Racism can be defined as a negative evaluation that privileges color or ethnicity in an inappropriate way. This definition tells us what is surely right, namely that not every negative evaluation of a person is thereby racist. It is not automatically racist to say that the crime-rate in the black ghetto is enormously high. That is unvarnished truth. It is, of course, possible to make this observation about the crime-rate in the black ghetto in a racist way: “The niggers are too stupid to do anything constructive.
The above definition also points to the truth that matters can be extremely over-determined; hence, it is manifestly not clear whether a given piece of behavior is racist or not. For instance, a woman who has been raped by a stranger will understandably be afraid of just any man whom she might encounter while she is walking alone at night. The fact that the man on a particular occasion turns out to be black is utterly relevant to the fact that she is panicking.
I said racism involves privileging color an inappropriate way. My favorite example of this would be, say, the 40-something white woman who reacts as if the middle-aged black man whom she encounters on the sidewalk is going to steal her pocketbook. To the best of my knowledge, this is not what middle-aged black men do. So even if it is reasonable for the white woman to think that a black youth might so behave, it is preposterous for her to think that this is how the middle-black man is going to behave.
The odds are that—from the standpoint of aches and pains and the like—he is just as concerned with merely getting from point A to point B as she is. So he is not going to snatch her pocketbook and dart across the street, jumping over fences and whatever else in the way that a teenager or 20-year old would! Finally, in this regard: the typical middle-aged male ‑‑black or white or whatever— looks his age. At any rate, he looks much closer to his age than he does to looking like a person who is only 20-something. I have yet to encounter, for example, a 45-year old person (of any race or sex) whom everyone takes to be merely 25-years old. No doubt that there are cases of this sort. But they are surely rare.
The charge of police brutality on the part of white officers against blacks is common. I have never been in that situation. So I cannot fully speak to it. What I will say is this: When anyone is in a life and death situation, it is at the very least understandable that instinctively the person moves to defend her or his own life. Are there instances of police brutality? I am sure there are. However, I am equally convinced that here is nothing like complete cooperation to undercut any concern that law enforcement official might have in that regard.
This brings me to the Henry Louis Gates matter. I suspect that the matter is complicated in a particularly interesting manner. As a very distinguished Harvard University professor, Mr. Gates is understandably used to having considerable power and deference. On the Harvard University campus surely just about everyone knows who he is. He is a god among earthlings. This is meant not as a caricature, but as a very real articulation of the considerable standing that Mr. Gates has as a Harvard University professor. When he is on campus, what most certainly has to be true is that when he says that he is Henry Louis Gates he pretty much says all that needs to be said.
Alas, this kind of standing in the university setting rarely carries over in the real-world. And that, alas, is the problem. It is the very rare professor whose academic reputation spills over into the everyday life of the ordinary person. Perhaps Richard Dawkins? Perhaps Stephen Hawkins?
For a very distinguished professor, going from the academy to the world of the ordinary person is rather like jumping off a cliff. There is simply no telling whether one will land safely or not.
I suspect that part of the problem is that Mr. Gates was unreasonably expecting deference in a context in which it was quite inappropriate for him to do so. This, alas, is most unfortunate. We need to know the limits of our standing and its general applicability. A very renowned professor, such as Henry Louis Gates, should never lose sight of the reality that her or his standing in academic circles rarely if ever carries over in the non-academic world.
The police most certainly did not cringe or genuflect upon learning that he is Henry Louis Gates. Indeed, I suspect that it is almost certain that –perish the thought— his name had no significance with them at all. This reality is not racist in anyway whatsoever. It simply reflects the fact that, with extremely rare exception, having considerable standing in the academic world does not at all carry over to having considerable standing in the world ordinary people.
Mr. Gates should have appreciated this. I appreciate it. But then I am no Henry Louis Gates. Not by a long-shot. Yet, I grasp the issue here far better than one might imagine. I shall always remember the moment when in response to the question from the taxi driver who was taking me to the airport, namely “Where are you, off to today?” I came back with “Oh, I am just going to California.” You see, for someone who routinely takes a plane to Paris (France), California seems relatively close. From what I can tell, all sorts of people on the Syracuse University campus know that I regularly fly off to Paris. To hear some students tell it: Why, I fly to Paris every week. The point here, of course, is that I am not entitled to suppose that my standing on the Syracuse University campus, in the small –150,000 person— town of Syracuse spills over into the life of the ordinary person in Syracuse.
Here is a simple fact of the world. Even if one is Henry Louis Gates, breaking into one’s very own house does not look good. It is downright silly to expect the police to exhibit Harvard Square deference under circumstances of this sort. Indeed, it would have been irresponsible for the police to do so. I do not doubt for a moment that there are instances of racism that are tied to the fact that a white does not expect a black to have the standing that the black has. Some of those instances are serious. Some of those instances are trivial. In the case of Henry Louis Gates, I do not see that we have an instance of this sort of thing at all.
When anyone is seen breaking into a house, the onus is very much upon the person doing so to provide substantial proof that she or he is the owner of that house. Indeed, far from being annoyed at having to do so, it is clear to me that decency and thoughtfulness requires that one graciously provides such proof. Why? Because in an instance such this decent and responsible officers are merely doing their job.
It is incomprehensible to me that Mr. Gates –a man whom I know and very highly respect‑‑ did not to grasp this very simple and basic point. Just under 20 years ago, I wrote an essay for Ebony entitled “Next Life, I’ll Be White” in which I talk talk about racism as indefensible statistical generalization. I did not make clear point about indefensible statistical generalization point in the essay. At any rate, the very point of this blog-entry is that we do not have that sort of thing in this case. Under the circumstances, the fact that Gates knew that it was his house does not change the fact that he needed to explain what he was doing breaking into it.
As for President Obama: Well, he played the race card in a most thoughtless and unfortunate matter. And that is very much a disappointment to me.
Still Outside Looking In
Brother Barack, as a black man, cannot transcend race. President Obama’s election has not transformed the racial beliefs in those Americans who have a biased mind set. Many Americans prefer to ignore the social and economic disadvantaged, and believe that only hard-working, morally upright people succeed.
While playing down the significance of discrimination, and lecturing people to stop framing issues along racial lines, candidate Obama appealed to successful stake holders of the American dream and to those who aspire to this dream. He understood that every Ethnic American experience and its collective sacrifice has contributed to the evolution of our Democracy.
President Obama knows his election did not signal a sudden, magical end to discrimination. When he commented on the arrest in Cambridge, of Professor Gates, he spoke as a biased, uninformed person. His comments struck a racial cord with Americans who are still distrusting and ambivalent about racial tolerance. His comments exposed his own distrust and ambivalence also. As long as there are disproportionate rates of unemployment, imprisonment and lack of health insurance in minority communities, social justice advocates will shine a light on these quality of life benchmarks and make appeals for change. He is such an advocate. President Obama rightly contrasts inequities in the social benefits available to Americans with the clubs and police dogs that black marchers faced in the 1960s and said that solving present-day problems would require comparable determination.
President Obama is a unique American. His cultures are many. His words will continue to inspire us and occasionally shock us. His potential to grow and learn, as a national and world leader, remains to be seen. Someday instead of saying:“I do think it is important for the African-American community, in its diversity, to stay true to one core aspect of the African-American experience, which is -we know what it’s like to be on the outside.” he’ll say : I do think it is important for all American ethnic groups to stay true to core aspects of their respective experiences, but to finally discover that we are all brothers and sisters in this American Family and together we will -as Curtis Mayfield said- “keep pushin”
MW