I don't want to distract the conversation, so consider this as an aside: The "monotheistic right" aka the "religious right" does indeed believe that all humans are intrinsically evil, but capable of redemption if they subscribe to and submit to religious authority. This is true of christianity, islam, and judaism, but least so with the last. (Just to inflame some readers: mormon theology, as opposed to mormon sunday school teaching — which is saccharine christianity — is the exception, teaching the humans are not only innately good, but inevitably good — it will just take a while for some to realize their potential.)
The secular right — and yes there really is such a thing — believes the opposite, i.e. that humans are intrinsically good, but subject to corruption. [perhaps the only good thing, for the republican party, in trump's ascendancy is the opportunity to take back the party from the religious right and restore the goldwater / reagan secular right to influence.) davew On Mon, Nov 14, 2016, at 02:06 PM, glen ☣ wrote: > On 11/14/2016 12:50 PM, Prof David West wrote: > > all humans, probably all animals, are innately xenophobic, we are all > > afraid of the "other." This is nature. But, fear of the black man, or the > > woman, or whatever, comes about only when our context, the collective / the > > culture gives definition to the xenophobic "other." > > > > absent the collective, no individual would be racist or misogynist, but > > they would be afraid. > > That's a good way to think about it. But it skirts a fundamental wolf > that Steve is feeding. The right tends to assume people are basically > bad (perhaps not evil, but at least selfish). The left tends to assume > people are good and circumstance leads to bad actions. The reality is > that the collective(s) constitute the individuals just as much as > individuals constitute the collective(s). > > > > Yes, there are individual racists. That assumption is a critical part of > my argument. If there was no individual racism, I couldn't distinguish > between individual and collective racism. And, no I'm not entirely > separating the two. Is/can individual racism persist (invariantly) under > composition? Yes, of course. Individual racism is foundational to the > US, unfortunately. > > But that's not the problem I'm pointing out in the _Williams_ article. > The problem with her article is that she implies that "elites" are > accusing policemen of individual racism. And asserts that those > shootings were not racist acts, motivated by individual racism. I agree > with her assertion. The shootings are (mostly) a result of fear- and > aggression-based training. Even _if_ the individual cops (like Darren > Wilson) are racist, being a policeman is a _professional_ position. To > the largest extent possible, cops are encouraged to keep their personal > opinions out of their work. So, even when an individual racist commits a > collectively racist act, it does not imply that the collective racism > necessarily _derives_ from individual racism. > > Systemic biases exist. And the current focus on the shooting of black > men by police is on systemic bias, not (necessarily) individual bias. > That Williams avoids that distinction damages the entire article. > > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016, at 01:20 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: > >> It sounds as if you are entirely dissociating individual racist (or > >> misogynist or... ) bigotry from the collective? > >> > >> I know you to have some fairly eclectic ideas about individual and > >> collective human behaviour/motivation/self-awareness, so I'm trying to > >> wrap my head around what you are trying to say here rather than deny or > >> discount or disagree with it. > >> > >> Perhaps one could postulate that many if not all human "sins" are > >> emergent properties of collectives and that individuals, raised out of the > >> context of an already corrupted group would not have those properties. > >> Adam and Eve before expulsion from the garden of Eden? It is as if you > >> are suggesting that many (or all?) individuals remain in some kind of > >> state of Grace, marred only by their myopic (and other types of) > >> ignorance, magnified quantitatively or transformed qualitatively into the > >> kind "sinful" behaviour we see in group activities? I can buy SOME of > >> that, but have a hard time not believing that there *are* truly bad > >> actors, individuals who have, through whatever process of arriving (nature > >> or nurture, genetic/disease/trauma-induced insanity), exhibit truly, > >> deeply madly abhorrent if not actually evil (how do you measure that?) > >> behaviour? > >> > >> Again, not to belabor it, I know you to have some very *useful* (to me) > >> alternative perspectives on things, I'm hoping my questions here provoke > >> you to illuminate me more. > > > -- > ☣ glen > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
