I had a few little problems with the way Paul Taylor dealt with the question: “Isn't race-thinking unethical?” Taylor wants to look at racialist thinking and (at least I thought) answer the question, whether this way of thinking is inherently racist.
He starts chapter out with a story that shows the controversy of the topic. (A Black person being called out on racialist thought and accused of racism) However, after giving a good working definition of racism, he then proceeds to only take a closer look at more uncontroversial 'classical racialist' thought. I think reading through the five claims he finds to be defining of 'classical racialism' (47-48) there cannot be two opinions on whether this framework is racist or not.
However, in the very first section of the chapter he describes all the tools needed to construct an argument that would make the case more interesting, but he does not make use of them. I will try to run through it quickly – I am not sure if I would qualify as racialist thinking or not.
As Taylor mentions there is an argument to be made that race-thinking “provides a basis for political mobilization and community building, or that it allows us to track the effects of racial discrimination.” (31) Building on this it could be argued that racialist thinking is responsible for racism, and in many forms is inherently racist, but that knowledge of this way of thinking is necessary in order to react adequately to injustice done in past or present.
Maybe I just missed the point of his question though, since I could not really find him giving a satisfying answer anywhere. (Maybe he answers it at some later point?)
He starts chapter out with a story that shows the controversy of the topic. (A Black person being called out on racialist thought and accused of racism) However, after giving a good working definition of racism, he then proceeds to only take a closer look at more uncontroversial 'classical racialist' thought. I think reading through the five claims he finds to be defining of 'classical racialism' (47-48) there cannot be two opinions on whether this framework is racist or not.
However, in the very first section of the chapter he describes all the tools needed to construct an argument that would make the case more interesting, but he does not make use of them. I will try to run through it quickly – I am not sure if I would qualify as racialist thinking or not.
As Taylor mentions there is an argument to be made that race-thinking “provides a basis for political mobilization and community building, or that it allows us to track the effects of racial discrimination.” (31) Building on this it could be argued that racialist thinking is responsible for racism, and in many forms is inherently racist, but that knowledge of this way of thinking is necessary in order to react adequately to injustice done in past or present.
Maybe I just missed the point of his question though, since I could not really find him giving a satisfying answer anywhere. (Maybe he answers it at some later point?)
No comments:
Post a Comment