A thought that occurred tonight:
The notion of "racial justice" is a wrong one. The problem is that to have any kind of justice at all there must be a baseline standard against which to compare and contrast and ultimately judge. "Racial justice" does not really possess that. Which race is the standard? Black, white, Hispanic, Polynesian, Brazilian... what?
I will posit that "racial justice" introduces far more problems than it solves. It elicits and encourages envy and anger. Sometimes wildly misplaced envy and anger. And we are seeing the fruit of that anger right now.
Yet obviously there is an issue. There has been one and always will be so long as human nature endures.
If "racial justice" is the wrong idea to pursue, then I would suggest "racial neutrality". Which is much more open ended and challenging. Racial neutrality emphasizes that all races are equal across the board, without respect or condescension toward anyone. It is not just an outward goal to strive for, but an inward reflection of how one perceives and interacts with all people.
Personally, I would rather have racial neutrality than have racial justice.
Then again, all my life I've seen all people as equal anyway. I have never understood racism during that time and I can't understand it now, however form it takes. So what do I know?
You are not alone!
customers served (give or take a few hundred thousand) since September 2004!
Posts From @theknightshift
Shop at Knight Shift Novelties
Apparel, stickers, posters and more...
100% pure odd products from the mind of Chris Knight, including the much-requested "My Political Philosophy" bumper sticker!
Look! Viral Videos! Not Kidding!
"Best campaign ad ever!"
- George Lucas's Edutopia magazine
and
featured on VH1, The Soup on E!, MTV, NBC's The Jay Leno Show and media outlets worldwide.
3 comments:
Racial justice was not the end goal of Martin Luther King and his immediate followers. Racial neutrality was. Even Malcolm X in his later years after his pilgrimage was preaching less about "justice at any cost" and more for peaceful coexistence. Thanks for pointing out the difference.
You just mentioned a figure from American history that has never ceased to fascinate me: Malcolm X.
If there is a more enigmatic persona of the past sixty years or so in American culture, I don't know who it could be. His perspective and personality as a member of the Nation of Islam, and then how that changed after his haaj to Mecca and became a man who defied what he had been before...
That's a pretty dynamic character. It could be argued that Malcolm X had rare strength in that he was not afraid to confront the person he had been before, and came out stronger for it. I may never agree with everything he stood for, but I have to respect him as a person.
And yes, I do believe that in his later life he was more for racial neutrality than he was for racial justice.
Racial neutrality doesn't allow for racial division, which is what those who profit from racism use to exploit others with. Lets face it the meaning of King's message is now forgotten about. He dreamed of a nation where people were judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Today we are judging everything by skin color. He would be ashamed of us.
Post a Comment