standards have to be lowered for African Americans. That really says they aren't the equal of other applicants, so lets give them an advantage. I wish I knew how we get to that perfection, but I certainly do not.

This triggered the following thought for me....

Do the standards have to be "lowered"? Can they be "altered"? Because I don't see it as a question of intelligence. In my opinion if you put two people of equal intelligence into training for a job for which neither of them has experience, chances are they will both do fine. But the "standards" are set by a race that is in the majority and often doesn't even try to understand that intelligence doesn't just mean alphabets, and that culturally we learn first the things of most value to our cultural lives.

Did that make sense?

My Mother grew up culturally learning how to be a socialite. Colin Powell grew up learning how to be a soldier. Give the two of them a "standardised" test and likely they would both do poorly, unless it culturally leans in one direction or the other. White people learn about the things white people value and very rarely supplement that with information outside of what we think we directly need. To work at a bank in Kansas, one really doesn't need to understand the cultural intricacies of people in Japan - or so it is assumed. But to hire a Japanese immigrant, for example, a standardized test would only show the immediate misunderstanding between cultures, not whether or not the person was intelligent enough to learn the job. It's not a question of intelligence, it's a question of approach.

Am I making any sense at all?

[gogoman.livejournal.com]

Sure you are making sense. I've come to believe that what we refer to as intelligence is very hard to define and even harder to measure, even without the complicating factor of cultural experience. It seems to me that entrance hurdles should be designed to determine a person's aptitude for the particular curriculum being considered, as well as the likelihood of their success in that field. Can somebody create a test that would look past cultural differences and make that determination? I hope so.

Here is a related thought: Suppose 10 people are competing for 5 positions, and all 10 exceed the minimum score of 70%. Some would demand that I pick and choose among the 10, discriminating on the basis of ethnicity and gender in order to get the "right" mixture. I would want the 5 with the highest scores regardless of those other considerations.

[gogoman.livejournal.com]

I saw your post in reference to me and the raging debate on world dominatioin.

I would like to be added to your Friends list because I found your racism post very interesting. But I understand your reluctance, and of course it's OK if you don't.

There is no biographical information because I just never thought to add it. And frankly, I didn't think it would interest anybody. I just got on and started reading and occasionally writing.

[anigo.livejournal.com]

I have become a rather suspicious person.

I am not, however, somebody to pass judgement without proper evidence. I'm not ready to friend you just yet, but you're on the candidates list.

(Are you feeling honoured yet?)

[gogoman.livejournal.com]

Sure. I'll take that for now.

[gogoman.livejournal.com]

I used to crew on a 28 footer on Lake Michigan. Not in your league, but I kind of know what it's about. And....my son and I used to go absolutely nuts over Monte Python.