Chapter
1
Semantics
(Excerpt from Defensive Racism by Edgar J.
Steele)
“What is in a name? A rose by any
other name would smell as sweet.”
--- William
Shakespeare
Names and labels are funny things. Used as a form of shorthand, to
facilitate communication, names often accomplish exactly the opposite. Worse, the damage is done in stealth,
with nobody the wiser.
A good deal of the world’s conflict assuredly can be attributed to those who walk away from an ostensible agreement with very different understandings of what just took place. Marriage merely is one of the easiest-to-recognize occurrences of stealth conflict.
The problem is one of semantics, in other
words.
It is critical to this book’s central thesis to
decide at the outset precisely what is meant by the words “racism” and
“racist.”
Ask most to define the term “racist” and they will
use words such as “bigot,” “hate” and “intolerance.” Even many who admit to being racist will
employ negatively-charged words in describing themselves.
Those who admit to having racist tendencies often
try to distinguish themselves as being “racialist,” rather than “racist,”
without realizing that makes no difference to most. They are kin to those who categorically
deny being racist, all the while comporting themselves in classically racist
ways.
Racism is a sort of “gateway” concept, too. Once one sees oneself as a racist, one
falls prey to a host of attitudes that simply are adopted whole cloth, with no
rational examination. Kind of like
how Democrats believe themselves to be liberal and Republicans think themselves
conservative (another set of self-defeating shorthand words, to be sure). That is why self-avowed racists almost
universally cannot give a rational explanation for disliking (for example)
Asians and fall back on skin color as their sole mode of distinguishing
others.
I have come generally to believe that two rational
people, after a full and complete discussion, can never disagree about
anything. At the very least, they
can agree to disagree because of some fundamental schism which cannot be
resolved.
A good example of an irresolvable conflict is the
abortion debate, which is a direct extension of how one views one’s unprovable
and unknowable role in the universe.
No amount of debate will sway one side to adopt the other’s point of view
without first getting both sides to agree on the origin and purpose of humanity,
an impossible task.
Of course, many self-avowed racists hew to a
religious basis for their racial outlooks, as well. Followers of Christian Identity, for
example, believe all non-Caucasian races to be the spawn either of Satan or of
creatures lesser than
Similarly, there is no reasoning with those who
have adopted secular humanism as a form of personal religion and therefore
refuse to believe the manifest proof of there being racial differences other
than mere skin color.
There simply is no reasoning with people unwilling
to place all underlying beliefs on the table for examination and
alteration.
Nor can one get these disparate irrational (for
lack of a better word) factions to agree on a definition for the word
“racist.” If you are one of these,
please keep in mind how you have hobbled yourself as you move through the pages
of this book. Remember that you
have refused to come to grips with the basic definitions necessary to examine
racism.
I submit that, ultimately, one can define racism
solely as a belief in the mere existence of racial differences. Other words are sufficient to
distinguish attitudes and beliefs apart from a fundamentally racist outlook
(“hateful racist” or “intolerant racist,” for example).
Yes, believing in skin color differences amongst
the races is a racist belief. Mind
you, if that were the only racial difference that existed, as some would have us
believe, then the concept of racism becomes singularly uninteresting and ceases
altogether for blind people.
However, ultimately we must deal with the baggage
that the term “racist” carries as it is flung about by one person or
another. Without realizing it, all
the people using the word really aren’t even on the same page.
What everybody might agree upon is that “racist”
is a negative descriptor. What of
those who believe in racial differences without the negative freight attendant
to the word “racist?” For example,
does stereotyping mean the same thing as bigotry? Is a police profiler a bigot?
Don’t we really use the term “racist” as a means
to vilify those with whom we disagree and/or dislike? Doesn’t that mean the negative
implication actually resides within the one using the label, not the other way
around?
The label “racist” really has more to do with the
labeler than with the labelee, doesn’t it?
Consider:
Why is it racist to form a White civil rights group, yet it is not racist
to support the NAACP? Why can
Blacks agitate for preferences which come at the expense of Whites, yet such is
not known as racism? Why does
opposing affirmative action get many White people labeled hateful and bigoted
racists?
Some argue that indulging one race at the expense
of another is necessary to redress past societal wrongs. Aside from the obvious inequity of
penalizing those who merely possess the same color skin as those who might have
acted wrongly in the past, there is the issue of the very real racial caste
system that becomes institutionalized once one begins dispensing race-based
favors.
If somehow we could subtract all the pejorative
meaning from the word racist, we could get on with the real job before us, that
of determining if there is any merit to the attitudes and beliefs of those we
call racist. A daunting task, yes,
but not one to be avoided merely because of apparent difficulty.
For the purpose of this book’s discussion, please
agree to set aside all the negative outlooks you might have toward racism and
racists. Try writing those negative
attributes inside the back cover as a symbolic means of setting them aside for
the moment. After you have finished
the book, then you may pick them up and reinstall them, if you wish. Should you choose to continue with them,
after all, you might just have gained a much more rational and logical basis for
shunning racists.
I won’t hide the ball: There exists the danger that you might
abandon your attitudes about racism, in whole or in part. You might even end up unabashedly
viewing yourself as a racist, albeit a very special sort, one with none of the
negative characteristics you might have listed inside the back cover, as
suggested above. On the other hand,
some skinheads might start growing hair again.
At the very least, I guarantee you will be thinking about the subject in ways that you never have before. The intellectual exercise, alone, will be worth the journey. I promise.
Let’s get on with it...
Copyright © 2004 Edgar J. Steele
