Reverse Racism

Usually I do not like to repeat myself.  I am, however, going to retell a story I have told elsewhere.  I do this in order to make an important point about reverse racism.  Because I don’t want to be misunderstood, I intend to put my views in a larger context.

Many decades ago, I underwent basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  This required serving a stint on KP.  Kitchen patrol usually entailed food preparation and cleanup.  Although it was only supposed to last a few hours, I encountered an unexpected obstacle.

Once the meal was over and the regular cooks were gone, the corporal now in charge turned to me and said.  “Jew boy, you’re ass is mine.”  This is an exact quote.  He then proceeded to assign me the worst tasks he could imagine—including scrubbing the grease trap.

Eventually one of my unit’s temporary sergeants wandered down past where I was working.  Aware that my assignment should be over, he asked why I was still there.  Upon hearing my explanation, he immediately went to summon our company’s regular sergeant.

When this non-com arrived on the scene, he instantly told me to return to the barracks.  He then went inside to chew out the corporal.  In other words, although it was a Christian who decided to harass me, it was two Christians who saved me.

My point is that it is important not to indict every member of a group for the misdeeds of a few.  While some Christians are bigots, many more are not.  Condemning them all for what these others have done is unfair.  Worse than that, it is immoral.

So let me turn to race.  Racism is wrong.  It too is immoral.  When it occurs, we ought not tolerate it.  Indeed, we have a duty to speak up.  But the same is true of reverse racism.  It is equally iniquitous and therefore it should also be condemned.  Here too we have a duty to speak up.

The problem is that when we do—whether we are white or black—we are apt to be accused of racism.  This, however, has become so a grave allegation that most people shy away from speaking their mind—that is, in public.  They do not because candor might endanger their careers or reputations.

Which brings us to the Black Lives Matter movement.  These folks insist that they are asking for justice.  Yet this is a canard.  They do not want justice; they want revenge.  They intend to get even with white folks for the centuries of oppression that black folks have undoubtedly endured.

This is understandable.  Retaliation is a normal impulse when a brutal injustice has been perpetrated.  It is also understandable that activists would target the police.  As the symbols of white authority, they provide a concrete target for their moralistic wrath.  Anonymous police officers can be insulted; they can even be killed.

But this is an explanation; it is not a justification.  When people are oppressed, it is natural to have fantasies of retribution.  It is not, however, acceptable to act on these.  It is not even acceptable to tolerate excuses for this sort of behavior.

That a Democratic candidate for president should have featured the mother of a thug like Michael Brown at her nominating coronation is reprehensible.  That, whether directly or not, she endorsed the “hands up; don’t shoot” propaganda ought have been unthinkable.

We should all stand up for fairness, but fairness is not possible when we condone unfairness as a remedy for past malfeasance.  The way to bring about justice is to provide it for everybody.  And that includes the police.

The indictment of Baltimore police officers for murder has developed into a travesty.  The crocodile tears of a former Miss Alabama for the ambush murder of five Dallas cops were likewise atrocious.  But the charity that a president and presidential candidate have shown for reverse racism is obscene.  It ought not be pardoned!

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University