Divide And Conquer

Here’s something I wrote in May of ’95 that still seems relevant and if I may say so, prescient. It was written in reaction to ideas dominant in higher education at the time. Looking at it now, I see it is woefully incomplete in accounting for the racism that still exists, perhaps naively so. But it speaks from a point that cuts past the liberal/conservative dialog, which had never been helpful. What do you think? 

Divide And Conquer

According to current ways of looking at things, Oprah Winfrey is an oppressed individual. Apparently, the color of her skin (not to mention her gender) offsets the fact that she takes in a hundred million dollars a year. The unemployed Appalachian white male, however, is “empowered”, someone raking in the benefits of a prejudiced system. The incongruity of this juxtaposition goes to show the limits of the current prominent paradigm. Using nationality as a way of categorizing people is accepting the paradigm of the oppressor. Emphasizing racial themes increases racial tension, resulting in tearing apart a majority that should be working together.

A big part of the reason that prejudice exists is because of cultural and economic differences, especially in regard to the African-American. Statistics show that a larger percentage of African-American males are incarcerated than are represented in society. If we look at this statistic through a racial paradigm, we can choose only two options: one, that black males are more likely to commit crimes, or two, that the white-male dominated system is more likely to incarcerate black males. Either way we increase racial tension without relieving the problem. If we choose a different paradigm, however, we see race as an incidental issue. Poverty is a major determinant in crime. An inordinate amount of Blacks are poor. The causal relationship is obvious. While race still plays a part in this paradigm, we can put it into its historical perspective by stating that slavery and bigotry have caused the poverty which now represses the African-American. In this view, we see a greater commonality between the unemployed white Appalachian and the urban black, even though they themselves may not see it.

While it is easy to say that hard work can help the ghetto dweller or the unemployed Appalachian to succeed, the cold hard facts are that the great number of them do not. The occasional success story does not compensate for the countless lives which never had the opportunity to grow. This is not a racial issue. If we were to go into the slums today and make sure that an equal portion of whites lived with violence, poverty and hopelessness, it would not ease the suffering one iota of the people who would still live there. Poverty, not racism, is the issue. Racism is perpetuated by poverty rather than the other way around. If we truly wish to deal with and overcome racism, we must ensure that all people in this nation are given equal opportunity.

Categorizing people by their race or background is a legacy we have acquired from the likes of slave owners who wished to rationalize their inhuman treatment of fellow human beings. We cannot “fight discrimination with discrimination” as Stanley Fish says. Any power grab by a minority group is bound to trigger off a backlash of the majority. Those who erroneously believe in Fish’s assertion are giving fuel to the Rush Limbaughs and hate mongers. In fighting prejudice, it is crucial to avoid accepting the prejudiced categories that divide us.