MORE THOUGHTS ON THE FERGUSON, MISSOURI GRAND JURY DECISION

I have read a lot about race as a biological or, (more accurately, for humans) as a pseudoscientific idea. There are no human races. There is only one living species of humans, Homo sapiens. We don’t speak of red roses and yellow roses as races of roses.  We speak of them as varieties.  There are many varieties of humans. Some differ in skin color, some differ in hair texture, some differ in the shape of eyes, some differ in size, and when it comes to what we cannot see, like blood groups, HLA types, and “genetic markers” in our DNA, we get even more numerous varieties of humanity.  The varieties measured by skin color are different from the varieties measured by blood group or by DNA markers.  In general darker skin color correlates with equatorial distribution.  In general lighter skin correlates with northern latitudes.  We know that humans had an out of Africa origin about 50,000 to 100,000 years ago and spread across the world. When a baby is adopted by an American couple from Africa, from Rumania, from Colombia, or New Guinea, that child will speak English, share American cultural values of the state in which she or he is raised, and reflect the values and culture of the nurturing parents.  What we call race in popular usage is really our perception of cultural or ethnic differences.

I am skeptical that we have innate fear of other races or cultures.  Young children tend to play together without regard to racial difference unless their culture makes them biased. That happens a lot.  It leads to a fear of those who are seen as a cultural threat. The police officer who killed an unarmed black youth (firing 12 times) saw him as a threat, a menacing hulk, although both were 6 feet 4 inches tall. The police officer saw himself as cowering and frightened by this perceived threat. Even if this were true, it tells us that there was something missing in his police training. If our police officers are to shoot first out of fear, civilians would be at risk. Every black youth would have to wonder: Do I respond to a police officer by lowering my head?  Do I say Yes sir at the end of each sentence?  If I lift up my arms in a surrender pose, will he see this initial movement as a threatening movement?  Will I hear him accurately?  Did he say don’ t move or did he say move out of the way?  If I respond will he think I am defiant?  Those questions are not as likely to run through the head of a white youth confronted by a white police officer.

I suggest the following. Use stun guns more frequently than bullet guns when dealing with unarmed suspects.  There are fewer deaths from jolts of electricity to subdue a suspect. Train police officers to deal with their panic and fears.  They could try role playing and imagine how they would respond if they were black and confronted by white police.  Hire more black police.  Use more black police to patrol black neighborhoods (they would help reduce the crime rate in such neighborhoods).  Stress community building in which police help youth with projects that better their neighborhoods.  Provide schools in black neighborhoods that at least have the same standards and quality as most white public schools. Provide opportunities for employment: clearing abandoned property and constructing pocket parks, community centers, and play grounds. Change use of drugs and minor drug dealing to misdemeanors and eliminate mandatory sentencing. Provide more lighting in public streets.

Racism is difficult to eliminate. Changes that improve education, safety, employment opportunities, and fair treatment are easier to change because they are specific and not theoretical.  Remember, too, that those incidents involving the shooting of unarmed black youths happen once or more each year and ask yourself, when was the last time you read about a white officer shooting an unarmed white youth? 

Life Lines 63

THE INERTIA OF THE FORTUNATE


My friend, Ken Anderson, called and lamented about the lack of response in his church to his reminders of injustice and prejudice that still abound in upstate New York where he lives. Was it some sort of racism they harbored, he wondered? I told him I didn’t think so. People who are fortunate and do not encounter prejudice against themselves tend to feel sorry for those who are not so fortunate. This is true if the unfortunates are born with genetic disorders; have premature deaths shifting the family into poverty; or experience illnesses or accidents that render them dependent on others. It is also true if the unfortunates are victims of prejudice for reasons of their religious beliefs or their ethnicity or race. If they could wave a wand everyone would be healthy, have equal opportunities, and would experience no prejudices against them. In this sense they are not racists. But most of humanity prefers inertia to activism. People often require some major upheaval to become active in a cause. The Civil Rights movement was one of those. Watching blacks chased by dogs and hosed down by water or beaten with clubs is not something Americans like. It goes against our sense of fair play. Similarly women revolted and stopped being doormats to their husbands and fathers and wanted their daughters to be doctors, lawyers, engineers, and corporate executives like their male family members. They shamed men into accepting that equality of opportunity.


We revere the leaders of these movements. They would not have happened without the Martin Luther Kings and Betty Friedans and hundreds of their supporters who became active to bring about change. Inertia rules until it is challenged. The handicapped need their Kennedys who can force public attention on their needs. Most of us are not leaders and even when nudged we feel uncomfortable taking on such roles. Some have other causes that occupy their lives. When I was reading Muller’s letters for his biography I was startled by the number of organizations and individuals pleading for Muller (a Nobel laureate) to lend his name to their cause or to speak on their behalf or write articles for their cause. In one of his responses he pointed out that if he agreed to do so for all who wrote, he would diminish his effectiveness in his major concern of radiation protection in health, industry, and the threat of military use of atomic weapons. Muller was not prejudiced against those other causes. He believed in them, but could not make the time commitments demanded of him. This is why leadership is so important. Gifted people have to stir the consciences of the inert. They must have the insights and talents to shift priorities from back burners to a more active awareness. Most of us lack those abilities. We make at best incremental changes by our own attitudes and by minimalist support by writing a check to an organization or sending a contribution to a politician who represents our views. If we see wrong and say nothing or do nothing at all, then we are moral cowards. But even a simple remark to others that members of all religions, races, and ethnic groups deserve our respect as human beings goes a long way to changing generations of indifference or prejudice. Sometimes it is more effective to galvanize those already sympathetic to a cause than to move the inert and seek leadership from them.