The Strange Case of Dr. Ho Man Kwok (2019)

The spectrum that the word "racist" covers is simply too large.

That's why I've pointed out that it used to just be called "stereotyping" but there's been a concerted effort on the part of those pushing identity politics, to make this about power. It's to the point where they've redefined "racism" to mean "at a minimum, stereotyping another person from a position of power or authority".

The implications of that new definition are that many people who were previously guilty of stereotyping, are now racist. In fact, basically any white person who stereotypes, because they generally have privileges' and power in society, are now "racist".

I don't agree with the redefinition, and I think it's an example of a pendulum that has swung too far.

I mean that sincerely. I'm afraid it may read as sarcasm, but it is not.

    Of course we had words for this before. I studied 
    what would now be called “environmental racism” 
    in law school. We would say “minority communities 
    suffer disproportionately negative effects from 
    the siting of coal plants.”

    The recent approach has been to reuse “racism” to refer to 
    systems that create or perpetuate racial disparities whether 
    or not they’re motivated by what’s now called prejudice.

Whether the year is 1860 or 1960 or 2020, surely even the most fundamental understanding of racism has always required an understanding of both intent and effect.

When I was in school in the 1990s, we learned about the many "kindly" slaveowners who viewed themselves as benevolent caretakers of their slaves, whom they viewed as simple savages that would not prosper on their own. We learned how race-based humor could have innocent intent but negative consequences. And so on. The frequent dissonance between intent and effect was in my opinion vastly underemphasized, but this was not a new line of thought even 30 years ago.

    [The coal plant thing] is a concept I could easily explain 
    to my Trump-voting  in laws and they’d get it. But when you 
    call that “racism” that implies (not only to my in laws, but 
    to my Biden voting  non-white dad) that people involved in the 
    siting decisions were motivated by racial prejudice. They’d 
    say, “no, they’re just putting the coal plant where the land 
    is cheapest.”

I would certainly agree that labeling such acts as racism precludes many people from understanding these concepts. We have been taught that racism is one of the greatest of transgressions and nobody wants to think of themselves as racist. I don't even think many members of white nationalist groups even consider themselves "racist."

Assuming that's true, all it says is that, once you're getting arrested, you're about even on the probability of being shot. What it doesn't address is the increased probability of Black me to be arrested to begin with.

"Interaction" is one thing; police killing people is another.

(An aside: if we dig deeper to figure out why black communities often have higher crime rates... welp, there we go again, it usually boils down to some form of systemic racism.)

> ... but you've chosen to only accept the racism one.

Why do you feel the need to steer people away from racism as a cause? Nowhere did I say that racism is the "only" thing; please don't put words in my mouth. But it is, by and large, the root of the majority of the problem.

I've already spent more time than I care to on this topic, so I'm not going to go digging again, but if you look at studies around general police behavior (who they are interested in, who they detain, how long they detain them, stats around escalation, arrest vs. warning rates for same offense, etc.), it's pretty clear that police target -- whether consciously or subconsciously -- non-white people, and black people in particular. You can call that "bias" or "prejudice" or whatever you want; I call it racism.

But regardless, bottom line: black people are killed by police at a disproportionately large rate when compared to people of other races. That is what the data shows, plain and simple. I'm not really interested in quibbling over vague claims that racism has little or nothing to do with it, as that's clearly false. If you want an acknowledgement that racism isn't 100% the entire picture, then sure, ok, fine. (Though you don't seem particularly interested in venturing forth any suggestions or data pointing to other causes, so I question your motives here.) But racism is a huge contributor to these disparities. If tomorrow we could magically eliminate racism from everyone's mind, I guarantee you ant disparities would be so small as to not really garner anyone's attention.

So here's my question for you: what are those other non-racism causes of this disparity? And if you can name some, do the causes of those causes not actually boil down to systemic racism in the end?

That is not in fact my basic premise.

My basic premise, is, as I said: "it's worth asking both questions: Is racism really at play? And given America's lasting, endemic racism, is there reason to think something makes it absent in a given case?"

If America's history of racism were somehow only limited to Black people, then perhaps we could dismiss out of hand the notion that said racism could have something to do with a fact-free hysteria about "Chinese Restaurant Syndrome". But that's demonstrably not true.

Note that I've never said the two things are necessarily linked. I'm just saying that we can't presume a priori that racism isn't involved. We shouldn't assume that it is, but we mustn't assume that it isn't.