Far from Definition: Racism isn’t About ‘Slant-Eyed or Black’
the-read Short Notes on Racism
Prologue: Compelling Racism Story
This the-read Short Notes on Racism will be flooded by examples, I, myself, are one of the people who believed in examples, but please, as the Quran recite; Iqra, Iqra, Iqra, or Read, Read, Read. Not to be taken for literal meaning but try to comprehend and think about the examples and think about the thinking itself, rather than just reading. Happy reading.
Shingeki No Kyojin
It's the first quarter of the year and it's already stuffed with godlike-story anime.
If you watch the phenomenal, critically-acclaimed anime called Shingeki No Kyojin (Attack on Titan), you might be well aware of the main drivers of the story. Everyone may have their own view on what’s the main drivers but mine is these two things; [1] the main character (Eren Yeager) pursuit of freedom, and [2] the Eldians — a race that has been in possession of Kyojin power since 1820 years before the story (Kyojin = Titans, a human-like creature that eats human and tall, 3 to 60 meters). I don’t want to spill too much of the storyline but (sorry…) I can’t help to discuss the insights about Eldians and how they’re being treated, and to include it in the examples of racism.
… It has been said that Eldian stomped all of the other races with the power of Titans, resulting in a catastrophic endless war, then, came a time when they all defeated by Marleyans, another race. Not-so-soon after (100 years later or so), they’ve become a race that is despised, marginalized, even lived in a concentration camp. They’re being sent to the frontline in wars between nations (Marley — A nation, mostly consisted of Marleyans, — becoming a great power in the world and fighting against the rest of it), they have limited rights, they always being taught that they only lived to give their lives to Marley to purge their ancestor fault and their ‘demonic blood’.
Millennia Old Story: Animalia Racism
Most of us eat meats; whether it is lamb, chicken, pork, or beef we craved for its nutrition, taste and joyfulness of eating it. I know, it’s a rather baffling thing to bring about meats in a racism discussion.
But humans are animals.
We, humans, are basically animals, part of the mammalian kingdom; but we do, treating other ‘fellow’ mammals as if they were mere food to us. That fact makes the claim of one of the most controversial philosophers, Peter Singer, thought that homo sapiens — modern humans the product of the evolution of ape — are discriminative or ‘racist’ against other animals, the terms he coined for that is what now called speciesism, which is another form of discrimination and prejudice as racism did, but to animals.
A Company Full of Chinese in Indonesia and A Black Man Walked into A Store
Ever had an interview when accidentally the candidates are all from Chinese ethnicity except for yourself? I have, and eventually, I didn’t get the job. Have you ever walked into a store and suddenly all eyes turn on you — the cashier, the manager, what I mean is shopkeeper — and you realize that others aren’t treated the same and they all whites and you are black? Well, I haven’t (because I am Asian of course) but clearly someone must have had.
Last, A Twitter Debate
Me and my friend who both Indonesian argued on Twitter. I am a Javanese descendant and he is an Asmat (ethnic) descendant of Papua. We throw arguments in our threads, and at one point he frustrated and tweets “Dasar turunan dajjal😝🤮! — You anti-christ descendant!😝🤮”
I’m done with the examples, now we can talk about the real deal, but before that, can you guess which one of the examples would be the ideal definition of racism?
The Problem 1: Racism Turned Political
The red underlined syllable in Merriam-Webster Dictionary is one of the examples of how we can use the word racism; environmental racism. But the syllable itself makes up a new meaning.
I’m not saying that ‘environmental racism’ is a fake thing nor saying that the term is wrong, nor saying that we shouldn’t fight for this cause, but my point is because the word racism presumably sparks anger faster than other words, it’s imminent for it to be widely used, even if it’s not on the right context. There’s even a quote that describes this perfectly:
“Racist” was no longer simply an adjective used by scholars to identify an abstract doctrine; instead, it became a word in popular use employed as a moral accusation that could be thrown against political opponents. Its value as an epithet contributed to an inflation in its use, so that its meaning may no longer depend upon any belief about race.
From a Scholarly Article in Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Nationalism
Why this is all happened? I believe that it has something to do with these two:
[1] People hate racism and condemned it. From slavery, colonialist caste, to the apartheid in South Africa, human past history tells us that it felt like to have racism rooted in our history and corrupted our ways of treating each other, which brings us to the next point,
[2] More People = More Power, Power for What? Everyone wants to take a part in the holy war against racism, and that’s when the other problem began. From the slogan of FIFA to the BLM movements and others, we all wanted to be a part of this noble cause, but more people means more power, and power sometimes what people need in advancing their agendas (political), regardless of the causes. Racism, over and over again, getting ‘hijacked’ by the populist to advance their political agenda, or to shut others with the term itself, becoming a tool to criminalize someone.
The Problem 2: To Differentiate & To Act Accordingly
Racism, Ethnocentrism, Culturalism, Islamophobia, Xenophobia, Speciesism, Anti-Semitism, Zionism, Anti-Zionism, White-supremacism.
These 👆👆👆 things are bad and they share something in common with racism, that for each one of these, at some certain level, contains prejudice and/or intolerance. Should we really accept all of these under the hood of ‘racism’ banner and slap its off or should we differentiate them? What are the treatments and what measurements we should take in response to racism and the other -ism (if we differentiate)?
Let's Get Back to The Examples
To examine this we need to get back to the examples.
[1] Humans eating animals and giving pains to them as an act of discrimination or ‘racist’ to other animals (Speciesism); People who against this (speciesism) are basing their objection with the claim that if we embrace speciesism, we are exposing ourselves to sexism or racism, because it based on the same prejudice and discrimination concept.
Think of it for a second, in one’s view, you can be a total jackass, a racist prick who thinks that himself is a better product of mammals, therefore you have all the right to abuse other mammals or animals, even separating an unborn child of chicken for your breakfast, on your daily basis.
But this — in my humble opinion — is certainly not what racism is, and for me, believing or doing something that categorized as speciesism is not wrong (to some extent).
Why? Because it's not solving any problems at all, I believe that animal cruelty is wrong, I despise that, but to force human beings not to eat meats or ‘kill’ other animals is unproductive, and the claim; we are exposing ourselves to racism and sexism, so what? We expose ourselves to greed with capitalism, we expose ourselves to pretty much anything bad, but the moral compass that we had, from our culture, universal values, human rights, define our action in this.
[2] The case of a company that hires a lot of Chinese ethnicity, the black man who walks in the store, and the Twitter debate (ethnocentrism and probably racism). The questions I would like to impose in these three phenomena are:
“For the company: Does the company being racist or ethnocentric? Even if it is ethnocentrism, is it also some kind of racism in disguise?”
For the black man case: Do the shopkeepers being racist for keeping their eyes on the black man?
For the Twitter debate: Does he tried to mock me or my lineage? If he really mocking me for being a Javanese, does it makes him a racist? Is he doing it in a joking-manner or does he really had an intention in feeling superior thus mocking me because of my ‘inferior blood’? Now for the controversial move, do I have to bring this to the court for a racist speech case?”
The answers:
[1] We tend to be comfortable to work with a person who had similarity or have some sort of acquaintance with us. That’s what makes a nation with 300 ethnicities and 1340 sub-ethnics like Indonesia be founded, even if we Indonesian are diverse, we have three similarities that poured into the Youth Pledge, one nation, one homeland, one language. And that’s also the reason why some cases like the Chinese ethnic workers company, or why there are so many Angkot drivers in Indonesia are Batakese ethnicity or why lawyers are Batakese too might happen. But does it provide fairness and equality? The yes/not are depending on the case. But does it always explicitly means racism? I would say absolutely not (it even may not implicitly means racism!).
The taking is that it is clear that ethnocentrism is not racism, but it may not represent fairness or equality, and it is worth noted that its not necessarily based on the view of other ethnic are bad, or ethnic supremacy, these things may have rooted in the fact that we comfortable with people that have similarities with us. Generally, ethnocentrism is humane and common, but if it does becoming a basis of decision-making, it may lead to biases and one — like me — may not approve the use of it.
And in a case of a country ethnically diverse like Indonesia, ethnocentrism may only serve good in a sense of ‘preserving the culture’ of one ethnic and not for public decision making.
[2] This is a hard one, the black man case. Even if somehow the shopkeeper learned that based on the theft cases in their neighborhood the prevalence of blacks doing theft is higher than whites and the culprit still left uncaught, the distinction between being racist or just being alerted is thin. Thus, even if its not meant to be a racist act, the prejudice may still hurt and affecting the black man.
For me, this is still bad, whatever the reason is. It is bad but the act itself does not make the shopkeepers ‘racist’ as much as being ‘unfair and unpleasant/annoying’. To understand this view, Using CCTV cams, having an emergency button, or any protocols other than ‘watching’ any kind of person would do better and way more efficient.
[3] The Twitter debate can be seen as two things; A.) A way to befriend and open, an act of trust and openness in which racial/ethnic difference becoming less and less relevant thus becoming a close friend joke or B.) A way to inflate other and saw other race/ethnic as inferiors with the intent to mock out of their inferiority. Whichever it might be, it is almost certainly bad to write out those things on the internet, but I do believe that the A.) option is something that provides more inclusivity and progress toward an equal and tolerant society, in a sense that the motive is as stated above and practiced with people who understand the motive.
Not So Far From Definition Now
With all the examples and its different treatments, the need for ourselves to comprehend the meaning of racism, by our own definition, which also didn’t perpetuate the cycle of bad definition, which then differs it from other ‘ism’ is a must. Because unfortunately, in this age of information, we can no longer be stupid, immature, and short-informed about these kinds of things. Maybe, just maybe, if we lived in a dark age or any ages before the internet, we can be a ‘less-informed’ person because getting information can be hard, but we no longer lived in that situation.
I believe that people who read this up until this point may realize that they are not that far from the definition of racism, you may already have one or still searching for one, but for me, one definition that I think would be the most appropriate for racism (at least for now) comes from a critical study, not a sociological study, which for some, might not be the ideal one since it strictly derived from a philosophical perspective. It’s written by Thomas Schmid in the Journal of Applied Philosophy, which defines racism as:
The infliction of unequal consideration, motivated by the desire to dominate, based on race alone.
With ‘unequal considerations’, ‘motivated’, ‘desire to dominate’ and ‘based on race alone’ needs to be strictly taken account. With this definition, we can clearly distinguish the prejudice or inequality that may arises from another ‘ism’ with one from racism.
As I mentioned earlier, ethnocentrism or any kind of unequal consideration may be inevitable in our lives, having a personal love preference on ethnicity or race like “I have a special interest in Asian” or “I wish I would marry a handsome black guy someday” is one of it. Those who practiced these things may/may not necessarily means they racist/even ethnocentrist, why? Because the motivation that underlying it, is as important as the unequal consideration itself; is the motivation is to joke with a close friend or is it an act of superiority, and the race, if we can distinguish it specifically, gives us a rigorous view in defining racism.
The importance of our view on racism may tremendously affect our actions and reactions towards social issues, specifically in racism, inequality, intolerance, and prejudice, as we’ve seen more and more of these issues surface in our daily lives of the age of information and political correctness, the key is to have a solid understanding and fair conception about racism.
That being said, as a reminder, I would like to urge all of you (and myself) to read extensively on this (not only relying on News or this article solely) if we really want to act or react to this matter. Additionally, the next article of the-read Short Notes on Racism would delve into the racism phenomenon in this age of political correctness, which also will imply what actions that we can do in order to combat that false information and avoid being a ‘marketing pawn’ of the political agenda that lies behind it.
Disclaimer:
Every phrase that I use in describing races and ethnic; black, white, batakese, sundanese, javanese, or any other similar phrases are written with the intent of educational purposes and to write the phrases with an inclusive word that capture the meaning and purpose of the phrases employed itself, with no intention of feeling superior whatsoever.
My Stance Against Racism:
I despise racism, it’s stupid and outrageous, it attacks the very basic identity and rights of ourselves, it does not and will never represent freedom, at all.
