erhaps there is a God after all; for I find that I am in substantial agreement with Al Sharpton regarding the following point.  He thinks that a man does what is offensive in calling a woman a bitch, no matter what the race of the man might be and no matter what the race of the woman might be.  In particular, then, he thinks that Isaiah Thomas is wrong in holding that it is less offensive if a black man calls a black woman bitch than it is if a white man calls a black woman bitch. 

While I shall go on about this for a bit, I shall turn to offer what strikes me as quite interesting explanation for the disparity that many see in terms of what blacks say about the wrongs of other blacks, including the no snitch rule.  The explanation shall be quite fascinating; and I encourage readers to attend to it.  I shall then conclude on a surprisingly personal note.

Now, Al Sharpton’s condemnation of Isaiah Thomas is an extraordinary breath of commonsense on Sharpton's part.  The point, of course, should be one of those obvious truths that requires next to no reflection to grasp.  But that fact Mr. Sharpton should actually hold that a black person is just as wrong as a white person, given that both the black and white person has committed the exact same act is rather like a new-found refreshing spring of water coursing down a mountain side. 

For the pattern has been that high profile blacks who can see just about any wrong that a white commits somehow manage to see less of a wrong done when a black commits that very same act in circumstances that are exactly analogous. 

Isaiah Thomas, of course, should be ashamed of himself and black women everywhere should be outraged.  It would not surprise me, though, if Whoopi Goldberg, for instance, were come to Isaiah Thomas’s defense invoking the “Southern tradition”. 

As it turns out, I have, finally, an insight as to some of this behavior; and that fact that I should just now be arriving at this insight no doubt says something about me, though I am not clear just what.

It seem obvious to me that during American Slavery and the Jim Crow era blacks rightly chose not to acknowledge in front of whites the wrongs that blacks committed, since that would have been tantamount to subjecting the black to a kind of double jeopardy—indeed, subjecting the black to horrendous injustice on the part of whites.  The defensibility of this practice presupposes that blacks took matters into their own hands in terms of meting out some form of punishment of the offending member of the black community; otherwise, blacks would simply be tolerating wrongdoing on the part of one another; and that would make no sense at all.  In the context just described even no snitching makes perfectly good sense. 

Looking at the present, it would seem that many high profile blacks act as if it is true nowadays that whites would inflict considerable injustice among blacks for the wrongs committed by blacks or, in any case, whites would judge blacks far more harshly than they (whites) would judge whites for the exact same wrongdoing.  Let us refer to the italicized remarks as the residue of racism. 

The residue of racism idea need not entail any intentions on the part of whites to judge blacks more harshly.  The idea need only hold that generally speaking whites have been socially configured in this way.  Indeed, the thesis can even allow that many well-meaning whites have been configured this way.  It is an undeniable truth that social configurations can exert an inexorable influence upon us. 

One of my favorite examples in this regard is traffic.  In most countries, people drive on the right.  The United Kingdom and South Africa, for example, are among the exceptions.  There is nothing innate about driving on one side or the other.  Just so, to be raised in a country where driving is on the right is to have a very power tendency to do all sorts of things rather instinctively.  One can counter-command this tendency but it requires considerable will-power.

The residue of racism thesis simply entails that the nature of the legacy of racism is that many whites—their good intentions to the contrary notwithstanding—instinctively (owing to cultural upbringing) have the tendency to judge blacks more harshly than whites, where both the black and the white have committed the exact same wrong. 

Two questions arise: (1) Is the residue of racism thesis true?  (2) How should blacks behave if it is true?

Now, for those readers who know me, you may at this point have some insight into why I accord so much significance to Frederic Douglass’s remarks about gratitude.  For he claimed, almost counter-intuitively that it was ingratitude more than anything else that reminded him of the evil of slavery.  Not whips and chains, but ingratitude for the extraordinary service that, notwithstanding their enslavement, many black slaves rendered to whites.

I hold that wherever people of kind L naturally and instinctively show genuine gratitude for the good done on their behalf by members of this or that group, then that is an exceedingly good sign that the people of kind L are free of any biases towards that group.  That is, the racial residue thesis does notapply to those individuals who are naturally and instinctively disposed to show gratitude towards those who are kind to them, regardless of the ethnicity of those showing the kindness.

I shall conclude then on a frighteningly informative and personal note.  Over the years at Syracuse University, I have in a very direct and personal way nurtured a number of undergraduate students here: some white, some black, some Latino, some Asian, and so on.  I have received some extraordinary expressions of gratitude from the parents of white and Asian Syracuse University undergraduates.  To this date in my life, I have never received a single note of gratitude from a black parent or a Latino parent of a Syracuse University undergraduate whom I have nurtured. 

Finally in this vein there is this: I have for more than a decade taught one of the most successful philosophy courses that Syracuse University has ever known.  From so many (but by no means all) of my white colleagues, I have experienced next to no gratitude.  Or things have felt as if I were but a dog being given a pat upon the head.  A shining example to contrary, and so of genuine gratitude from a colleague, has been Dean Cathryn Newton, the out-going Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.  I do not know what we have agreed upon.  I do know that she has always respected me as a person.  Under her leaderhip, I have not in anyway whatsoever been a minority to be showcased as a sign that she is not racist.  Not at all.  The same holds for Deborah Freund, former Vice-Chancellor and Provost here.  Professor called me in Paris and asked me to serve on the search comittee that chose Dean Newton; and Professor Freund's first remarks were: "I understand that you are a trouble-maker".  I knew immediately that she understood importance of affirming my independence as a thinking person. I often wonder if they both understand just how much this has meant to me. 

Now, from my students, the vast majority of whom are white: Their genuine gratitude has been one of the greatest sources of nurturance that I have known in life.  I am forever grateful for the role that they contually play in affirming my personhood.