Our last two Dispatches have dealt with the issue of stereotyping and its role in racist and discriminatory behaviour and policy. Today’s anonymous Post is a rejoinder to that debate and opens new ground, ground that Passive Complicity sees as a highly fertile field, one that may promise a rich harvest.
Previously:
Myself, I have often made fun of ‘matters German’. A group of Germans telling jokes: “Drei und vierzig (43)… Ha Ha Ha , neunzehn (19)…Ha Ha Ha…achtundzwanzig (28) …Ha Ha Ha… und zo weiter”
Not to mention the German Coastguard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR0lWICH3rY
Very funny Frank. On reflection this is based on prejudice and if most Germans were brown or black it would be called racism. Over the years I may have unwittingly hurt many a German’s feelings. Of this I’m not proud. Prejudice without pride.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw”
Tim Minchin is very good!
There is prejudice on the basis of race (racism), and then there is prejudice on the basis of culture (culturism). They are often confused because race is often a convenient stereotype to identify culture, but they are actually different things.
Racism is fairly obviously stupid…aside from the stupidity of prejudice on the basis of any sort of difference, there is less biological difference between races than there is between random individuals of the same race. My favorite quote from the wikipedia page on race and genetics is this;
“From a scientific point of view, the concept of race has failed to obtain any consensus; none is likely […] the major stereotypes, all based on skin color, hair color and form, and facial traits, reflect superficial differences that are not confirmed by deeper analysis with more reliable genetic traits…”
However, culturism is a far more subtle and difficult thing to argue against. It typically manifests as; “I’m not racist. I believe that everyone, regardless of race, should be free to live just like me.” It is not racist, but it is denying people the freedom to live differently. It’s hard to argue against because although most people can understand race is a minor and arbitrary difference, they struggle to understand and accept that people would genuinely want to live a different way. To them it just looks like the “wrong way” that needs to be corrected.
It is very hard to get people to understand and accept cultural differences. It’s actually easier for people to accept cultural differences if they don’t understand them… it’s easier to accept something if you don’t realize just how different it is. This is why people in Melbourne are more accepting of Aboriginal rights than people in Alice-Springs. Once you begin to realize how big the differences are, it’s a whole new level of understanding before you can accept them.
I think it’s too hard to educate people to the “acceptance point”. It’s much easier to argue for tolerance… that people should have the freedom to live how they like, even if it is the “wrong way”. You can also argue for the benefits of diversity… it makes the world more interesting and adaptable if we are not all clones of each other.
Editors note: I would like to see more discussion on the idea of ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’. Where does ‘judgement’ or ‘non-judgement’ fit into this?