It is no doubt true, of course, that racism still exists in individuals in police departments and other institutions, but it does so in spite of the systemic anti-racism which does exist and not because of the systemic racism which doesn’t. The real problem is that those who cry loudest about systemic racism are not referring to real concrete systems, but about the whole “system” of civilization as defined by Marxist ideological dogma.
If there is one thing which is currently obsessing large swathes of the ideologically globalized world, it is the scourge of systemic racism. It is a matter of unquestioned dogma that such systemic racism is widespread and that it must be purged from society. To question this unquestionable dogma is a heresy which is punishable by the unleashing of the lynch mob. This being so, and playing the fool who rushes in where wise men fear to tread, let’s investigate the matter employing the lost faculty of dispassionate reason and commencing with the forgotten art of defining our terms.
Let’s begin with racism itself. It is the judging of a person on the basis of his race or skin colour, or the judging of a whole people on the basis of its race or skin colour. It is, furthermore, the allowing of such judgment to transcend, subvert, or supersede all other considerations. Racism, as defined, is an unmitigated evil. From a Christian perspective, it violates the inviolable dignity of every human person as being made in the image of God, and breaks the great commandment of Christ that we love our neighbor.
So far, so good.
Systemic racism is the systemic practice of racism by institutions. Examples of systemic racism would be slavery, segregation in the South, and apartheid in South Africa. Examples of systemic anti-racism would be the abolitionist movement, the civil rights movement, and the anti-apartheid movement. Examples of enforced systemic anti-racism would be the Civil War, insofar as this was a conflict fought on the issue of slavery, and the busing of students in the 1970s to enforce the desegregation of schools.
Having differentiated between systemic racism and systemic anti-racism, it is clear that we live in a systemically anti-racist culture. Racism is illegal within the systems and institutions of this country, and, for that matter, in many other countries in the world. If a police officer or a school teacher behaves in a racist manner, the rules require him to be summarily dismissed. Insofar as there is systemic training, in police departments, schools, and businesses, it is anti-racist training. There is no police department, school district, government department, or business which condones racism, and it is preposterous to suggest that any of these institutions have racist training programs.
Insofar as there is systemic discrimination on racial grounds, it is what is called positive discrimination or affirmative action in favour of minorities. In its mildest form, it is choosing to employ the non-white candidate for a position over equally qualified white candidates; in its more potent form, it is choosing to discriminate in favour of non-white candidates, even if they are not as qualified as their white counterparts. This sort of systemic racial discrimination in favour of minorities has been widely practiced in both the public and private sectors of the economy for many years.
It is no doubt true, of course, that racism still exists in individuals in police departments and other institutions, but it does so in spite of the systemic anti-racism which does exist and not because of the systemic racism which doesn’t.
The real problem is that those who cry loudest about systemic racism are not referring to real concrete systems, in the sense of real institutions that exist, but about the whole “system” of civilization as defined by Marxist ideological dogma. The only difference from old school Marxism is that this new-breed of Marxists is comfortable with global capitalism, in the sense that they hate those who resist globalism, and have directed their hatred instead against anything tainted with the “European” past. Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms are racists because they are part of the European cultural “system”; every artist from Giotto to Cézanne is a racist because they are also part of the “system”; Dante, Dickens, and Dostoyevsky are racists. The “systemic racism” which these radicals seek to destroy is nothing less than the past itself, or at least any aspect of it which can be accused of the heinous crime of being tainted in any way with the unforgivable sin of being “European.”
At the root of this arrant nonsense is an inhuman understanding of history and the human person derived from philosophies that see reality in terms of systems and deterministic processes. Hegel and his disciple Marx saw history as an almighty mechanism and people merely as disposable cogs in the machine. This is why Marxists have happily killed tens of millions of people in the quest to perfect a social “system.” Another inhumane philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche, hated Christian humility and advocated the Pride which reinvents the image of the self into the Übermensch, the superior person of the future who sees himself in his Pride as better than the inherently inferior Untermenschen of the past. Today’s revolutionaries have mixed Marx with Nietzsche to make a philosophical Molotov cocktail with which to set the world on fire. They will happily kill anyone who gets in their way.
Let’s end with the words of a former socialist revolutionary who advocated Pride and greatly admired Nietzsche, whose words, though spoken almost a century ago, sound strikingly similar to those enunciated by the Pride movement and its stormtroopers on the streets of Seattle and other cities. This revolutionary made “a declaration of war against the order of things which exist, against the state of things which exist, in a word, against the structure of the world which presently exists.” Like today’s revolutionaries of Pride, he had a mind animated by hatred. His name was Adolf Hitler.
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
The featured image is courtesy of Pixabay and has been brightened slightly for clarity.
After reading the article, although a non-white, I have changed my mind and would now be fighting for white rights. Also on the role of Christianity, now I understand that historians have really done a disservice by highlighting how Church condoned, in face abetted slavery. This unfounded Marxist propaganda needs to be expunged from history.
thank you
I’m not a Neitzsche fan, but I don’t think many protesters were inspired by his “ubermensch” philosophy, which is certainly not Marxist. Yes, it’s true the BLM movement is anti-white and anti-Western, but it’s even more anti-intellectual. The mob even tore down a Frederick Douglass monument. You give them too much credit.
James, an excellent book that describes how the current movement co-ops Nietzsche while drawing on their puritanical sense of calling and mission is Power and Purity: The Unholy Marriage that Spawned America’s Social Justice Warriors by Mark T. Mitchell. Not sure if that interests you, but your observations here coincide with some of the author’s conclusions.
Very well described, and with terms I have searched for. Very useful.
The most excellent one-paragraph synopsis of the Woke Movement I have read can be found in your introductory paragraph.
One critical comment, however. Your use of the word Pride will lead the LGBT community to claim that you have co-opted their terminology. They use the word Pride to describe and advance their cause.
Maybe Hubris would have been better choice? There is no end to the Orwellian Speak these days, you see. Word games abound!
Thanks Kelli. I avoid using the acronym “LGBT”. If the advocates of this acronym can’t find a word in the lexicon for what they stand for it’s because they are advocating something completely alien to the Logos and the entirety of human experience derived from it (Him).. When these people advocate “Pride” they are being absolutely precise. Pride is “the absence of humility” and making ourselves into the gods of our own self-identified cosmos.
Another great essay, Joseph. Thanks. I will mention that , growing up half Mexican in liberal Berkeley, I was assaulted several times over the years for being “white.” I pray for the perpetrators. And for all who have been misled by libertine-Marxist thinking. Godspeed.
One might argue that affirmative action is itself racist, (as I believe you subtly do), which is ironic because allegedly the point of it is to prevent racism. However, some people are so afraid of being called racist toward minorities (even falsely), that they swing the pendulum the opposite way, favoring minorities as a means of virtue signaling. Or else, they genuinely believe that affirmative action combats racism, and are not using it out of fear of the Left’s accusations. As well intended as affirmative action might be, its problem is that it actively draws a line between different ethnicities, thereby being a racism born out of the attempt to not be racist. I think that, for instance, Black Americans should not be treated as ‘second-class’ citizens that must be saved in a special way, nor should they be downtrodden because of their race. They should be rewarded for skills, expertise, and actions, not given preference due to their race.
Excellent article!
I genuinely think reading a book such as The New Jim Crow might provide some useful insight into how systemic racism and systemic anti-racism can coexist/be at odds with one another within the same system. I don’t think it’s a zero sum game where simply because we have anti-racist laws that we have entirely anti-racist systems. The reality is there are very real systems in play from redlining to majority white banking systems that categorically lend fewer dollars to black people that contribute to systemic racism as is so often talked about. Your article was clearly well thought out and articulate but I do believe it’s missing some necessary perspective.
I agree that there are some things missing in this well written and thoughtful essay. Banking is a good example. However I am interested in learning where there still exists redlining as a systemic entity. Back in the early 2000s, I went through the training required to become a licensed Realtor in my state. Redlining was a specific topic discussed in class. It was very explicitly described and clearly stated that this is illegal and something that would be cause to have one’s license revoked. We spent some time discussing ways this could be asked by clients that weren’t initially obvious, as well as the standard of a non-answer to such questions (in other words, one would not touch them with a 10 foot pole, and would make it clear to a client that you as a professional did not engage in redlining). I assumed this was a nation wide standard of anti-racism, but perhaps it is not? Where does this still exist on an institutional level?
Excellent analysis. Thank you.
“Systemic racism is the systemic practice of racism by institutions.”
Wrong definition. “Systemic racism” in the U.S. is the residue of past institutional racism as you define it–slavery and Jim Crow and KKK terrorism and vote suppression. For instance, consider the proposition that Blacks in the U.S. are killed by police in disproportionate numbers relative to their percentage of the overall population because of systemic racism. This doesn’t imply that the police involved are individually racist (even if that continues to be a problem in places). You could give all police men and women hearts of gold with respect to racism, and Blacks would still be killed disproportionately because systemic racism means that they are more likely to be in situations where someone is killed than are non-Blacks.
Ridding the country of institutional racism is only the first step towards “all men are created equal” (women of course implied too). And it has nothing to do with Marxism–it’s “Founding Fathers 101”.
You are correct that Blacks are more likely to be killed by police because they tend to have more encounters with the police. However, the link to slavery, Jim Crow, and KKK terrorism (which were real problems, I’m not downplaying them) to present day circumstances is tenuous at best, or perhaps non-existent. The real driver is the catastrophic breakdown of the nuclear family in our inner cities, something that can be more directly tied to the well-intentioned, but misguided Great Society programs of the late Sixties.
I’m a Latina (mix race) and appreciate this article
We need to educate ourselves and our youth because we are like sheep lead to slaughter by all the very dangerous nineteen century liberal philosophies running strong in our current culture
I’ll add to your list Sartre, Foucault and Simone de Beauvoir (gender ideas)
Most grateful
Dear Sir,
I’ve very recently become interested in the problem of systemic racism. Would you, please, recommend some resources to answer specific arguments in favor of the existence of systemic racism?