(Name-mce) ListServ We are all NOT racist, unconsciously
Rita Kohli
rkohli at ucla.edu
Mon Nov 27 11:37:04 EST 2006
I think it is a great idea to have a workshop on addressing structural
racism at the next conference.
I also think its great that Richard's is pushing folks to reflect on
themselves, but honestly, I do not feel that I learned (or can learn)
about myself from his actions. What was affirmed for me is that white
supremacy is lurking (a word someone used) and supressed in many people.
As a Person of Color, and as a very reflective Person of Color on
racism, and internalized racism, I am very aware of racism all the
time. I also believe that for those who are not as focused on racism,
it still should not take a white man yelling epithets on tv for "us" to
remember racism. I see, feel and hear racism everyday- whether subtle
or overt, whether conscious or unconscious, whether structurally
embedded or within an individual. Racism is part of our world, our
history. And to be the target of racism, whether structural or
individual, can have a deep and lasting affect on People of Color, on
our identity and the way we see our place in the world.
I think as one reflects, or writes an LA times article, or speaks on
racism, it is important not confuse words like "us" and "we" for the
experiences of whites and People of Color. I don't mean to be
disrespectful, but I do not waiver in my thought that the racism that
may unfortunately lurk in your 91 year old grandmother, to me, is very
different than the INTERNALIZED racism that my grandmother feels for
her own community when compared to Europeans who colonized our country.
I appreciate that Richard's has prompted reflection on white privelege
and white supremacy. But I stand firm that, no matter how much he
regrets, apologizes or is coming to terms with his racism (which I
still doubt), he is NO hero!
Whether white or a Person of Color, to quote a friend and scholar Dr.
Picower, "we must always keep an unblinking eye on white supremacy."
As we begin to plan the next conference, I am willing to
participate/help in the development of race/racism conscious sessions.
I am still a young and developing scholar, and a recent member of the
org, so if any veteran NAME member wants to recruit or guide me in how
to help plan, I am very open.
Thanks, Rita
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: We're all racists, unconsciously (Paul or Lisa)
> 2. ListServ We're all racists, unconsciously (Ssbernabei at aol.com)
> 3. Re: We're all racists, unconsciously (rfriedman at brookes.ac.uk)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 08:45:38 -0700
> From: "Paul or Lisa" <plw2351 at zianet.com>
> Subject: Re: (Name-mce) ListServ We're all racists, unconsciously
> To: "NAME-MCE - National Association for Multicultural Education
> EmailDiscussion Group" <name-mce at nameorg.org>
> Message-ID: <002501c71171$ec0dc310$1f581fd8 at yourdaa2649010>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> I absolutely agree, Rita, that Richards should not be forgiven because it
> appeared he gave a heartfelt apology on television (he is, after all, an
> actor). His comments are inexcusable. However, I think it is important that
> we self-reflect and examine our own biases. There are, after all, varying
> degrees of prejudice. My 91-year-old grandmother living in rural small-town
> Ohio, who has never worked outside the home, for example, is afraid of
> African Americans. Her fear stems from her limited life experiences but it
> is racist nonetheless. Yet, she would never use the n-word publicly or
> privately. Clearly, her racism is not as severe as Mr. Richards, yet it is
> still there lurking.
>
> I think the point is to take a good hard look in the mirror and acknowledge
> our own prejudices. Then work to eliminate them.
>
> Lisa Weinbaum
> Las Cruces Public Schools
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rita Kohli" <rkohli at ucla.edu>
> To: <KispokoT at aol.com>; <name-mce at nameorg.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 11:19 AM
> Subject: Re: (Name-mce) ListServ We're all racists, unconsciously
>
>
>> I am not sure if whoever posted this article had an opinion about what
>> it is saying, but I really have a problem with it that I don't feel can
>> go unaddressed.
>>
>> I do not agree that we are all racists unconsciously, I also feel
>> strongly that I should not just accept Richards apology because he had
>> some kind of "courage" that we do not have to share our innermost
>> feelings of hatred.
>>
>> What Richards said and did was an exhibition of white power. He didn't
>> like what was being done to him by an African American heckler, and he
>> had the words and power to subjugate him, in a way that could never be
>> done to a white man.
>>
>> The test mentioned in the article, that proves that we are all
>> "racist," may show that whites as well as People of Color associate
>> white with good and Black with bad on an unconscious level, but we must
>> acknowledge the historical reasons for why People of Color may
>> demonstrate this. Colonization, slavery, post-colonial dominance,
>> education, media are all ways in which People of Color, globally, have
>> been and continue to be taught to believe in a racial heirarchy where
>> whites are deemed superior. We have been forced to believe that we are
>> inferior, and often carry a deep self-hate, whether consciously or not.
>> From Carter G. Woodson, to Fanon or Malcolm X, Black activists have
>> been naming racism to allow African people to heal from a self-hate
>> that was taught to them by their white oppressor.
>>
>> I, as a South Asian woman, refuse to believe that the colonization and
>> enslavement of my people had little impact on the way that we view
>> whiteness, light skin, Europe. And I also refuse to believe that the
>> elements of internalized racism that I, or my community hold about
>> ourselves or others, is the same as the deep-rooted hatred for African
>> Americans that Richards has "unconsciously" in his heart.
>>
>> The interpretation of this test in this article seems to excuse racism
>> because we all allegedly have it. There is no excuse for what was
>> done, and in my opinion no way to forgive or not judge a man by what he
>> said when he was drunk or angry. I have been angry or upset many times
>> in my life, and I know for a fact that nothing like that has ever come
>> out of my mouth.
>>
>> There is nothing that Richards could EVER say to get me to believe he
>> is a decent human being. We cannot confuse white supremacy with the
>> internalization of racism imposed on non-white people in this world, we
>> must not confuse hate with self-hate, and I feel it is fundamental that
>> we begin to recognize these differences.
>>
>> Rita Kohli
>> Race and Ethnic Studies in Education, UCLA
>>
>> _http://www.latimes.http://wwhttp://www.latimhttp://wwhttp://www.latihttp://_
>> (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shermer24nov24,0,48454)
>> 06.story?coll=06.story?coll=<W06
>>
>> We're all racists, unconsciously
>> Kramer just blurted out what unfortunately comes naturally to all of us.
>>
>> By Michael Shermer
>>
>> MICHAEL SHERMER is the publisher of Skeptic magazine and a monthly
>> columnist for Scientific American. His latest book is "Why Darwin
>> Matters."
>>
>> November 24, 2006
>>
>> AFTER A PAROXYSM of racial viciousness at the Laugh Factory last week,
>> Michael Richards, the 57-year-old comedian who played Kramer on
>> "Seinfeld,"
>> explained to David Letterman and his "Late Night" audience Monday: "I'm
>> not
>> a racist. That's what's so insane about this."
>>
>> Richards' shattered demeanor and heartfelt repentance leaves us with what
>> I
>> shall call Kramer's Conundrum: How can someone who spews racial epithets
>> genuinely believe he is not a racist? The answer is to be found in the
>> difference between our conscious and unconscious attitudes and our public
>> and private thoughts.
>>
>> Consciously and publicly, Richards is probably not a racist. But
>> unconsciously and privately, he is. So am I. So are you.
>>
>> Consciously and publicly, most of us are colorblind. And most of us, most
>> of the time, believe and act on that cultural requisite. You'd have to be
>> insane to publicly utter racist remarks in today's society ? or
>> temporarily
>> insane, which both science and the law recognize as sometimes being
>> triggered by anger.
>>
>> And alcohol ? recall Mel Gibson's drunken eruption about Jews, or the
>> college frat boys slurring alcohol-induced insanities about blacks and
>> slavery in Sacha Baron Cohen's film "Borat."
>>
>> The insidiousness of racism is because of the fact that it arises out of
>> the deep recesses of our unconscious. We may be unaware of it, yet it
>> lurks
>> there.
>>
>> How do we know this? One indication is the Implicit Association Test,
>> developed by Harvard scientists, which asks subjects to pair words and
>> concepts. The more closely associated the words and concepts are, the
>> quicker the response to them will be in the key-pressing sorting task
>> (try
>> it yourself at _https://implicit.https://implhttps://i_
>> (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/) ).
>>
>> The race test firsts asks you to sort black and white faces into one of
>> two
>> categories: European American or African American. Easy. Next you are
>> asked
>> to sort a list of words (joy, terrible, love, agony, peace, horrible,
>> wonderful, nasty, pleasure) into one of two categories: Good or Bad. No
>> problem.
>>
>> The next task is a little more complicated. The words and black and white
>> faces appear on the screen one at a time, and you sort them into one of
>> these categories: African American/Good or European American/Bad. Again
>> you
>> match the words with the concepts of good or bad, and faces with national
>> origin. So the word "joy" would go into the first category and a white
>> face
>> would go into the second category. This sorting goes noticeably slower,
>> but
>> you might expect that because the combined categories are more
>> cognitively
>> complex.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the final sorting task puts the lie to that
>> rationalization.
>> This time you sort the words and faces into the categories European
>> American/Good or African American/Bad. Tellingly (and
>> distressingly)Americ
>> sorting process goes much faster than the previous one. I was much
>> quicker
>> to associate words like "joy," "love" and "pleasure" with European
>> American/Good than I did with African American/Good.
>>
>> I consider myself about as socially liberal as you can get, and yet on a
>> scale that includes "slight," "moderate" and "strong," the program
>> concluded: "Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for European
>> American compared to African American." What? "The interpretation is
>> described as 'automatic preference for European American' if you
>> responded
>> faster when European American faces and Good words were classified with
>> the
>> same key than when African American faces and Good words were classified
>> with the same key."
>>
>> But I'm not a racist. How can this be? It turns out that this
>> subconscious
>> association of good with European Americans is true for everyone, even
>> African Americans, no matter how colorblind we all claim to be.
>>
>> We are by nature sorters. Evolutionists theorize that we evolved in small
>> bands of hunter-gatherers when there was a selection for within-group
>> amity
>> and between-group enmity. With our fellow in-group members, we are
>> cooperative and altruistic. Unfortunately, the downside to this
>> pro-social
>> bonding is that we are also quite tribal and xenophobic to out-group
>> members.
>>
>> This natural tendency to sort people into Within-Group/This nat
>> Between-Group/Between-Group/<WBR>Bad is shaped by culture, so that all A
>> even those whose ancestry is African) implicitly inculcate the cultural
>> association, which includes additional prejudices.
>>
>> The Harvard test, in fact, also demonstrates that we prefer young to old,
>> thin to fat, straight to gay and such associations as family-females and
>> career-males, liberal arts-females and science-males. Such associations
>> bubble just below the surface, inhibited by cultural restraints but
>> susceptible to eruption under extreme inebriation or duress.
>>
>> Richards' sin was his deed; his thoughts are the sin of all humanity.
>> Only
>> when all people are considered to be members of one global in-group (in
>> principle if not in practice) can we begin to attenuate these out-group
>> associations. But it won't be easy. Vigilance is the watchword of both
>> freedom and dignity.
>>
>> We should accept Richards' apology for losing his temper and acting out
>> those hateful thoughts. Perhaps we also ought to thank him for having the
>> courage to confess in public what far too many of us still harbor in
>> private, often in our unconscious minds. As the Russian novelist Fyodor
>> Dostoyevsky wrote: "Every man has reminiscences which he would not tell
>> to
>> everyone but only his friends. He has other matters in his mind which he
>> would not reveal even to his friends, but only to himself, and that in
>> secret. But there are other things which a man is afraid to tell even to
>> himself, and every decent man has a number of such things stored away in
>> his mind."
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This is a mailing of the National Association for Multicultural
>> Education -
>> (NAME) Listserv list - www.nameorg.org. The materials included reflect
>> diverse perspectives of NAME Listserv participants and do not necessarily
>> reflect a position of the National Association for Multicultural
>> Education. If you would like to subscribe (or unsubscribe)to this listserv
>> go to http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org. You
>> can read all past postings in the archives at
>> http://mail.nameorg.org/pipermail/name-mce_nameorg.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> Name-mce mailing list
>> Name-mce at nameorg.org
>> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 11:09:17 EST
> From: Ssbernabei at aol.com
> Subject: (Name-mce) ListServ ListServ We're all racists, unconsciously
> To: name-mce at nameorg.org
> Message-ID: <be2.677698b.329b162d at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
>
> It is amazing that a race constructed country can still maintain
> confusion and thereby white supremacy after hundreds of years and
> hundreds and
> hundreds of textbooks written by hundreds of experts on the subject.
> It is sad
> that the debate continues the confusion and pain we share around the issue of
> race and racism.
>
> Until we share a common definition...a common understanding of our
> collective history grounded in facts and not left to individual
> opinion, we will
> continue to hurt and confuse. Historian John Hope Franklin was named
> winner of
> 2006 John W. Kluge Prize for the Study of Humanity the equivalent of
> the Nobel
> prize in History. This great announcement received little attention in the
> news.
>
> He is 91 years old and ends his career as a United States Historian
> saddened by the reality that Americans still do not understand their
> history and
> are still not taught the truth. He refuses to be referred to as a Black
> historian insisting that he wrote and taught American history not
> Black history.
>
>
> Racism is structural yet we continue to focus on the individual. Our
> discussions will do nothing to change the structural arrangements
> that keep us
> divided and at the same time maintain the status quo that is killing
> people of
> color everyday as we debate the acts of individuals. "Racism cannot
> be taught
> away.. nor talked away. Undoing is a verb and requires organized action."
> (www.pisab.org)
>
> I recommend that all Name members take advantage of the Undoing Racism
> Workshop offered by The People's Institute for Survival and Beyond (led by
> people of color) and join the movement to undo structural racism.
> The People's
> Institute have been offering workshops on Undoing Racism for over 25
> years and
> maintain a focus on racism, not diversity, tolerance or multiculturalism...of
> course the workshop includes history and culture and it all makes more sense
> once we have clarity on racism.
>
> Perhaps The People's Institute could present at the next annual
> conference. It may be time to consider the contribution NAME
> members could make to
> the movement to undo structural racism if we work together with a common
> framework and common strategy.
>
> peace,
>
> Sandy Bernabei
> www.antiracistalliance.com
> a movement to undo structural racism
> -------------
>
> November 24,? 2006
>
> AFTER A PAROXYSM of racial viciousness at the Laugh Factory last? week,
> Michael Richards, the 57-year-old comedian who played Kramer on? "Seinfeld,"
> explained to David Letterman and his "Late Night" audience? Monday: "I'm not
> a racist. That's what's so insane about? this."
>
> Richards' shattered demeanor and heartfelt repentance leaves us? with what I
> shall call Kramer's Conundrum: How can someone who spews racial? epithets
> genuinely believe he is not a racist? The answer is to be found in? the
> difference between our conscious and unconscious attitudes and our? public
> and private thoughts.
>
> Consciously and publicly, Richards is? probably not a racist. But
> unconsciously and privately, he is. So am I. So? are you.
>
> Consciously and publicly, most of us are colorblind. And most of? us, most
> of the time, believe and act on that cultural requisite. You'd have? to be
> insane to publicly utter racist remarks in today's society ? or? temporarily
> insane, which both science and the law recognize as sometimes? being
> triggered by anger.
>
> And alcohol ? recall Mel Gibson's drunken? eruption about Jews, or the
> college frat boys slurring alcohol-induced? insanities about blacks and
> slavery in Sacha Baron Cohen's film? "Borat."
>
> The insidiousness of racism is because of the fact that it? arises out of
> the deep recesses of our unconscious. We may be unaware of it,? yet it lurks
> there.
>
> How do we know this? One indication is the? Implicit Association Test,
> developed by Harvard scientists, which asks? subjects to pair words and
> concepts. The more closely associated the words? and concepts are, the
> quicker the response to them will be in the? key-pressing sorting task (try
> it yourself at _https://implicit.https://implhttps://i_
> (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/)?? ).
>
> The race test firsts asks you to sort black and white faces into one? of two
> categories: European American or African American. Easy. Next you are? asked
> to sort a list of words (joy, terrible, love, agony, peace,? horrible,
> wonderful, nasty, pleasure) into one of two categories: Good or? Bad. No
> problem.
>
> The next task is a little more complicated. The words? and black and white
> faces appear on the screen one at a time, and you sort? them into one of
> these categories: African American/Good or European? American/Bad. Again you
> match the words with the concepts of good or bad, and? faces with national
> origin. So the word "joy" would go into the first? category and a white face
> would go into the second category. This sorting? goes noticeably slower, but
> you might expect that because the combined? categories are more cognitively
> complex.
>
> Unfortunately, the final? sorting task puts the lie to that rationalization.
> This time you sort the? words and faces into the categories European
> American/Good or African? American/Bad. Tellingly (and distressingly)Americ
> sorting process goes? much faster than the previous one. I was much quicker
> to associate words like? "joy," "love" and "pleasure" with European
> American/Good than I did with? African American/Good.
>
> I consider myself about as socially liberal as you? can get, and yet on a
> scale that includes "slight," "moderate" and "strong,"? the program
> concluded: "Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for? European
> American compared to African American." What? "The interpretation? is
> described as 'automatic preference for European American' if you? responded
> faster when European American faces and Good words were classified? with the
> same key than when African American faces and Good words were? classified
> with the same key."
>
> But I'm not a racist. How can this be?? It turns out that this subconscious
> association of good with European? Americans is true for everyone, even
> African Americans, no matter how? colorblind we all claim to be.
>
> We are by nature sorters. Evolutionists? theorize that we evolved in small
> bands of hunter-gatherers when there was a? selection for within-group amity
> and between-group enmity. With our fellow? in-group members, we are
> cooperative and altruistic. Unfortunately, the? downside to this pro-social
> bonding is that we are also quite tribal and? xenophobic to out-group
> members.
>
> This natural tendency to sort people? into Within-Group/This nat
> Between-Group/Between-Group/<WBR>Bad is shaped by culture,? so that all A
> even those whose ancestry is African)? implicitly inculcate the cultural
> association, which includes additional? prejudices.
>
> The Harvard test, in fact, also demonstrates that we prefer? young to old,
> thin to fat, straight to gay and such associations as? family-females and
> career-males, liberal arts-females and science-males. Such? associations
> bubble just below the surface, inhibited by cultural restraints? but
> susceptible to eruption under extreme inebriation or? duress.
>
> Richards' sin was his deed; his thoughts are the sin of all? humanity. Only
> when all people are considered to be members of one global? in-group (in
> principle if not in practice) can we begin to attenuate these? out-group
> associations. But it won't be easy. Vigilance is the watchword of? both
> freedom and dignity.
>
> We should accept Richards' apology for? losing his temper and acting out
> those hateful thoughts. Perhaps we also? ought to thank him for having the
> courage to confess in public what far too? many of us still harbor in
> private, often in our unconscious minds. As the? Russian novelist Fyodor
> Dostoyevsky wrote: "Every man has reminiscences which? he would not tell to
> everyone but only his friends. He has other matters in? his mind which he
> would not reveal even to his friends, but only to himself,? and that in
> secret. But there are other things which a man is afraid to tell? even to
> himself, and every decent man has a number of such things stored away? in
> his mind."
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is a mailing of the National Association for Multicultural Education -
> (NAME) Listserv list - www.nameorg.org. The materials included reflect
> diverse perspectives of NAME Listserv participants and do not
> necessarily reflect a
> position of the National Association for Multicultural Education. If
> you would
> like to subscribe (or unsubscribe)to this listserv go to
> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org. You
> can read all past postings in
> the archives at http://mail.nameorg.org/pipermail/name-mce_nameorg.org/
>
>
>
> Name-mce mailing list
> Name-mce at nameorg.org
> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 23:43:11 -0000 (GMT)
> From: rfriedman at brookes.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: (Name-mce) ListServ We're all racists, unconsciously
> To: "NAME-MCE - National Association for Multicultural Education Email
> Discussion Group" <name-mce at nameorg.org>
> Message-ID:
> <2954.86.145.1.172.1164584591.squirrel at webmail.brookes.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> hello i have been following the news on this story-i am not sure if we are
> in position to forgive Richards-is that our job? and is that the angle
> that we need to adopt...i am not convinced--however i think that as was
> suggested on one newssite-that we need to turn this incident around and
> learn from it for ourselves and our communities...the men in the audience
> could have insulted Richards in a way that many white men cannot
> understand and they could have called him one of the names that are used
> for Jews-there are plenty of things that could have happened...but didn't
> the 'n' word is a word that makes me 'uncomfortable'[and this is not a
> significantly strong enough word] whether i am hearing men women or
> children that are black, white or any other colour saying it, however to
> pretend that i do not know that word or that it exists would be a
> lie...that word is heard in popular songs of today, i have heard people
> that are black and people that are white using that word...i do not use
> that word...but i know that it exists...
> a favorite quote of mine is 'justice, justice you should pursue' and an
> interpretation of this quote that makes it appeal to me is the one that
> attempts to explain why justice is written twice...why? because it is a
> reminder that we should pursue justice with justice...and from where i sit
> it seems that Richards is attempting to do this in the face of his own
> behavior...and i would like to suggest that instead of staring and finger
> pointing, we take this opportunity to look more closely inside of
> ourselves and confront our own beliefs---we never know what tomorrow will
> bring--Richards is working to understanding himself and to mend the
> damage...i would like to think that if i were to cause pain and
> humiliation to others that i would be strong enough to face my
> self...let's pull together instead of apart..we can be stronger that
> way--Rachel
>
>
>
>
>> I absolutely agree, Rita, that Richards should not be forgiven because it
>> appeared he gave a heartfelt apology on television (he is, after all, an
>> actor). His comments are inexcusable. However, I think it is important
>> that
>> we self-reflect and examine our own biases. There are, after all, varying
>> degrees of prejudice. My 91-year-old grandmother living in rural
>> small-town
>> Ohio, who has never worked outside the home, for example, is afraid of
>> African Americans. Her fear stems from her limited life experiences but
>> it
>> is racist nonetheless. Yet, she would never use the n-word publicly or
>> privately. Clearly, her racism is not as severe as Mr. Richards, yet it
>> is
>> still there lurking.
>>
>> I think the point is to take a good hard look in the mirror and
>> acknowledge
>> our own prejudices. Then work to eliminate them.
>>
>> Lisa Weinbaum
>> Las Cruces Public Schools
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Rita Kohli" <rkohli at ucla.edu>
>> To: <KispokoT at aol.com>; <name-mce at nameorg.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 11:19 AM
>> Subject: Re: (Name-mce) ListServ We're all racists, unconsciously
>>
>>
>>> I am not sure if whoever posted this article had an opinion about what
>>> it is saying, but I really have a problem with it that I don't feel can
>>> go unaddressed.
>>>
>>> I do not agree that we are all racists unconsciously, I also feel
>>> strongly that I should not just accept Richards apology because he had
>>> some kind of "courage" that we do not have to share our innermost
>>> feelings of hatred.
>>>
>>> What Richards said and did was an exhibition of white power. He didn't
>>> like what was being done to him by an African American heckler, and he
>>> had the words and power to subjugate him, in a way that could never be
>>> done to a white man.
>>>
>>> The test mentioned in the article, that proves that we are all
>>> "racist," may show that whites as well as People of Color associate
>>> white with good and Black with bad on an unconscious level, but we must
>>> acknowledge the historical reasons for why People of Color may
>>> demonstrate this. Colonization, slavery, post-colonial dominance,
>>> education, media are all ways in which People of Color, globally, have
>>> been and continue to be taught to believe in a racial heirarchy where
>>> whites are deemed superior. We have been forced to believe that we are
>>> inferior, and often carry a deep self-hate, whether consciously or not.
>>> From Carter G. Woodson, to Fanon or Malcolm X, Black activists have
>>> been naming racism to allow African people to heal from a self-hate
>>> that was taught to them by their white oppressor.
>>>
>>> I, as a South Asian woman, refuse to believe that the colonization and
>>> enslavement of my people had little impact on the way that we view
>>> whiteness, light skin, Europe. And I also refuse to believe that the
>>> elements of internalized racism that I, or my community hold about
>>> ourselves or others, is the same as the deep-rooted hatred for African
>>> Americans that Richards has "unconsciously" in his heart.
>>>
>>> The interpretation of this test in this article seems to excuse racism
>>> because we all allegedly have it. There is no excuse for what was
>>> done, and in my opinion no way to forgive or not judge a man by what he
>>> said when he was drunk or angry. I have been angry or upset many times
>>> in my life, and I know for a fact that nothing like that has ever come
>>> out of my mouth.
>>>
>>> There is nothing that Richards could EVER say to get me to believe he
>>> is a decent human being. We cannot confuse white supremacy with the
>>> internalization of racism imposed on non-white people in this world, we
>>> must not confuse hate with self-hate, and I feel it is fundamental that
>>> we begin to recognize these differences.
>>>
>>> Rita Kohli
>>> Race and Ethnic Studies in Education, UCLA
>>>
>>> _http://www.latimes.http://wwhttp://www.latimhttp://wwhttp://www.latihttp://_
>>> (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shermer24nov24,0,48454)
>>> 06.story?coll=06.story?coll=<W06
>>>
>>> We're all racists, unconsciously
>>> Kramer just blurted out what unfortunately comes naturally to all of
>>> us.
>>>
>>> By Michael Shermer
>>>
>>> MICHAEL SHERMER is the publisher of Skeptic magazine and a monthly
>>> columnist for Scientific American. His latest book is "Why Darwin
>>> Matters."
>>>
>>> November 24, 2006
>>>
>>> AFTER A PAROXYSM of racial viciousness at the Laugh Factory last week,
>>> Michael Richards, the 57-year-old comedian who played Kramer on
>>> "Seinfeld,"
>>> explained to David Letterman and his "Late Night" audience Monday: "I'm
>>> not
>>> a racist. That's what's so insane about this."
>>>
>>> Richards' shattered demeanor and heartfelt repentance leaves us with
>>> what
>>> I
>>> shall call Kramer's Conundrum: How can someone who spews racial
>>> epithets
>>> genuinely believe he is not a racist? The answer is to be found in the
>>> difference between our conscious and unconscious attitudes and our
>>> public
>>> and private thoughts.
>>>
>>> Consciously and publicly, Richards is probably not a racist. But
>>> unconsciously and privately, he is. So am I. So are you.
>>>
>>> Consciously and publicly, most of us are colorblind. And most of us,
>>> most
>>> of the time, believe and act on that cultural requisite. You'd have to
>>> be
>>> insane to publicly utter racist remarks in today's society ? or
>>> temporarily
>>> insane, which both science and the law recognize as sometimes being
>>> triggered by anger.
>>>
>>> And alcohol ? recall Mel Gibson's drunken eruption about Jews, or the
>>> college frat boys slurring alcohol-induced insanities about blacks and
>>> slavery in Sacha Baron Cohen's film "Borat."
>>>
>>> The insidiousness of racism is because of the fact that it arises out
>>> of
>>> the deep recesses of our unconscious. We may be unaware of it, yet it
>>> lurks
>>> there.
>>>
>>> How do we know this? One indication is the Implicit Association Test,
>>> developed by Harvard scientists, which asks subjects to pair words and
>>> concepts. The more closely associated the words and concepts are, the
>>> quicker the response to them will be in the key-pressing sorting task
>>> (try
>>> it yourself at _https://implicit.https://implhttps://i_
>>> (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/) ).
>>>
>>> The race test firsts asks you to sort black and white faces into one of
>>> two
>>> categories: European American or African American. Easy. Next you are
>>> asked
>>> to sort a list of words (joy, terrible, love, agony, peace, horrible,
>>> wonderful, nasty, pleasure) into one of two categories: Good or Bad. No
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> The next task is a little more complicated. The words and black and
>>> white
>>> faces appear on the screen one at a time, and you sort them into one of
>>> these categories: African American/Good or European American/Bad. Again
>>> you
>>> match the words with the concepts of good or bad, and faces with
>>> national
>>> origin. So the word "joy" would go into the first category and a white
>>> face
>>> would go into the second category. This sorting goes noticeably slower,
>>> but
>>> you might expect that because the combined categories are more
>>> cognitively
>>> complex.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, the final sorting task puts the lie to that
>>> rationalization.
>>> This time you sort the words and faces into the categories European
>>> American/Good or African American/Bad. Tellingly (and
>>> distressingly)Americ
>>> sorting process goes much faster than the previous one. I was much
>>> quicker
>>> to associate words like "joy," "love" and "pleasure" with European
>>> American/Good than I did with African American/Good.
>>>
>>> I consider myself about as socially liberal as you can get, and yet on
>>> a
>>> scale that includes "slight," "moderate" and "strong," the program
>>> concluded: "Your data suggest a strong automatic preference for
>>> European
>>> American compared to African American." What? "The interpretation is
>>> described as 'automatic preference for European American' if you
>>> responded
>>> faster when European American faces and Good words were classified with
>>> the
>>> same key than when African American faces and Good words were
>>> classified
>>> with the same key."
>>>
>>> But I'm not a racist. How can this be? It turns out that this
>>> subconscious
>>> association of good with European Americans is true for everyone, even
>>> African Americans, no matter how colorblind we all claim to be.
>>>
>>> We are by nature sorters. Evolutionists theorize that we evolved in
>>> small
>>> bands of hunter-gatherers when there was a selection for within-group
>>> amity
>>> and between-group enmity. With our fellow in-group members, we are
>>> cooperative and altruistic. Unfortunately, the downside to this
>>> pro-social
>>> bonding is that we are also quite tribal and xenophobic to out-group
>>> members.
>>>
>>> This natural tendency to sort people into Within-Group/This nat
>>> Between-Group/Between-Group/<WBR>Bad is shaped by culture, so that all
>>> A
>>> even those whose ancestry is African) implicitly inculcate the cultural
>>> association, which includes additional prejudices.
>>>
>>> The Harvard test, in fact, also demonstrates that we prefer young to
>>> old,
>>> thin to fat, straight to gay and such associations as family-females
>>> and
>>> career-males, liberal arts-females and science-males. Such associations
>>> bubble just below the surface, inhibited by cultural restraints but
>>> susceptible to eruption under extreme inebriation or duress.
>>>
>>> Richards' sin was his deed; his thoughts are the sin of all humanity.
>>> Only
>>> when all people are considered to be members of one global in-group (in
>>> principle if not in practice) can we begin to attenuate these out-group
>>> associations. But it won't be easy. Vigilance is the watchword of both
>>> freedom and dignity.
>>>
>>> We should accept Richards' apology for losing his temper and acting out
>>> those hateful thoughts. Perhaps we also ought to thank him for having
>>> the
>>> courage to confess in public what far too many of us still harbor in
>>> private, often in our unconscious minds. As the Russian novelist Fyodor
>>> Dostoyevsky wrote: "Every man has reminiscences which he would not tell
>>> to
>>> everyone but only his friends. He has other matters in his mind which
>>> he
>>> would not reveal even to his friends, but only to himself, and that in
>>> secret. But there are other things which a man is afraid to tell even
>>> to
>>> himself, and every decent man has a number of such things stored away
>>> in
>>> his mind."
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> This is a mailing of the National Association for Multicultural
>>> Education -
>>> (NAME) Listserv list - www.nameorg.org. The materials included reflect
>>> diverse perspectives of NAME Listserv participants and do not
>>> necessarily
>>> reflect a position of the National Association for Multicultural
>>> Education. If you would like to subscribe (or unsubscribe)to this
>>> listserv
>>> go to http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org. You
>>> can read all past postings in the archives at
>>> http://mail.nameorg.org/pipermail/name-mce_nameorg.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Name-mce mailing list
>>> Name-mce at nameorg.org
>>> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This is a mailing of the National Association for Multicultural Education
>> -
>> (NAME) Listserv list - www.nameorg.org. The materials included reflect
>> diverse perspectives of NAME Listserv participants and do not necessarily
>> reflect a position of the National Association for Multicultural
>> Education. If you would like to subscribe (or unsubscribe)to this listserv
>> go to http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org. You
>> can read all past postings in the archives at
>> http://mail.nameorg.org/pipermail/name-mce_nameorg.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> Name-mce mailing list
>> Name-mce at nameorg.org
>> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is a mailing of the National Association for Multicultural Education -
> (NAME) Listserv. The materials included reflect diverse perspectives
> of NAME Listserv participants and do not necessarily reflect a
> position of the National Association for Multicultural Education. If
> you would like to subscribe (or unsubscribe) to this listserv go to
> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org. You
> can read all past postings in the archives at
> http://mail.nameorg.org/pipermail/name-mce_nameorg.org/
>
>
> Name-mce mailing list
> Name-mce at nameorg.org
> http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org
>
>
> End of Name-mce Digest, Vol 374, Issue 1
> ****************************************
>
More information about the Name-mce
mailing list