How Much Should 'Race' Matter?

What do you think? Post Comments Below!

In response to "VOX CLAMANTIS: Race Matters," itself a response to "Lott: Truly Color Blind," an article I already expressed interest in:

"First, let me be up front. I am black. Uncomfortable yet? Unlike Roger Lott claims (“Truly Color Blind,” March 7), there is nothing “welcoming” about a color-blind environment. Color-blindness ignores continuing and widespread social phenomena rooted in racism (white flight, anybody?). It promotes assimilation instead of self-expression and, in so doing, lets slide blatantly demeaning acts because they are normative (Native American mascot, anybody?) It suggests that inequity is only tied to us claiming that race matters. As if to say that everything would be dandy if those pesky minorities would stop making a fuss.

Color-blindness tells me that it is not okay to be of color, that any success I experience happens in spite of my racial identity and that I should not celebrate a history of strength and creativity. It’s patronizing nonsense. Instead of listening to myriad experiences of race, those who choose color-blindness implicitly tell others how to — or rather not to — define themselves. The message: assimilate."

I assure you Lott isn't asking for anything that extreme. The aggressive tone of this article is just one of the things that does not endear me to this argument. I hope people do not judge all of black people by this response or think that all black people have the same views on this issue.

Although I'm not exactly sure where Lott was coming from or how sincere he is, lumping non-white people under various "colored" labels only divides the Dartmouth community further, fosters a sense of division and self-segregation as opposed to cohesion and hurts the internal as well as external campus-wide reception, perception, and identities of said non-white minority groups.

People shouldn't be afraid to point out racism whenever and wherever it occurs but we must also look deeper before automatically assuming an argument is harmful or racist. I rarely agree with Lott's conservative and controversial views on guns and the like, but I don't think a push for a color-blind Dartmouth is necessarily racist. This argument may actually be the revolutionary thinking that most people are too afraid to say. It should be lauded as such.

Encouraging students and the administration to look beyond something as obvious and one-dimensional as color when understanding a person or a group of individuals is the right way to go. Yes, backgrounds matter, but sometimes constantly drawing too much attention to "diversity" does more harm than good.

Of course race matters, but I think the vitriol that has followed this argument stems from confusion over how race should matter or how much race should be allowed to matter. Socioeconomic inequalities between races force us to continually look at race but when do we step back and recognize the universality of our experience - that we all belong to one race: the human race?

I think Kim's "Raising Awareness" takes a much more even-keel and nuanced stance on the debate, while also taking on the thorny issue of Asian Americans as the "model minority:"

"The “model minority” myth also poses a problem for interracial dynamics. The illusion of the pan-Asian community’s successful assimilation is often used to blame other minority groups for their own socioeconomic stagnation or decline. Accusing minorities of perpetuating their own “failures” shifts blame from where it often belongs — on broader cultural and societal obstacles that are reinforced by the status quo — to an issue of race. The one-dimensional myth of the “model minority” is thus used to justify existing racial inequalities.

This type of sweeping generalization is not limited to the Asian community. The racial categorization that we commonly refer to as “black” does not acknowledge that people who are placed in this category encompass an immense range of geographical, cultural, ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds — from the mixed descendents of the American slave Diaspora to visiting students from Rwanda [Finally someone points this out. I've been saying the same thing for years.] This supposedly homogenous racial group actually represents a vast mix of individuals who we naively collectivize by the color of their skin or their place of origin. The same could be said for our perception of Latinos, Middle Easterners, Native Americans and “whites.”

The common system of categorizing race in America is outdated and oversimplified. Clearly, we need a new paradigm. One suggestion posed by Roger Lott yesterday (“Truly Color Blind,” March 7) is to “foster a color-blind environment.” Yet the term implies a lack of cultural and ethnic cognizance, which may lead to an unwillingness to recognize the very real challenges that many minorities face. It also dismisses the importance of the varied cultural and historic backgrounds that make America — and more specifically, Dartmouth — so vibrant and eclectic.

Instead, we must not be color-blind but simply be aware. Aware of the incredible spectrum of nationalities, ethnicities, histories, religions, beliefs, creeds and circumstances that shapes and molds individuals. Aware of our own biases and ugly prejudices that distort our perceptions of others. Aware of both the obvious and discrete injustices that people face on the basis of gender, age, class, race, etc. Most importantly, however, we must be aware of our common humanity in order to foster a community — perhaps a world — of mutual respect and understanding."

- Ryu