The June 25th print edition of the Detroit Free Press carried an oped by Suzette Hackney, Indianapolis Star columnist who claimed that now is the time to crush "systemic racism."
We had "systemic racism" during the slavery years and again during the Jim Crow years. There is still some racism today but in no way is it 'systemic."
I reject the notion that every alleged instance of injustice by white cops to black suspects is caused by racism suggested in the phrases "we have all the facts we need" and "systemic racism." Really? I question that.
I watched that video many times of policeman Chauvin kneeling on Mr Floyd's neck. I looked for some clue that could indicate racist motive. I watched Chauvin's face for a hint of a smile that might reveal a racist pleasure. I saw and heard nothing. Kneeling on a suspect's neck while in handcuffs should be cause for punishment in my view. I can see kneeling to put cuffs on a suspect but not after he's been rendered harmless.
The whole thing looked very calm, calculated, deliberate as if the public were the intended audience. Chauvin knew he was being recorded and could not fail to know that it would cause riots if made public and probably the end of his police career. But why would he do that over a small time thief like Floyd? Self sacrifice for a higher goal? I saw no evidence of that or of racism. The coldness of it made no sense.
But these two men knew each other for some time. Was there any animosity between them? Grudges? Sure, it could have been rank racism on the part of Chauvin and I would like this question posed to him: What was your motive? But even then, we have to remember that a crime is in the action not the motive. Murder is murder regardless of motive.
I grew up in the Jim Crow era and I know there was much more racism then than there is now. The famous psychologist Eric Hoffer once said "Mass movements can rise and spread without the belief in a god, but never without a belief in a devil." I submit that Ms. Hackney is presenting a demon--"systemic racism"--to be destroyed. But destroying an evil is not the same as creating a good, especially when that evil is a manufactured one.
To defeat an evil like racism one must define it precisely. However, in America today we have a systemic attack on defining anything precisely: Progressive Education. It is a pedagogic philosophy that teaches students to think in the approximate, the almost, the close enough. Progressive Ed teaches this stuff in reading and math curriculum in our schools today. If 23 + 23 = 44, well that's close enough. If an appearance of racism can be postulated, well, that's good enough too, he's guilty. No more evidence needed ("We have all the facts we need.")
I don't think so. In my view we need to get government out of education. Today all young people are not being taught how to think conceptually, so all they have to guide their actions are their feelings. Feelings not controlled by thoughts are political and moral disasters.
We had "systemic racism" during the slavery years and again during the Jim Crow years. There is still some racism today but in no way is it 'systemic."
I reject the notion that every alleged instance of injustice by white cops to black suspects is caused by racism suggested in the phrases "we have all the facts we need" and "systemic racism." Really? I question that.
I watched that video many times of policeman Chauvin kneeling on Mr Floyd's neck. I looked for some clue that could indicate racist motive. I watched Chauvin's face for a hint of a smile that might reveal a racist pleasure. I saw and heard nothing. Kneeling on a suspect's neck while in handcuffs should be cause for punishment in my view. I can see kneeling to put cuffs on a suspect but not after he's been rendered harmless.
The whole thing looked very calm, calculated, deliberate as if the public were the intended audience. Chauvin knew he was being recorded and could not fail to know that it would cause riots if made public and probably the end of his police career. But why would he do that over a small time thief like Floyd? Self sacrifice for a higher goal? I saw no evidence of that or of racism. The coldness of it made no sense.
But these two men knew each other for some time. Was there any animosity between them? Grudges? Sure, it could have been rank racism on the part of Chauvin and I would like this question posed to him: What was your motive? But even then, we have to remember that a crime is in the action not the motive. Murder is murder regardless of motive.
I grew up in the Jim Crow era and I know there was much more racism then than there is now. The famous psychologist Eric Hoffer once said "Mass movements can rise and spread without the belief in a god, but never without a belief in a devil." I submit that Ms. Hackney is presenting a demon--"systemic racism"--to be destroyed. But destroying an evil is not the same as creating a good, especially when that evil is a manufactured one.
To defeat an evil like racism one must define it precisely. However, in America today we have a systemic attack on defining anything precisely: Progressive Education. It is a pedagogic philosophy that teaches students to think in the approximate, the almost, the close enough. Progressive Ed teaches this stuff in reading and math curriculum in our schools today. If 23 + 23 = 44, well that's close enough. If an appearance of racism can be postulated, well, that's good enough too, he's guilty. No more evidence needed ("We have all the facts we need.")
I don't think so. In my view we need to get government out of education. Today all young people are not being taught how to think conceptually, so all they have to guide their actions are their feelings. Feelings not controlled by thoughts are political and moral disasters.
No comments:
Post a Comment