What exactly is racism?
The students at public and private colleges and universities nationwide have been grappling with this issue extensively over the past few years, in part due to the efforts of campus offices specifically designed to encourage and facilitate racial, cultural, ethnic, and social harmony. The aim of reaching "racial intelligence" as some may call it seems constantly "plagued" by this perhaps undefinable term. What is racism? Is there a difference between racism and racial ignorance? Does racism always have to hurt? Does it count as racism if it doesn't offend me, even if it might offend somebody else? The questions about this little word seem to go on and on . . .
According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2004), racism is defined as "a belief that some races are by nature superior to others; also: descrimination based on such belief." Interestingly, there is also a much less heard term, racialist, which is defined along similar terms: "a theory that race determines human traits and capacities." Perhaps this only serves to complicate the matter. Is what we call racism actually racialism? Is there a difference? It would seem that at least the latter question has an answer. There does seem to be a difference between racism and racialism. Racism, by its definition, implies betterness; racialism, on the other hand, suggests defining race/culture based on traits, not necessarily what is better or superior.
And so, when a student suggests that he or she could "never be Black because [he/she] can't dance," is that racism? According to many students at Messiah College, the answer is yes. But by the very terms we use to define racism, the answer ought to be no. In general terms, racism refers to a superiority-ruling on an inferior. Ergo, Group A feels superior to Group B because Group A does x better, et cetera. Yet in this case, Group A considers another group better (Group B) because that group does something better than Group A. Is that racism? The scenario seems better fitted to the terminology of racialism.
Could it be that racism is an overly generalized term? That is not to suggest that racism, in-and-of-itself does not exist; however, I would offer that often what we call racism is in fact something quite different, if only by a degree. The very questions that arise regarding the subject seem to suggest this: If I make a joke that someone finds offensive without knowing it was offensive, am I a racist? If I use this-or-that term in regards to a person, and that term happens to be a cultural stereotype, does that make it a racist statement, no matter how true it is?
An example yet again. In a conversation on institutional racism on my own college campus, an Asian student submitted the following scenario. Her friends were joking about a particularly difficult Math course, and one of the White group members jokingly stated that this student was doing better because she was naturally better at Math. The Asian student, in our conversation, said that she did not feel that this was a racist statement, but true; in that case, she was naturally better at Math than her friends, and she just happened to be Asian. However, several members of the group discussing this with her countered her statement, attempting to convince her that such a statement was indeed racist because it fed a cultural stereotype. The question was then posed, "What if the stereotype is true?" The suggestion was then made that another Asian girl found the statement offensive because she was not good at Math. But considering the setting, the scenario, the background . . . what does this second Asian student matter? Do her feelings about a conversation she wasn't part of create racist undertones in the conversation itself?
I would submit a third term to the racist/racialist strain; racial ignorance. Could a student, your best friend, your favorite professor, the Dean, be racially ignorant without being racist? Yes, in my opinion, they could! Racial ignorance is based much on the same principles as racism and racialism; it involves assumptions on cultures/racial/ethnic groups based on stereotypes and, importantly, ignorance. There is a strong difference, in my mind, between the two: racism is intentional; racial ignorance, clearly, is not. Racism may not be solvable (as many have suggested it is not, at least not anytime soon); racial ignorance, on the other hand . . .
What are the implications of redefining what we often call racism as racial ignorance? I would suggest a simple, and quite positive, implication: racial ignorance can be educated. Misunderstanding can be converted to understanding. Disharmony can be changed to harmony. Broken bonds can be reunited. How, and why? The answer to the "why" is perhaps simpler: racial ignorance is susceptible to change because ignorance itself can be corrected. What differentiates, then, racial ignorance and racism is the willingness to change. What may begin as racial ignorance may quickly and easily become racist when the truth is presented, the potential for change made available, and the change is cast aside. The idea of racial ignorance also adds to the value of discourse on racial issues. To throw in the face of an ignorant person that they are racist because of their preconceived ideas is hardly an open door to conversation and change. Rather, pointing out the truth, and shedding a light on ignorance, seems quite the open road to change.
As to the question of how, the answer becomes quite different, in that it seems much more difficult. Will a forum adequately address racial ignorance? Should we strike up conversations at our dinner tables? To the former question, I would suggest that no, a forum will likely not solve the problem of ignorance. Yet to the latter, I hold more positive feelings; there is no better way to initiate conversation than in real-life settings, where the flow of conversation is much more natural, open, and freely expressed. Could a conversation over a coffee lead to the next world change?
Maybe.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
To be racist you have to be racially ignorant. If you think race A is better than race B, you are clearly ignorant about both races, particularly race B.
I have no problem with racially ignorant people. I'm ignorant about many races. But I ask rather than state. People who arrive with preconceived ideas are already acting as racists.
When someone has preconceived ideas about a race or culture, it may not be their fault, but it certainly is not O.K. My brother once made friends with a group of kids on our block. One of the kids came from a Nazi family and he was clearly Nazi. Let's call him Fred. He carried a swastika on a chain around his neck and he'd painted a swastika on his skateboard. One day they decided to hold a relay race, so they split up into two teams. Fred started shouting "Nazis against Jews! The Jews are idiots! Down with the Jews!" at which point my brother ran back home. I ran outside with my dad who asked Fred "Do you know what the Nazis did?" Fred mumbled something inaudible and finally said "They were in a war" my dad answered "They killed my grandfather". Fred was clearly ignorant about both Jews and Nazis and that ignorance allowed him to be racist.
Thanks for the comment. What you described is definitely something I'd describe as racial ignorance that leads to racist views. The question, as I said in the main entry, that I suppose we'd all have to answer for ourselves is whether or not that child's ignorance made him racist, or whether he was simply racially ignorant and expressing racist ideas. And hopeflly, you can see the difference between confronting him as a racist and dealing with his racial ignorance.
thank you so much for that! i really thiught that there was not actually some place in the world that talks about racism!
please send me some more!
thank you so much for that! i really thiught that there was not actually some place in the world that talks about racism!
please send me some more!
In a nut shell, the reason that we have racisim today is because the older generations are still around. I believe that the goal of humans is and has always been to survive and adapt. Survival of the fittest means who can outlast the struggles and obstacles along your lifes journey, but we of course have over time developed complex emotions and thought processes which allow us to want to not just look out for ourselves but when possible be able to carry the weight of others. However the problem with this is that now, when people believe that they are failing in some aspect of their lives the first thing we do is look to see not what but who is in our way. Thats why the fastest most successful way of uniting people has always been under hatred, there are far more angry people is society than there are happy, mostly because there are, as it appears, far more things in life to complain about. examples would be a wide range of groups from political parties to, you guessed it, race. Racism in america from the neo nazi perspective seems to be based soley on tradition and very broad statistics and stereotypes which would make me say racism in america today is ignorance becuase you don't have a real reason behind your social reforms you are just abusing your right to freedom of speech and stopping your foot. My problem with racism is that I also believe in america the main factor is, while the new generations get along very very well and have a very good sense of humor and personal awareness, the older generations are still around being very and easily offended and sometimes just plain superstitious. They are parenting and teaching the new generation to give a crap about the past based on the way the individual speaking was mistreated. This is wrong, the older generation should look at the new generation and emphasize the unity amongst the races and why it is important not, don't say this or look like this or talk to these people because along time ago this happen to me from a person of that same race or religion. Because now the newer generations are really confused, because they are listening to what the older generation has to say and is taking it into consideration, but they way they and their peers live their lives is just fine and harmonius, so now there is a loss of a sense of identity and how we should treat others based on race.
This is the start of a good discussion on such a tough subject.
One question that is rarely addressed was raised, in the first post, but not discussed further. This was, What if some parts of racist stereotypes are true? It has to be discussed sooner or later: the same genetic system that governs skin color or facial features also governs other physical features and has a strong influence on intellect and personality. But anyone who raises the issue (like a sports writer, several years ago) gets flogged as a racist.
Tests in the University of California system have found a pattern in how well people of different races do, in classes, SATs, etc. Asians do best, then whites, then Hispanics, then blacks. Even when results are corrected for poverty and family conditions the pattern remains.
Now of course this is not a predictor for any individual, it's more like the association of gender and height. On average men are taller than women, although there's an overlap in the middle, with some women being taller than some men.
Is it possible for our culture to discuss this matter, in a non-racist way--or without some people making accusations of racism? Should we discuss it or should it be a forbidden topic? As the exploration of the Human Genome continues, there may well be more and more things like this popping up, with genetic "influence" or even total determination, for traits that we thought were just variation, or were learned or chosen.
A CASE IN NOXUBEE COUNTY,MISSISSIPPI,HITS CLOSE TO HOME!!!!
Let me first start by saying that im not trying to upset nobody,but being from Noxubee County , I can shine some light on this issue and let you all know that this part of Mississippi is still far behind.The white people in this area are trapped in the mind set that we are still in slavery .Crazy thing about it is I could never understand why white teachers could teach us but their children wouldn't dare set foot in the same schools ..They were home school or either went to private school if their parents could afford it.Im not saying all ,but some white people usually complain about how lazy we are as a race .If we stand up and decided to make a difference in the world its a problem....How many years later ? We still facing the same issues.This American soil wasnt found by whites people nor was it by blacks.Honestly, the only people that has a right to turn their nose up and ask why are you here?In my opinion are the the indians and that's real talk.If you lived in a area such as Noxubee then you probably understand what im saying . Its about time that we play a role in the voting and the polls ......White people have done messed up things to black people for many years...What we do? Dust it off and keep on moving ...SO I HOPE THE NAACP FIGHT THIS ALL THE WAY TO SUPREME COURT IF NEEDED!!!!!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 13, 2006
CONTACT:
Earl Ofari Hutchinson
323-296-6331
hutchinsonreport@aol.com
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN BLACKS SUPPRESS WHITE VOTERS
By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, BlackNews.com Columnist
The news that the Justice Department has filed a vote discrimination lawsuit against blacks in Noxubee County, Mississippi for of all things suppressing white votes has raised eyebrows. The novel suit, which is believed to be one of the first of its kind in which blacks were explicitly accused of using illegal tactics to boot whites from the polls, seemed laughable if not downright absurd. For nearly a century, Mississippi whites used every trick in the book from intimidation to physical violence to keep blacks from the polls. The lawsuit seemed even more absurd given the well-documented reports of continued voter intimidation and suppression against black voters. The NAACP, a legion of citizen watchdog groups, People For the American Way, and Democrats have filed lawsuits in Florida, Ohio, Missouri, and other states claiming vote fraud before and after the 2004 presidential elections.
There is no smoking gun proof that the Bush Justice Department systematically subverted the enforcement provisions of the voting rights act to diminish black political strength and bolster the Republicans. But Bush did not aggressively fight to implement the Help America Vote Act of 2002, nor lobby Congress to speed up funding for the initiative. Republican voter groups were caught red-handed in Oregon and Nevada dumping Democratic voter registrations. Republican registrars have limited the number of ballots, and have cut back the number of polling places in heavily black neighborhoods, and have rejected thousands of applications on the most spurious technical grounds. The Justice Department has taken no action in these cases.
But the Department has taken action against Noxubee County blacks. And it should have. Blacks outnumber whites 3 to 1 in the county. The crushing numbers advantage guarantees that they’d dominate county politics in a fair election.
Instead, says the Justice Department, the black chair of the county Democratic Party instead chose to cheat to disfranchise whites by intimidation, bribery, falsifying and manipulating absentee ballots and even importing black outsiders to run for office. If whites had used the same tactics, blacks would have loudly screamed foul, and demanded that the Justice Department take action.
They didn’t and haven’t in part because of their fierce loathing of the Bush administration, and in part from their deep suspicion that the Justice Department is using the lawsuit as yet another ploy to diminish black voting strength. The caution and silence is understandable, but this walking on racial eggshells leaves blacks prone to the charge that they propagate double standards on race. That is that when a white commits a racially offensive act they rush to condemn it, but are silent when a black does the same thing. That swings the door open even wider for blacks that commit crimes or inappropriate acts to finger-point whites for their misdeeds, and thereby divert attention from their wayward acts, or even get support and sympathy for them.
The endless line of black politicians, ministers and sports icons know the drill well. Whenever they are accused of or are nailed for sexual hijinks, bribery, corruption, drug dealing and even murder they reflexively shout that they are victims of a racist conspiracy. It’s a well-worn tact but it’s a sure fire crowd pleaser because many blacks are conditioned to belief that anything whites do or say toward and about them is malicious.
The problem with this is that the victims of the misdeeds of black miscreants are almost always other blacks. That’s true with the flap in Noxubee County.
Though whites are the target of voting abuses, black voters now are forced to take the heat from the Justice Department. The Department will be hawk like in watching for any sign, real or imagined, that blacks have abused the voting process there. State officials, in turn, will keep a sharp eye on voting procedures. The state’s Democratic Party will keep black county officials at arms length. The press will finger point Noxubee, County as the poster symbol of political corruption. The implicit meaning is that when blacks grab political power in Southern state’s counties they are just as prone as whites to bend, twist and subvert the political process.
The ultimate winner is the Bush administration. The suit deflects attention from the Justice Department’s see no evil, hear no evil against accusations that Republicans have suppressed the black vote in the South and the Latino and American Indian vote in other states. It boosts the Justice Department image as an even handed enforcer of the voting rights laws.
With mid-term elections weeks away, and with Republicans and Democrats locked in intense battles for Senate and House seats in some states, the issue of black voter suppression almost certainly will again be a hot issue in some places. The vote muddle in Noxubee County makes it harder it that much harder to sell the notion that blacks, not whites, are still the prime target of voter suppression.
BlackNews.com columnist Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a political analyst and social issues commentator, and the author of The Emerging Black GOP Majority (Middle Passage Press, September 2006), a hard-hitting look at Bush and The GOP’s court of black voters. For order information, see www.blackgopbook.com
For media interviews, contact:
Mr. Hutchinson at 323-296-6331 or hutchinsonreport@aol.com