From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Thu Aug 09 2001 - 20:08:57 MDT
Harvey Newstrom writes
>> now can we get back an address the issue? Is Jesse Jackson a racist?
>
> This is almost a trick question. Jackson's original quote said that he was
> ashamed to have this distinction between blacks and whites in his mind.
> Therefore, he seems to be giving an example of where even he has racial
> prejudice and/or discrimination in his mind. However, he gives this as an
> example of what we need to stop doing.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that he was in effect making a
statement about black crime rates, and not engaging in self-criticism.
> So is he a racist? No. He seems to be admitting that racism is
> a common and natural feeling that we all need to fight to overcome.
So now we can have "common" and "natural" feelings of racism,
without being racist? This is wrecking the terminology.
> He admits some racist thoughts, but is fighting to end racism.
I predict that Jackson would (rightfully IMO) deny that he
has racist thoughts.
> Therefore, I don't really care if we call these attitudes racist, prejudice
> or discrimination. To link unrelated traits to race is racist. To make
> decisions based on race rather than people's individual merits is racist.
I agree that getting too involved in definitions, then coming up with
new ones, and then expecting everyone to abide by the new ones is crazy.
But I think that your usage here of what is "racist" is overbroad, and
you will end up saying (like you did above) that Jesse Jackson has
racist (against blacks) thoughts, and that it was racist for the person
walking down the street to be relieved (in that neighborhood) that the
person behind him was white.
Now it should be understood that statistics probably dictates that in
*some* neighborhoods in the United States, one would be relieved to find
that there was a black person walking behind them. One possible locale,
conceivably, could be South Boston. But in that case, it would be
equally ridiculous to suppose that then one was being "racist"
against whites.
My usage of the term needs criticism: "A racist is someone who is
automatically antagonistic towards someone else just because of
that person's race."
> Is there any good reason to split hairs with these terms, except to be able
> to practice prejudice and discrimination while claiming not to be racist?
Harvey, please give some of the people here more credit than that.
Like you, many really do want to come to the truth about a very
difficult issue.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:09:40 MST