I definitely think so. I'm of mixed heritage and have been racialized 4+ different ways over my life in different settings and countries (hispanic, black, white, middle eastern, etc). Since 2020 we've certainly multiplied our focus on racial identity and racial purity in every media and university setting, and the results have been quite negative in my opinion. We just have so many things we need to work on together, and aside from being fake/socially constructed, it's also demonstrably negative. Nothing revolutionary there - Fred Hampton basically said and thought the same 60 years ago - we have to build our coalitions around a future we can all thrive in together. I don't agree with his anti-capitalist message, but the essence of what he was aiming for was noble in my opinion. I don't think a future of racially stratified medicine, education, etc. is anything to strive for - South Africa has been doing that, and disastrously. That which is socially constructed, can be socially de-constructed. I'm human race.
Dr. Mason has asked us not to rush to judgement and to wait until her book comes out, I respect that. So here's what I think.
I remember posting somewhere is relation to the question posed by Glen Loury, 'Why does racial inequality persist?', that there was a problem with the question as 'race' presupposed inequality. I've learnt more about Loury since, and I'm sure that he needs no lessons in the semantics of race. Nonetheless mine would then be a tactical rather than a philosophical intervention.
Are we confusing political questions with philosophical questions? I don't believe that the problems of race can be solved by education, philosophy or psychology. I'm reminded of the concept of 'false consciousness', a crude Marxist idea, that we can attribute to the followers of Marx if not Marx himself. This idea is that due to the mystification of capitalist society, the working class lose sight of their own true interest. They develop a false consciousness. We can see a similarity to this idea in Plato, who believed that society should be governed by philosopher kings who alone could perceive reality as it really is. Similarly the Marxist vanguard would lead the proletariat to a correct understanding of their true interests.
The Marxist project has never worked, perhaps ironically many leftists have decamped to identity politics. Are we now to believe that Identitarians also have a false consciousness, and that they can be coaxed out of this?
Certainly in the UK, perhaps in the West in general, the concept of Race, seemed to be heading for redundancy. In the 1980's Race was replace by Ethnicity, this was a recognition that race presumed hierarchy, while Ethnicity presumed different but equal cultures. Today HR professionals, in the UK public sector leaders, and the managerial class in general, have either forgotten or are unaware of the problem or the history. Race and ethnicity are used interchangeably and unthinkingly.
Few people today, particularly on the left would argue that Race is anything but a social construct. The concept of Race continues because it remains useful to someone. We have a black Newspaper in the UK (only one), I wrote to them about ten years ago suggesting that they produce just one edition in which they do not mention 'racism'. This would be an opportunity for black people to talk about something else that interests them or gives their lives meaning. But this paper's preoccupation with race and particularly with racism has intensified.
I could say that race is not my concept and does not benefit me in anyway. I could say that I didn't create the concept and I cannot erase it. But Race remains a thing in the world (not always the same thing). When the most powerful white man in the world Joe Biden can say to a black critic 'you ain't black' (even in jest), I think to myself that if I forfeit my blackness and my right to define blackness, I leave that definition in the hands of others, they will then be in a position to define me. This is a serious matter, what we now call 'woke' is a racial ideology that is now very much part of our governing institutions. To give up my definition of blackness (or right to define it) and then wait patiently for the identitarians and governing classes to give up their's, would be stupidity.
I definitely think so. I'm of mixed heritage and have been racialized 4+ different ways over my life in different settings and countries (hispanic, black, white, middle eastern, etc). Since 2020 we've certainly multiplied our focus on racial identity and racial purity in every media and university setting, and the results have been quite negative in my opinion. We just have so many things we need to work on together, and aside from being fake/socially constructed, it's also demonstrably negative. Nothing revolutionary there - Fred Hampton basically said and thought the same 60 years ago - we have to build our coalitions around a future we can all thrive in together. I don't agree with his anti-capitalist message, but the essence of what he was aiming for was noble in my opinion. I don't think a future of racially stratified medicine, education, etc. is anything to strive for - South Africa has been doing that, and disastrously. That which is socially constructed, can be socially de-constructed. I'm human race.
Very well said, thank you for sharing
Dr. Mason has asked us not to rush to judgement and to wait until her book comes out, I respect that. So here's what I think.
I remember posting somewhere is relation to the question posed by Glen Loury, 'Why does racial inequality persist?', that there was a problem with the question as 'race' presupposed inequality. I've learnt more about Loury since, and I'm sure that he needs no lessons in the semantics of race. Nonetheless mine would then be a tactical rather than a philosophical intervention.
Are we confusing political questions with philosophical questions? I don't believe that the problems of race can be solved by education, philosophy or psychology. I'm reminded of the concept of 'false consciousness', a crude Marxist idea, that we can attribute to the followers of Marx if not Marx himself. This idea is that due to the mystification of capitalist society, the working class lose sight of their own true interest. They develop a false consciousness. We can see a similarity to this idea in Plato, who believed that society should be governed by philosopher kings who alone could perceive reality as it really is. Similarly the Marxist vanguard would lead the proletariat to a correct understanding of their true interests.
The Marxist project has never worked, perhaps ironically many leftists have decamped to identity politics. Are we now to believe that Identitarians also have a false consciousness, and that they can be coaxed out of this?
Certainly in the UK, perhaps in the West in general, the concept of Race, seemed to be heading for redundancy. In the 1980's Race was replace by Ethnicity, this was a recognition that race presumed hierarchy, while Ethnicity presumed different but equal cultures. Today HR professionals, in the UK public sector leaders, and the managerial class in general, have either forgotten or are unaware of the problem or the history. Race and ethnicity are used interchangeably and unthinkingly.
Few people today, particularly on the left would argue that Race is anything but a social construct. The concept of Race continues because it remains useful to someone. We have a black Newspaper in the UK (only one), I wrote to them about ten years ago suggesting that they produce just one edition in which they do not mention 'racism'. This would be an opportunity for black people to talk about something else that interests them or gives their lives meaning. But this paper's preoccupation with race and particularly with racism has intensified.
I could say that race is not my concept and does not benefit me in anyway. I could say that I didn't create the concept and I cannot erase it. But Race remains a thing in the world (not always the same thing). When the most powerful white man in the world Joe Biden can say to a black critic 'you ain't black' (even in jest), I think to myself that if I forfeit my blackness and my right to define blackness, I leave that definition in the hands of others, they will then be in a position to define me. This is a serious matter, what we now call 'woke' is a racial ideology that is now very much part of our governing institutions. To give up my definition of blackness (or right to define it) and then wait patiently for the identitarians and governing classes to give up their's, would be stupidity.
I enjoy reading your comments, always so insightful.
Thanks, that's good to know.