the bugaboo of racism

A few possible instances of racism were discussed at work today. It's one thing to theorize about racism (as many have), but to actually confront it, I think you need to look at racism in the real world. In both cases discussed below, co-workers of mine believed that the relevant statements were not racist. After some thought, I have to disagree.

But first, some definitions:

Here's American Heritage's: The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

There's also the notion that racism = prejudice + power.

On a similar and rather lengthy note, this definition by Helan Enoch Page.

What's common in all three definitions is that there are innate characteristics based on race. On a purely physiological level, there are differences between people of different descent (most notably that of skin color). But racism as it manifests itself in contemporary America typically posits social and cultural practices as racially based.

Onto the cases.

1) A caller describes "the Orientals" as always being pushy and rude at the supermarket.
2) C's mom asking a friend of C's brother whether he felt safe in his neighborhood in North Philadelphia with all the Mexicans that lived there.

As I previously said, both these cases strike me as racist. Their commonality is a generalizing a particular characteristic to a larger set of people on a racial basis without making an attempt to understand the origins of the characteristic and whether it might have a non-racial foundation.

Another co-worker, B, came up with an example that, on its surface, appears similar. "Black people can dance." To be sure, this seems to be declaring there is something innate about black people that makes them good dancers. But B's explanation of why such a statement is not necessarily racist is telling. A paraphrase of what B had to say:

It's not that black people have a "dancing gene" but rther than a greater emphasis is placed on dance in typical black communities than typical white communities. In other words, a black kid growing up in a white suburban community could end up being a bad dancer and vice versa.

In other words, characteristics that might seem racial are actually based on cultural differences. What exactly B means when she says "Black people can dance," is colored (sorry, couldn't resist) by her subsequent explanation.

Cases 1) and 2) above are different. In 1), the caller is, presumably, drawing this conclusion based on observations of particular Asians and generalizing their behavior to the entire Asian community (and using the dated and exoticizing Oriental in the process). While it might be that she attributes these characteristics to some aspect of Asian culture, by couching the complaint in racial terms, the caller opens herself up to charges of racism (not that this was a concern of hers, but you know).

Onto C's mom. To assume that Mexicans cause trouble and make places is dangerous is racist. It just is. It might very well be the case that in northern Alabama, where C's mom lives, that a disportionate amount of crime is committed by Mexicans living there. But by projecting that putative predisposition towards crime onto all Mexicans, C's mother ignored the socio-economic circumstances (e.g. unemployment, poverty) that often lead towards crime and instead chose to see race as the determining factor.

Therein lies the crux of racism. To assume characteristics or traits on solely a racial basis is to be racist. This seems to suggest that not all manifestations of racism are equally bad (a position that appears fairly tenable to me). But if you're going to have a principled definition of a term, you need to apply it in a consistent and principled manner.