Winstonm, on 2017-September-11, 10:15, said:
Perhaps I am naive, but I think it possible by the exercise of our cognizance to overcome tribalism's effects. Instead of seeing a black man, I am convinced it possible to see a man who happens to have black skin, nothing more.
Maybe possible, but difficult. Until you know someone personally, all you have to go on are superficial features. And we are genetically primed to draw conclusions based on first impressions: quick, intuitive "friend or foe" decisions were necessary for survival.
And it's not just in our prehistory that this was necessary. The MIT campus is located just a few blocks from low-income housing projects in Cambridge. Even if you ignore race, residents of the projects are more likely to be in gangs or commit violent crimes. If you're walking at night in the neighborhood between them, and you notice someone following you, you need to decide whether to ignore them or try to get away for your own safety. Knowing that most of the residents of the projects are black, it's natural to be more worried if the follower is black, while assuming that a white kid is more likely to be another MIT student. It may be racist, but it's also based on solid statistics about crime in that neighborhood.
I've been threatened with a gun once in my life. I was watching a movie by myself, and some young people were talking back to the screen, and I complained to an usher about the disruption they were causing. After the movie, they confronted me in the parking lot, and one of them showed a gun; luckily, a security guard saw this and came to my rescue. This theatre was also located right near another housing project, and the race of the young people was stereotypical of the residents there. They also perpetuated a stereotype in their talking during the movie.
I don't think I fear black people in general, but I don't think it's completely racist to be aware that in certain places there's a high correlation between race and income level, and there's a similar relationship between income and violent crime. Black people aren't naturally inclined to violence, but black people are disproportionately poor, and hence more likely to turn to crime. If we could solve the poverty problem, it would extend to solving the violence problem. But as long as social and economic policies make income mobility difficult, we have a feedback loop that racists can jump on to justify their views ("look at all the black-on-black violence, they're obviously a violent race").
It's possible to be too politically correct to avoid racism. If you know that radical Islamic groups like ISIS and al Qaeda are planning attacks, and that their members are primarily of Middle Eastern descent, is it really so wrong for TSA to give a little extra scrutiny to people who look Middle Eastern? There are a limited number of screeners, so it's just good resource utilization to concentrate them where the danger is more likely. This isn't the same as automatically assuming browns are bad and whites are good -- it might amount to extra screening of 30% of browns versus 20% of whites (both random). Political correctness could mean that they're just as likely to pat down an 8 year old white child as a 30 year old man wearing a turban. Yes, the 8-year-old could have had a bomb planted on him by his parents, but statistically, which is the more likely threat? Political correctness sometimes trumps logic.
But maybe that's OK. We have ideals about freedom, tolerance, and diversity in our country, and perhaps promoting civil liberties over a little increase in safety is a way of saying that we consider these ideals paramount.
Help
