Ending Racism: Who and How?

David French is one of my favorite columnists.  I appreciate his nuanced conservative positions regarding political, social , and religious issues.  However, his sports takes are usually pretty bad (He thinks LeBron is the GOAT). I subscribe to his Sunday morning French Press newsletter and I enjoy reading it first thing in the morning with my cup of coffee.  What I think I admire most is his willingness to push back against mainstream conservative narrative in a reasoned and circumspect manner.  I know his articles have definitely challenged some of my ideas before, even pushing me to change my stance on an issue.

This morning's French Press was definitely one that challenged some of my ideas.  In fact, I read it three times to really understand why I was apprehensive about the article.  One reason may be that yesterday I wrote an article critical of the idea of "systemic racism", at least in the sense that it is white liberals who are in control of the meaningful systems that can impact our views on race.  Moreover, I made that point that they use terms like "systemic racism" and "white privilege" as a means to prevent the mob from turning on them.  In another article from a couple of weeks prior, I discussed the irony of the liberal view of racism makes race a singular focus and thus we never will really get beyond it.  But after reading and rereading, I think there a few items of which I would like to comment.

First, a few points about the academic definition of systemic racism.  In academia, one of their functions, especially in the social sciences, is to identify and describe a particular phenomena.  In this instance the term systemic racism is an attempt to explain inequities and disparities that exist in a variety of different areas based on the single variable of race.  So, when we look at data that shows blacks achieve less in education, are incarcerated more often, make less money, have shorter life spans, and a host of other negative metrics compared to whites, we attempt to explain the reason for that data.  To say that race has no impact, would be a huge lie from someone who does not want to face the facts.  But questions remain.  Why is race such an important factor?  Is there more to it than just race?  Is the left correct when it believes that race is an inherent part of white America, written in our DNA?  Is racism really only a white American issue?  I think theses questions require a great deal of dialogue and also a great deal of courage to address in a manner that makes both liberals and conservatives feel uncomfortable.  Simply, there are some truths that both sides do not want to confront, but we must if we are ever going to make real progress.

Back to "systemic racism".  My problem with the term is that it is broad and lacks the clarity to address the issue.  Sure, we have described a social context, but the devil is in the details.  Even after French provides the definition, he then provides instances of individual acts of racism by individual actors.  The only example he provides of "systemic racism" is the data from Minneapolis police.  I don't discount the data, but I would love to see some more detailed analysis that provides real answers and solutions to the problem.  For example, an in-depth analysis of the details of the use of force by the Minneapolis police.  We need to know why and how police got involved, the circumstances that led to use of force, and similar instances that did not lead to a use of force.  The large disparity in the use of force is worthy to understand the minutia of details that could challenge people's narratives.  Too often we see disparities and inequities and we immediately look for the simple, single variable answer.  What if it is more than just one variable?  

I agree with French, that we have both come a long way and have a long way to go.  Part of the problem is that racism is part of the human condition.  Read the Bible and you will find plenty of stories of one group of people not liking another group of people.  Even Jesus faced this mentality.  Read history and you will see all sorts of examples of groups and nations of people disliking other groups of people.  Even now, I have seen posts from people in the black community that are highly antisemitic, which seems ironic.  We are wired with an easy on-off switch for the "Us vs. Them" mentality.  Notice I didn't say we come with an automatic "Us vs. Them" mentality, but rather a proclivity to develop it and learn it.  As parents, my wife and I watched our children play with the kids in the neighborhood that consisted of Indian children, Mexican children, and black children.  The only thing they ever noticed was that the Mexican children spoke another language that was unfamiliar to them.  There was never a conversation about their skin color or ethnicity, because none of the kids had the "Us vs. Them" switch in the "on" position.  The point is, people don't start out as racist or discriminatory, but it is easy for people to develop an "Us vs. Them" mentality, and it takes a deliberate effort to push back against that notion.

Unfortunately, too often in my life I have seen racism in different contexts, forms, and subtleties and know that it is real.  Growing up in California's Central Valley, I went to schools where the vast majority of the student body was Hispanic.  In seventh grade I was harassed often for being a "pinche gringo" (f***ing whiteboy) which led to more than one conflict.  It was the worst school year in my life.  I have nephews who are half-black and they have told me their stories of discrimination and racism.  As a high school vice principal, sadly I suspended a number of students who used highly offensive racial epithets towards other students.  To my dismay, I have spoken with student's parents and realize that the student learned their racism from their parent.

We do indeed have a long way to go.  The past week's events prove that.  But what it really comes down to is, in which direction will we go?  Often the direction we should go is opposite of popular opinion.  One of the most profound scriptures is the Proverb, "There is a way that seems right to man, but in the end leads to death."  Maybe the more important question, is who will lead us there?  It will take a huge amount of courage to search for the truth and not be swayed by the partisan mobs.  It will take leaders who will not use an NFL player's protest to divide a country.  It will take leaders who will not allow voices to be silenced because other's think those ideas are "violent".  It will take a leader willing to seek the truth, no matter where it lies or how uncomfortable it makes us.  As the Lord told Joshua after the death of Moses, "Be strong and courageous..."  These days we need "strong and courageous" to make real progress.