Michelle Gross wrote: > >Michael Atherton: Mr. Brauer's objection to my analogy > >aside (power is not a necessary condition for racism), > >I believe that this declaration makes it fairly > >obvious that race is one factor in this group's objection to > >Mr. Jennings selection. > > Michael is incorrect here. Numerous social scientists have > defined racism as bigotry plus the power to back it up. Power > is the necessary ingredient that transforms individual bigotry > into institutionalized racism. Since whites have power in this > country and Blacks (and other people of color) generally don't, > racism is a uniquely white phenomenon, though bigotry is > not. For that reason, "reverse racism" is a myth in this > country because, except in small enclaves, people of color do > not have the power to act on prejudices to create widespread > systems and mechanisms to enforce those prejudices and use them > to maintain social control.
I have a different perspective than these numerous social scientists. I adhere to the common dictionary definition (2): ra-cism (rasizm) n. 1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. 2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race. It is interesting that Ms. Gross's definition allows people of color to discriminate on the basis of race, while excluding others. Of course groups have always changed definitions to fit their political agendas, although not always in the direction of basic human rights and equality. As is the case here as well. The problem with allowing discrimination to be defined relatively, is that injustice oscillates from one group to another depending on the balance of power and the situation in which it is applied. A general focus on the rights of individuals makes the elimination of discrimination a matter of enforcement rather than an assessment of the relative distribution of power between individuals; a particularly dicey task. What I find astounding about this situation is that people are racially prejudice towards the current superintendent and yet this person has done nothing to change what appears to be a discriminatory system, i.e., it is not obvious that children of color are any better off now than previously. I think that we should at least hear what proposals Mr. Jennings has to make the system more equitable. That is the relevant issue here not his race or his past political actions (which are marginally incorrect). I have to admit that if Mr. Jennings has no such proposals then the Board should reconsider. I have no objections to people protesting, but given their current statement they should be willing to accept opposition to another candidate simply because they are Black and not because they might be the best choice. The idea that we should accept a Black superintendent just because African Americans are not as powerful as Whites is absurd. We should select a superintendent who will have the greatest positive impact on student achievement irregardless of their race. THAT was the Dream: the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Michael Atherton Prospect Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
