Posted by: a | July 30, 2009

The Real Issue with Racism, Prof. Gates, & the Swim Club

Immigrant cartoonIn the past few weeks the news has been flooded with talking points on two highly profiled race cases.  First, there were allegations that a private Philly suburban swim club rescinded a membership to a predominately Black camp group following complaints from White members.   Witnesses say White parents pulled their children out of the pool when the other kids arrived, made racial slurs, and then complained to management. The swim club owner went on television saying he, “didn’t want to change the complexion of the club,” but then went on to invite the group back after public outcry. Management claimed safety concerns were the real reason they pulled the membership, as the story went national and hit every major news outlet in the country.  

Last week, a prominent Black Harvard professor was arrested for disorderly conduct after arguing with police officers who came to investigate him breaking into his own home because he lost his keys.  Even upon proving it was his home, tempers flared on both sides, and the cops then arrested him.  

I am not writing this to argue the merits of either side of these cases, nor to comment on how they are indicative of how we do not live in post-racial America.  The issue with both of these cases is the way the media and the public have used the Cambridge police and the Swim Club as scape goats.  The way racism, like all sin, works is that it pervades our culture and communities in such a way that it breaks the fabric of Shalom.  It inserts its evil into everything.  Ultimately, every action I take is laced with some sin, some selfishness, some flaw that I cannot see, and is the equivalent of me giving God the finger thinking I can do it my way. 

Racism is not an academic thought, or a social ill that we can cure. It is a sin that pervades all of the institutions in our society.  We cannot escape it, even if we want to, or think we can. The problem with these two stories is that they allow us to point the finger at Cambridge, and point the finger at the swim club owner.  They are dramatic stories that provide us with a fire escape for ourselves, because it shows us how racist someone else may be.  We demonize both groups, justly or unjustly, without looking at our own thoughts, intentions, power dynamics, or social institutions that have created the situations ripe for gross misconduct to occur. 

As long as our national conversation about race and class is only sparked when there is an ‘outlier’ of injustice, rather than an on-going dialogue about the pervasive injustice occurring all around us, we will be unable to see the structural and individual brokenness and sin that leads to oppression.  It is a lot easier to yell foul play at the White swim club, than it is to examine our own attitudes, agendas, and social arrangements from which we benefit.


Responses

  1. From what I understand “race” wasn’t even a category in the Roman empire. Should that analogy be influencing how we perceive race issues in our modern day? Doesn’t that also imply we can get beyond race issues?

  2. “Race” may not have been a category, but ethnicity and nationalism certainly were. The concept is the same, and does apply. One group oppressing another on the basis of their ethnicity, that’s racism. It may have been labeled something different when the Jews would not associate with the Samaritans, but it is the same thing.

    We may make progress on race issues, but we will not eradicate it. It is a sin of the human condition… just like greed, lust, or anger.

    • At the heart of racism, classism, or what have you, is the problem of collectivism. It is judging somebody not on the basis of their individuality or their being made in the image of God, but on what “group” they allegedly (or actually) belong to. Judging a black man because he’s breaking into a home, even his own, is a collectivist error. Failing to treat people as individuals is a grave error. For all its alleged failures, individualism is a far superior way of looking at society in this respect, because it forces us to think of a person as a person, not as part of a group.

      I think the point made in this post is right on… proving that it’s not easy to claim racism is “dead and gone” simply because _________ . It’s not that easy, of course. And while I’m sure I’d go so far to say that every action is laced with sin, it is certainly a major thread in the fabric of human nature.

      • Collectivism and individualism are equal and opposite errors. Individualism just leads to different problems than collectivism. Two books that describe these are “Rise of the Creative Class” = touting individualism and “Bowling Alone” touting collectivism. The church has to meld the strengths of both and mitigate the weaknesses. Not pick one over the other.

        • Hmmm… I’m sure to their extremes, both do contain errors. And I suppose any debate could include fears of “slippery slope” with either side. With regards to racism, though, I’m not sure I see the error in individualism. And maybe definitions are in order. If I were to understand individualism, it is the philosophy that each person is to be treated on his/her own merits/value, and respected because of his/her uniqueness, over and against the collective; violation of such is injustice. Collectivism, in my estimation, is the belief that people are part of a larger group, and their individuality and uniqueness is subservient to the needs of the larger group.

          Maybe you understand it differently. Collectivism “works” only so far as it is voluntary and not coercive, which is why good and health churches seem to be more “communal” in how members interact and love one another.

        • Meade, I looked up the “social capital” stuff by searching for “Bowling Alone” and came up with some good stuff. I wouldn’t call what “Bowling Alone” is advocating is collectivism as I’ve defined/understood it. Looks like an excellent concept, and their comment in the FAQ on government was honest and nonpartisan.

          I can see you point on merging the two concepts, but I would say that while we were “made for community” and humans function optimally and work best within a tight-knit, I still cannot stomach the idea that the needs of the group trump that of an individual, unless said individual agrees as being part of that group.

          • I don’t see how you can “pick” one over the other with the perspective of the Gospel. There is a seeming symbiotic relationship to me between the individuals agency in Christ, and also their agency to the body of Christ. How is the individual more important? How is the group more important? I do not see how you can argue one over the other, without falling off one side of a horse.

            • A, I think what you just described is one of the beautiful things about the gospel, and one of the “selling points” (if you can mind the expression) for joining the Body of Christ.

              Where I do have a problem with individual rights being trumped is when an individual hasn’t agreed to be part of a group where he/she has a symbiotic relationship to the group. That, I believe, would be coercive and aggressive on the part of the group to the individual.

  3. D: Yes.. you point to the insidiousness. It is so laced into everything that it is difficult to even see.

  4. I just read a published article from the Christian website, acton.org, called “What can we learn from Gates-gate?” It’s a good read, especially the section at the end.

    http://blog.acton.org/archives/11549-what-can-we-learn-from-gates-gate.html


Leave a response

Your response:

Categories