![]() They use racist as a proxy in a larger culture war, underusing it in some situations and overusing it in others. What prevents clarity? Some pundits reject the notion that they should apply the word consistently, only when appropriate, without regard to whether the usage will upset their audience (or to whether not using the word will upset their audience). And those following along will be clear on any disagreements rather than wondering how other people are defining their terms. Dissenters can challenge his premises or his conclusion. Every reader can see exactly what he meant by racist––the unequal treatment of white Americans and nonwhite Americans––and why he concluded that deploying it was fair and accurate. But even if I disagreed, I would praise Yglesias’s approach. “Trump sees nonwhite Americans as not genuinely American,” he explained, “as possessing a kind of inherent foreignness regardless of where they were born and a second-class claim on citizenship.” And the lack of clarity is vexing for those of us who believe that rigor ought to be the lodestar in determining whether to use racist in a given instance.Īt Vox, Matthew Yglesias recently distinguished himself by articulating exactly why he believes that Trump’s birtherism and his attacks on those members of Congress were racist. This free-for-all makes it difficult, if not impossible, for everyone to be on the same page. Prejudging members of a racial group or failing to treat them as individuals.Īny of the above applied to ethnic, religious, or national-origin groups too.Īny of the above, plus power over members of the target group. But even when explicitly grappling with the appropriateness of using racist in coverage, journalists often make no attempt to do so.Īmong the definitions that may come to mind for readers when they see the term:Ī belief in the innate inferiority of a racial group.Īnimus directed at someone because of the person’s racial identity.ĭenying equal treatment to a racial group.Īny action, law, policy, or institution that disproportionately harms a racial group. John McWhorter: Racist is a tough little wordĪbsent any consensus, journalists ought to clarify which meaning they’re using in a particular article. On the subject of racism, Merriam-Webster warns, “Quoting from a dictionary is unlikely to either mollify or persuade the person with whom one is arguing.” ![]() That inquiry often generates more heat than light in part because there is no broadly agreed-upon definition of racist, even if we narrow the pool from Americans generally to New York Times subscribers or NPR listeners or CBS viewers. Then he told four congresswomen of color that they should “go back” to where they’re from even though three of them were born in the United States and all four were chosen by their fellow Americans to represent them in the legislature.Īre some or all of those comments racist? Trump’s short political career includes denying that Barack Obama was born in the United States, calling for a ban on Muslim travel here, characterizing masses of Mexican immigrants as rapists, and asserting that a judge was unfit to hear a case because of his Mexican heritage. A long-running debate about when to use the word racist resurfaced this month, prompted by mass grappling with how to cover Donald Trump’s recent attacks on four House Democrats.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |