From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Tue Sep 24 2002 - 21:53:12 MDT
Greg Burch, a member of an Extropians governing body
recently posted a message simply entitled "Racism",
and spoke of its repugnance to Extropians. However, from
time to time it should also be explained exactly *why*
racism is wrong, especially on a list like this where
practically any idea is accepted for review.
It was briefly touched upon a recent email, but I want
to explain it myself. Racism is wrong because it
suppresses individual characteristics at the expense of
group characteristics. The truth is that the human race
is composed of human *individuals*, and that's not nearly
so true about the other higher animals. Every time racist
statements are pronounced, entire groups are denigrated
to the extent that no allowance is made for within-group
variation, and no allowance is made for the truth that
a person is an *individual*.
It follows, then, that views made about *individuals*
based upon the groups to which they belong are both
in error and are *wrong*. And, by that latter, I mean
exactly that I disapprove wholeheartedly.
Other people who are not ethical relativists can go
further than I, and claim that it can be scientifically
shown that such sentiments, as mine, are morally correct,
that there is an absolutely right moral stance, and that
racism fails to meet the criteria. While I *am* an ethical
relativist, and so cannot go that far, I am *not* a moral
relativist: I stridently disapprove of many things, and
do not hesitate to disparage them.
Sometimes, however, it's true that racist statements are more
than just very distasteful: it is egregiously *inaccurate*
to imply that all individuals of a human group exhibit some
genuine human trait, such as intelligence, to a lesser degree
than some other group. These errors must be firmly separated
from other kind of statement that one merely disapproves of.
But to return to the subject of odious (to me) racism,
a few months ago a guy at work made a number of remarks
that confirmed for me the impression I'd had that he's a
racist. He makes clear his disdain for many groups of
people (practically all but his own, I think), and is
not above seeing some other people at work as having
personal failings related to their color. But here is
where it gets interesting, and is, I think, typical of
racists: one of his *very* closest friends happens to
be from a non-white minority group, and I must say that
their friendship cannot be any less profound than is mine
with my closest friends---theirs is perhaps even more so.
This individual has even done exemplary service for a
Chinese woman we know, who was the victim of non-racial
persecution and harassment (sexual jealousy, I think).
Yet one day some months ago in conversation, while we
were discussing the possible use of nuclear weapons in
Afghanistan, he said "Well, I think that we should nuke
them *all*; why stop at Afghanistan?". I said, "What do
you mean? All the Arab nations?". He said, "I mean
all the third-world nations. What have they ever done
for civilization? Who needs them?" I said, "You mean
China, and South America, and so on?" He said, "Yes".
I took the time to confirm that he wanted to stand by
that statement, and for the sake of office harmony did
not say that I thought he was crazy. His problem---
and I do mean *problem*--- is that there is a very
serious disconnect between his personal reality and
his "global reality", if you will. I could have nastily
said, "Well Tim (not his real name), Cynthia used to
live in Canton, and was even *born* there! How CAN YOU
propose destroying millions of people who are just like
her?" (She was the one he had so nobly taken actions
away from work to defend, and whom he visits often.)
This attitude on the part of racists, I say, is quite
typical, and creates for them, I suspect a huge amount
of angst. They are, IMO, responding to deep-seated
instincts of xenophobia, which to me aren't necessarily
all bad (which is why evolution provided them to us),
but which seriously ruin any effort racists make to
integrate their disparate views and feelings into a
conscious, rational whole.
I know that for some people on this list, my abhorrence
at his beliefs was insufficiently displayed in my little
encounter with him, and that for the sake of political
correctness, I should have told him that his views were
"unacceptable", and then, at the present time denounce
this human being in the MOST uncompromising way. But
I just cannot totally condemn a significant section of
all people, and think of them as sub-human or anything.
I also hope that folks reading this list don't think
that this is some kind of propaganda ploy or mind game by
me, but realize instead that the words above are completely
sincere. Too often, of course, those on the right will
leave to the left all the denunciations of racism, (because
to us that's what they're going on about all the time anyway
even when the charge isn't warranted). By the same token,
liberals too often leave to the conservatives the needed
denunciations of wrong behavior that they also feel is
too often emphasized by *their* opposite numbers. All this
only increases polarization and suspicion, naturally.
It's these mechanisms I've discussed above that underlie
racism, IMO, and they're complex enough---and slippery
enough---that no final sweeping conclusions will be
rightly accepted as fact until people are vastly more
intelligent and knowledgeable than they are now. Puerile
denunciations of *hate*, for example---so common in the
media---do much more harm than good towards understanding.
In conclusion, perhaps it can be put this simply: racism
is wrong because it ignores individual differences.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:16 MST