The current spate of the murder of black men in America by white police officers, discussions with family and friends, and perusing of other sources have led me to think that the word "racism" is often used without a clearer understanding of what it is. So I looked at some ordinary definitions of racism and what I found was hardly satisfactory. Merriam-Webster Dictionary, for example, is virtually useless in this matter. This is one of its definitions: "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race." And this is another: "racial prejudice or discrimination." Apart from the fact that this definition assumes the existence of "race", it does not tell us what racism is. The Anti-Defamation League, which specializes in dealing with issues arising from racism, also assumes race but also connects racism to hatred of the other. It says that racism "may be defined as the hatred of one person by another -- or the belief that another person is less than human -- because of skin color, language, customs, place of birth or any factor that supposedly reveals the basic nature of that person. It has influenced wars, slavery, the formation of nations, and legal codes." I called these ordinary sources because they do not demonstrate the kind of rigorous thinking about racism that one would expect from scholars and most people tend to get their information from them because they are easily available on the Internet.
Whatever the definitions from these ordinary sources may say, they do not speak to the critical issue about racism as it has been experienced under the modern condition. First, it should be stressed that modern racism is based on skin color or pigmentation. Racism is the ranking of human beings in society according to their skin colors and the setting up of social infrastructures to support that ranking. It is the belief that skin color determines degrees of humanity, such as saying that African Americans are three-fifths human because they are black. Second, this belief is hardly based on hatred. Hatred may be part of the history of the effects of racism but it is not racism. White people hate White people, Asians hate Asians, Blacks hate Blacks. This is hardly racism because it is hardly based on skin color. It may be related to ethnic hatred rather than to racism. When Immanuel Kant, David Hume, and Hegel pointed out that Black people were inconsequential in history, they had hardly met any black person and so theirs views could not be construed to be based in hatred. One may be justified that their views were based in ignorance rather than in hatred. It is very important, therefore, that racism should not be confused with hatred. Hatred is just an effect of racism rather than a cause. Third, racism should be differentiated from tribalism or ethnicity. In many African countries, people often discriminate against each other based on perceived regions of origin. However, this discrimination is not based on the ranking of human beings based on the color of their skin. I am not aware of African societies that built societal infrastructures to support such belief, either. Third, racism is not based on language, place of birth or local customs. To discriminate against someone because they speak a different language should not be considered racism. Fourth, racism did not lead to slavery. It would be a big misunderstanding to think that racism led to slavery. Slavery has always been about economics. This is why it was practiced in Africa and many other places around the world. It is only when the color of skin is associated with slavery that slavery may have anything to do with racism. In modern times, racism has been located around the color "black" and those who have promoted racism have been associated with the color "white".
The people against whom modern racism has been applied have been "black" people. "White" people have said that "black" people are lower in the human hierarchy because of their skin color and corresponding social structures have been erected to defend this claim. The case has not been reversed. In other words, "black" people have not posited that "white" people are lower on the scale of human hierarchy and have not built any infrastructure to support this claim. The point of this is simple: saying that black people are racist is not correct, as Martin Luther King, Jr. rightly saw. I say this because I have heard some people say that some black people are racist. I have heard Africans compare tribalism or ethnic conflicts to racism. Black people may hate White people but that is not racism. It may be hatred born of racism but it is not racism. Let us not confuse the facts.
Whatever the definitions from these ordinary sources may say, they do not speak to the critical issue about racism as it has been experienced under the modern condition. First, it should be stressed that modern racism is based on skin color or pigmentation. Racism is the ranking of human beings in society according to their skin colors and the setting up of social infrastructures to support that ranking. It is the belief that skin color determines degrees of humanity, such as saying that African Americans are three-fifths human because they are black. Second, this belief is hardly based on hatred. Hatred may be part of the history of the effects of racism but it is not racism. White people hate White people, Asians hate Asians, Blacks hate Blacks. This is hardly racism because it is hardly based on skin color. It may be related to ethnic hatred rather than to racism. When Immanuel Kant, David Hume, and Hegel pointed out that Black people were inconsequential in history, they had hardly met any black person and so theirs views could not be construed to be based in hatred. One may be justified that their views were based in ignorance rather than in hatred. It is very important, therefore, that racism should not be confused with hatred. Hatred is just an effect of racism rather than a cause. Third, racism should be differentiated from tribalism or ethnicity. In many African countries, people often discriminate against each other based on perceived regions of origin. However, this discrimination is not based on the ranking of human beings based on the color of their skin. I am not aware of African societies that built societal infrastructures to support such belief, either. Third, racism is not based on language, place of birth or local customs. To discriminate against someone because they speak a different language should not be considered racism. Fourth, racism did not lead to slavery. It would be a big misunderstanding to think that racism led to slavery. Slavery has always been about economics. This is why it was practiced in Africa and many other places around the world. It is only when the color of skin is associated with slavery that slavery may have anything to do with racism. In modern times, racism has been located around the color "black" and those who have promoted racism have been associated with the color "white".
The people against whom modern racism has been applied have been "black" people. "White" people have said that "black" people are lower in the human hierarchy because of their skin color and corresponding social structures have been erected to defend this claim. The case has not been reversed. In other words, "black" people have not posited that "white" people are lower on the scale of human hierarchy and have not built any infrastructure to support this claim. The point of this is simple: saying that black people are racist is not correct, as Martin Luther King, Jr. rightly saw. I say this because I have heard some people say that some black people are racist. I have heard Africans compare tribalism or ethnic conflicts to racism. Black people may hate White people but that is not racism. It may be hatred born of racism but it is not racism. Let us not confuse the facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment