Honest dialogue about race and racial issues should move the conversation forward and advance its participants further down the road of understanding. Unfortunately, we’ve been doing the opposite. That’s why our columnist is proposing this radical idea: a moratorium on the use of the “R-word.”
I just can’t take it anymore. Something has to stop.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham recently made comments about illegal immigrants having children, calling into question the validity of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Almost immediately, many people called his comments, and the people who support them, racist. (Do I even need to mention this happened on Fox News?)
Technology writer Farhad Manjoo recently posted a thoughtful, broadly generalized analysis of the ways in which many young black people use Twitter. Various bloggers have either called it, or more generally insinuated it to be, racist.
A chorus of African American conservatives gathered at the National Press Club, in the wake of the Shirley Sherrod fiasco and the expulsion of former Tea Party spokesman Mark Williams, largely for the purpose of advancing their belief that liberal race-baiting is just as much, if not more racist than any of the so-called racist elements in the Tea Party.
Rap mogul Diddy was asked in an interview about the rather ostentatious luxury car he had given his teenage son. Diddy was offended. According to Diddy, White luminaries in their respective fields would not be assailed with such trivialities. He said the question was racist.
Dr. Laura Schlessinger apologized for her now-infamous saying “n-word” rant during her radio show in response to an African American caller expressing consternation over racist remarks by her husband’s friends. She was chiding the caller for being hypersensitive, and ended with the following comment:
“If you’re that hypersensitive about color and don’t have a sense of humor, don’t marry out of your race.”
For many bloggers, pundits, and readers, that quote is all the evidence one needs to convict Dr. Laura of a textbook case of racist behavior.
A Year Without the R-Word
In today’s overly politicized media climate, storms of controversy continually erupt over allegations of racism, polarizing wide swaths of people in the process. It happens with big stories and small stories, with celebrities as well as regular folks. And even in stories that ostensibly seem to have nothing to do with race, it breaks out in comment threads after the fact. Somebody says that something or someone is racist, and people on both sides lose their minds and start jabbering away. The names may change, but the problem persists.
Actually, forgive my typo.
What I meant to say is that people close their minds and start jabbering.
Not that I believe that open-mindedness is the ultimate virtue to strive toward. I subscribe to the maxim of G. K. Chesterton, who once stated that an open mind is like an open mouth; useful only in its capacity to close down on something solid. His point, generally speaking, is that open minds should be constantly searching for truth.
My belief is that substantive dialogue about race and racial issues should, when done honestly and with virtue, move the conversation forward and advance its participants further down the road of understanding.
What I’ve seen too often is the exact opposite. It’s a mindless bludgeoning, day after day, perpetrated by people who wield terms like “racist” as weapons to be used only for discrediting, embarrassing or repudiating their enemies, regardless of how much truth is in the allegation. When this happens, no real dialogue or learning takes place, other than a steely resolve from both sides to dig in a little deeper and get a little nastier next time.
And like I said, I just can’t take it anymore.
Like The Winans once said, it’s time make a change. So I’m gonna summon my inner MJ, and start with the man in the mirror.
I’m gonna take a break from talking about racism.
For one whole year, I will conspicuously avoid using the word “racist” or “racism” in any written form of public discourse, except to finish this article.
Too Many Dropped Calls
This might seem like a really radical idea, but in fact a lot of intelligent black people already do this. Some of us might do it to avoid being labeled as a troublemaker. Some of us might do it because we’re tired of banging our heads against the wall. Some of us might do it because we want to prove that black people can and should talk about more than just “black issues.”
I’m doing it for a simpler reason, though.
The word “racist” is broken.
Words are supposed to represent ideas, and when the use of certain words actually impede the communication of ideas, then those words no longer function like they’re supposed to. When people argue about whether or not such-and-such was racist, there is no agreed-upon standard for what racism is or is not. The arguments just go in circles.
Some people believe that racism is strictly a matter of the heart, like jealousy or avarice. Others look at racism more in terms of structural or institutionalized inequities in society. Some people think it’s both. Some people hear or read the word “racist” and they automatically translate that to mean “not politically correct.” Others do the same and end up with “conservative.”
Is it any wonder, then, why our conversation suffers so badly?
Like a bad cell phone connection, constantly assailing racists and calling out racism leaves us with an illusion of communication. We think we’re getting our point across effectively, unaware that critical feedback is missing. Assumptions and biases block us from making relational progress across the long cultural and ideological divides where progress is needed most. It litters our discourse with misunderstandings that frustrate like so many dropped calls.
And the conversation goes nowhere.
In Other Words
When I was just out of high school, I was in a Christian discipleship program called The Master’s Commission. One of the aims of the program was to create leaders in the faith who could elucidate on matters of import. As such, the leaders at the time issued a challenge to the students, to see how many of them could carry on a conversation without using the words “dude,” “cool,” or “awesome.”
For some of us, this was a minor inconvenience. For others, it was a full-blown crisis of communication.
Some of these students were tempted to view the leaders as archaic fuddy-duddy types who abhorred casual speech, but that was not the case at all. They had no problem with those words in and of themselves. They just wanted to break the students of their habitually poor choice of words. The challenge forced the students to start using unfamiliar words, which occasionally led to some hilariously awkward exchanges.
“Du — I mean, bro, did you watch the game last night?”
“Oh yeah, when Drexler hit that three it was so … um … interesting.”
Many black folks today use the terms “racist” and “racism” with almost that same habitual reflex as my white Gen-Xer friends had with “dude” and “awesome.”
It’s not that we think everything bad or wrong is racist, but we keep it handy for any situation that fits a certain familiar scenario where our brothers and sisters get the shaft. There’s legitimate reason for this habitual usage — namely, centuries’ worth of systemic oppression and disenfranchisement against people who look like us and share our lineage. But over time, as the issues get murkier and problems have more complicated solutions, habitual cries of racism look like emotional shorthand for “something shady that I can’t quite put my finger on.”
Back in the salad days of the Internet, netizens in chat rooms and message boards used to operate on a principle known as Godwin’s Law. It says the longer any particular argument goes on, the more likely it is that someone will make a comparison to Nazi Germany. Thus, whoever reaches that point first has automatically lost the argument by default, since they obviously had nothing else worthwhile to say.
I think we ought to do the same thing with “racist” and “racism.”
Because regardless of how racist someone may actually be, the moment that word enters the discussion, you’ve lost any hope of actual dialogue with anyone who didn’t already agree with you — even if the facts are on your side.
So that’s why I’m taking this pledge. It’s not in spite of the many instances of racism I see, but precisely because of how much there is that doesn’t get talked about in any meaningful way.
No, I don’t believe that choosing not to talk about racism will make it go away. But choosing to talk about it in other terms that aren’t so emotionally charged … that’s a start.
Some may say that by doing this, even temporarily, it lets purveyors of racist acts and ideas off the hook.
I could not disagree more. Choosing to talk about these things without using the terms “racist” and “racism” can shine an even more effective light on the relative merit (or lack thereof) of these particular ideas and actions, without giving their defenders an easy way to blow off the criticism as being too P.C.
So I don’t need to call Sen. Graham a racist to combat his statements. I can simply call them insensitive, politically-calculating, cowardly, mean-spirited, a threat to the fabric of our Constitution, and lacking even a modicum of logic. (Seriously, “drop and leave”? Isn’t the whole point that they want to stay?)
I can say that Farhad Manjoo was pretty clear that not all black folks use Twitter the same way, and that even though the header image was a little silly, I’d proudly rock a baby blue fitted hat with a pound sign on it, stereotype or not. (Assuming it wasn’t a 59Fifty, those joints are expensive.)
I can say that black Tea Party apologists are fighting a lost cause if they can’t recognize rogue elements in their own movement, because everybody else can see them, even if some of them are manufactured by their opponents. Unfortunately, perception is reality.
I can say that Diddy is a rap star who popularized celebrity culture in hip-hop, and that he, of all people, should know better than to clamor for attention and then pout after getting too much. It doesn’t take a family counselor to see that no 16-year-old needs a Maybach Benz.
I can say that Dr. Laura is, like most talk-radio icons, too abrasive and combative to deal with issues like race effectively, which says less about her as a person than it does about the ineffectual nature of talk radio as a forum for serious discussion. I can say that I don’t really believe her apology, because it sounds too much like many other apologies we’ve heard after these types of racial incidents. And despite her rude and boorish response to her listener’s question, I can say that she has a point about the whole HBO-and-black-comics thing.
That’s what it’s like to talk about racial incidents without using those words. And that wasn’t so hard, was it?
That’s why I’m willing to give it a try.
Now who’s with me?
If you plan to join Jelani in refraining from use of the “R-word,” drop us a comment below and share your reasons. Even if you don’t plan to abandon the word, we’d still like to hear from you.
I am.
Well written Jelani and I am with you!
Good post. I wonder why we even bother to call something racist. It’s more important whether an idea or statement is true or false. Hypothetically speaking, it might be possible for something to be racist and true. Is that what we are afraid of? We seem afraid to let ugly prejudiced ideas be spoken, but why? I’d rather shine a light on them, and let the ideas be challenged. I for one am confident that such ideas and prejudices would crumble under scrutiny because they are simply wrong, petty, mean, ignorant and so on. In a way, keeping “racist” thoughts hidden from public view keeps them potent.
Great article. I think that the term has been used to refer to so many things that it has lost its useful meaning. Language depends on words having common meaning, and when one person thinks it’s one thing and another person thinks it’s something else, then the word loses value.
And then we end up arguing over the definition of a word, rather than actually considering the ideas presented.
Great article, Jelani (as always!). I have found recently that even in attempts at calm, rational discussion, my use of the “R” word(s) has had an unintended effect: the shutting down of all dialogue. As Ed pointed out in a recent post, the “R” word is increasingly perceived to be as explosive as the “N” word by many. Like you, I’m having to consciously re-phrase some thoughts before expressing them, in the hopes that constructive dialogue can ensue.
Interesting, Jelani.
As I’ve written before, I’m definitely in favor of reassigning the correct term to people groups and not using the word “race” to refer to them. Culture or ethnicity is more accurate.
So now, I’m thinking about your idea, and wondering, is it important to distinguish certain types of animus from others, and not just use broader language to describe biases, behaviors and such as generally incorrect, prejudiced, etc.? Specifically, is it important to know and identify certain wrongs as “race”-based because that particular mindset carries with it certain ills that specifically need to be challenged and addressed? Or is it sufficient to just know that a statement, belief, etc. is wrong, no matter the source of the hostility?
Any thoughts on that?
First, thanks for the comments Denise, Judy, JJJ, Chandra and Kevin. I appreciate the support.
Chandra, I do think that it is important to talk about race and the role it may play in various issues. As I’ve said to other (usually White) friends before, anything can be a racial issue to me because I’m always Black and always hypersensitive to that element of things.
Where I think those two R-words are dangerous is in their propensity to polarize. They make it seem like race is the only issue or the main issue. For people who have a problem seeing the racial angle, they have no entry into the conversation except to humbly admit the possibility of being wrong.
And on these internets, humility is not exactly a common virtue.
So this pledge is like taking the oxygen out of the flame wars before they flare up again.
Your article is interesting. But I am NOT with you. In many cases, “The Race Card” is the only thing some people have… especially considering the times. If we accept “racism” or “racist” as politically incorrect, and look for softer terms to describe and categorize these blatantly racist actions, I would argue that we are hurting ourselves more. We already don’t have that good of a hand, why give one of our most powerful cards away? Further, (keeping with my card analogy) a spade is a spade. Call it what it is.
I think your mental energy should be used in writing about how racist people should change their racist hearts, minds, and actions and not how victims of racism should change the way they view or describe racism or racists.
Tim, I respect your opinion and your choice, but I do think you’re selling yourself (or others) short if you think that the race card is the only thing we have to work with.
Fact is, I’m not talking about using softer terms, I’m talking about using terms that are more easily understood.
You talk about calling a spade a spade… how do you know what a spade is? More importantly, how will you convince others who disagree with you what a spade is if they grew up thinking a spade is different than what you think it is?
Some people, when they hear the word “spade” think of cards. Others think of gardening tools. What’s the point of fighting about it unless you have some sort of common understanding? Otherwise, you might as well be fighting over “tastes great” over “less filling.”
100% agree. I’m with you.
From Tim
Actually I think this is precisely the reason that we should consider using other terms.
In America today, calling someone a racist (or any sort of bigot) is probably the second worst accusation you can level against a person, and the moment that accusation shows up, the conversation shifts from “How should I change to end the inequalities of different races and social groups” to a Flight or Fight conversation. The accused feels attacked and in most cases either attacks back (“How dare you call me a racist when you go to a church with no white people, you’re as racist as I am!”) or tries to argue (outwardly or inwardly) that the label doesn’t apply to them (“You don’t know what’s in my heart, and you don’t know about all the cross-cultural friendships I have, so you’re wrong.”).
Neither of those responses is conducive to the self-reflection we all need to go through to change ourselves to make the world a better place.
If we want the people who perpetuate racism to change their attitudes, thought patterns and actions that contribute to the problem then we need to approach the conversation in a way that encourages change instead of combat
Wonderfully written.
I wanted to add one more thing. I think one thing we often do is to call others ‘racist’ when they have a different take on some racial issue, even if there is no malice involved. I think we should be able to discuss different points of view without demonizing someone that had a different point of view because of a different background or different life experiences.
For example, I think many blacks tend to see many more things in racial terms than a white person would. It would be nice if we wouldn’t hate each other over this. If someone doesn’t come to agree with you it doesn’t make them racist.
The term “racism” has been so loosely applied that it has become the magic-bullet in conflicts. There is no better way to end a public debate (one may be losing) than to charge your opponent with racism. That’s the easy, lazy way out. But if applied improperly it’s damaging, embarrassing and hateful itself.
Isn’t the term “racism” based upon hatred due to a sense of superiority—sort of like elitism, or egotism? If that’s the case use it this way, but some stupid remark about all black folk using a cell phone in a certain manner is NOT racism! It’s just a sign of how a person generalizes. Sterotypes in themselves are NOT racism. It’s just a lazy way to compartmenatalize cultures one does not understand.
Most of what people call “racism” is a cultural/ethnic prejudice based upon ignorance and fear. Humans tend to respond to others based upon personal past experience rather than taking time to know the person they are dealing with. Just a simple few questions of clarification would be a good start. “What? EVERY black person on earth uses Twitter that way? What? Why shouldn’t black people buy their children nice gifts?” “What how many black people have you ever associated with?”
Instead of lovingly, being willing to engage in what may be (but most often, not necessarily) another painful conversation, another brand of hatred and vengeance arises…”RACIST!”
A really interesting conversation around the results our ageing populace may have as well as the difficulties we might become going through.