Michael, I have no quarrel with you. Your "now, now, Boys..." plead is understandable but not to the point. Much of the racism debate on Pen-l, which some have accused me of starting, has been focused on institutional racism. No one has accused any person directly of being a racist. I have cahracterized certain acts and statements as such. It seems to me that some on the list are threatened by the debate and tried to stop the attack on instutional racism by blaming it on Henry Liu's unjustified hyper sensitivity. Even if I were guilty of that charge, it is not a basis to denying that institutional and cultural racism exist and that a debate on it, though emotionally painful to some, is not useful or enlightening. Many on the list personifies any attack on racism on themselves, only they know why. Nobody likes to thinks of him/herself as a racist. Yet individual rooting out of every behavior is the only wat to root out racism, one act at a time whenever it happens, committed by whoever, for whatever reason. Racism, capitalism, imperialism in the form of neoliberal globalization are not benign subjects at a genteel tea party. We are not "all working for a good society – even if we differ on details". Those who support the above mentioned concepts are not working for a good society. The British used to and still do explain British political imperialism that way. Neo-liberalism claims for it foal the building of a good gloabl society. The dfference is fundamental, not on details. This thread may be in a lull because some of us are busy on another debate on another list, not becaswue racism has vanished. And the debate on racism will only die out only when racism dies out. When a racist act or statement or attitude appears on the list, it will be called racist. One can characterize that a gentle nudge. A real attack is what they did in Yugoslavia with smart bombs, known as moral imperialism. And why should a person who commits a racist act not be called a racist? It is this type of gentelman's agreement that perpetuates racism. Whether it is disguised with humor, satire, economic theory, unintentionality, predominant decency or civilized behavior, if a racist action, thought, expression or theory comes from a person, that people is a racist, not for life, not on all things, not to his dog, or loving family, but a racist nevertheless in relation to those offenses and to the intended or inintended victims. It one does not like the label, don't commit the act. Self-forgiveness leads not to absolution. As J. Blaut said very insightfully: nowadays, there is a lot of racism but very few racists. Have much more to say on the subject, but out of consideration for your slow internet connection..... Henry Michael Perelman wrote: > Perhaps this thread has already died out. If not ... > > I have been able to see only a few of the posts. What I have seen is > troubling to me. > > I along with everyone else on this list probably have some racist > thoughts. To be free of every element of racism is virtually impossible > in a society like that the U.S. Yet I do not think of myself or anybody > else on the list as a racist. > > If I should slip up an do something racist, I would expect a friend and a > comrade to nudge me gently and to explain the problem with what I had > done. I would not expect to be denounced as a racist. > > I would like to see that approach adopted here. I do not see much use > in self-righteously rooting out single instance of poor behavior, > whether insensitivity, taunting or just bad taste with cries of > indignation. > > We need to treat each other as if we come here with a modicum of good > will. I do not mean “everything goes.” The “progressive” aspect of > pen-l still holds. What I do mean is that we should assume that we are > all working for a good society – even if we differ on details. > > At the same time, I do not like to see those who hold a “minority” > position -- as for instance in the recent war -- attempt to “impose” > their views on the rest of us through constant repetition of what seems > to be indistinguishable from the official line of the government. > > -- > > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Chico, CA 95929 > 530-898-5321 > fax 530-898-5901
