Even subtle displays of bigotry are today widely regarded as illegitimate not just in the political arena, but also at work or even in social circles. This is true not only in terms of a reduction of the number of bigots, but also in terms of a steady restriction of the social arenas in which prejudice manifests itself. Though racial prejudice certainly still exists, many fewer people despise others simply because of their skin color. It is widely and correctly observed that this sort of racial prejudice, or bigotry, has abated greatly in this country in the last half century. In this definition, racism is not a social condition but rather is something that exists in the minds of “racists.” People of this persuasion define racism as being identical to (and, crucially, limited to) ethnophobia-that is, disdain for other people on the basis of their supposed racial characteristics. One of the most fundamental problems with the discussion of racism in the United States today is the tendency (most commonly found, it must be said, on the political right and among whites) to equate racism with racial prejudice. The fundamental divide in the debate over racism in the United States today is between those who regard racism as essentially a question of individual psychology versus those who consider it a social, structural phenomenon. To what extent was West’s statement fair? More generally, what would it mean to ascribe the racial profile of Katrina’s victims to “racism”? This essay will argue that the debate over the racial meaning of Katrina exposes a public disagreement in the United States about the meaning of racism itself. For a discussion of how the media was treating the race issue, see Howard Kurtz, “Katrina in Black and White,” Washington Post, September 9, 2005. For a more dispassionate accounts, see Jesse Washington, “Katrina, aftermath galvanize black America,” Associated Press, September 8, 2005. Denying the same charges were Douglas MacKinnon, “In the eye of the storm,” Washington Times, SeptemSusan Jones, “Dependence on Government, Not Racism, Hurting Black People, Pastor Says,”, SeptemJonah Goldberg, “Race has no place in Katrina relief efforts,” New Hampshire Union-Leader, September 8, 2005. 1 Charging that the story of Katrina cannot be told apart from a story of race and racism, see Clarence Page, “When the ugly truths bubble up: Katrina brings race, poverty front and center,” Chicago Tribune, SeptemBetty Bayé, “Katrina and Pandora: Debate rages over role of race in slow response,” Louisville Courier-Journal, September 8, 2005. At first the mainstream media restricted themselves to muttering nervously about this fact, but the racial dimension (and divide) was brought into open debate as a result of Rapper Kanye West’s declaration, during an unscripted moment on live TV at a Katrina fundraiser, that, “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Inevitably, a partisan firestorm erupted. The televised and photographed spectacle of Katrina’s aftermath in New Orleans in particular revealed that the vast majority of those worst affected were black, in numbers disproportionate even to the large percentage of blacks within the city. Of the many sorry things about the contemporary United States that the Katrina catastrophe has exposed, perhaps none is more depressing than what it showed about the abiding divide in American thinking about race and racism.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |