Confessions of a Racist: The View from the Middle Majority

By Donald Blair

The quest for racial equality is critical to the realization of the unfulfilled American promise, yet the debate around how best to achieve that goal is generally led by the most virulent voices on the issues. The result is often a storm of attacks on anyone who falls between the most extreme opinions. Author Donald Blair gives voice to the unspoken views of a majority population coming to terms with the promise and failings of our American ideals. Confessions of a Racist provides readers a look inside the thoughts of this silent Middle Majority. Caught between good intentions and cautious defensiveness, this Middle Majority rarely engages in discussions of race despite their potential to substantially contribute to a positive path forward. Through a review of the perspectives, programs, and positions that run through America’s equality efforts, Blair provides an honest - and often surprising - map of how we might progress towards a more equitable society.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Gatekeeper Press
• Release date: May 18, 2024
• ISBN: 9781662943898

Book preview

THE GROUNDWORK

INTRODUCTION

A fully functional multiracial society cannot be achieved without a sense of history and open, honest dialogue.

Cornel West

Let’s say I’m at a business or social event. Someone who I have never met walks into the room to join the conversation. The person is friendly, and there’s nothing in appearance or manner that suggests anything peculiar or noteworthy. This person is African American, and I am not. Does that change anything in my behavior? Does it change my manner; my presentation style, if in a business setting; or my small talk if it’s purely social? And if it does change something in the way I act, does that make me a racist?

The issue of race runs through our national story like a secret power in a superhero melodrama. It is a source of great strength and great strife. It is among our most defining characteristics that we make considerable effort to hide. It is a fundamental test of how well we can live up to the ideals that were so nobly expressed, and immediately violated, at our founding. Despite the march of civilization, it’s hard to give unqualified examples of multiracial countries that function as a truly unified society. In fact, there are few societies that intentionally invite the cultural and racial diversity that the United States attempts to achieve. We seek to unify people without a common ancestry, religion, or history through shared civic values. The challenge of achieving this connection is at the heart of the great experiment that our nation continues to be for the world.

The results of this experiment hinge in no small part on our ability to integrate our racial differences into a just, free, and prosperous society. If we prove successful, we may provide a model that other nations can test in their own societies. If we fail, we will contribute to the stubborn belief that multiethnic societies are inherently untenable. From almost any perspective, there is much at stake. It has come to the fore in our society after a string of incidents incited protests and counterprotests that shaped elections from school boards to the presidency.

Based on those developments in our public discourse, you would think that race would also be a major subject of our private discourse. Instead, it works its way into our personal discussions like mention of a wayward family member, usually avoided in mixed company, and heard mostly in the murmurings of side conversations. We march, protest, and proclaim more easily than we engage in earnest discussion.

Minorities seem to come to the open discussion of race more easily than the majority. Whether it is a stand-up comic or an elected official, we accept a minority bringing up race much more easily than we do a majority. That’s in part because the generally accepted cultural standard underlying discussions of race is that the majority is in the role of oppressor—and the minority in the role of the oppressed. Therefore, if the minority brings up issues regarding the racial majority, it is seen as speaking truth to power. If the situation is reversed, it is suspect, perceived as either an act of oppression or capitulation, depending on the message and the audience.

There’s slim hope of us making progress this way. Some problems go away on their own over time, and it would be nice if racism were one of them. Sadly, recent events reinforce that this is not the case. The optimism born of an Obama administration that seemingly advanced our progress was reversed in the years since by a slew of incidents and protests that exposed a deep divide. Racism, or the lack thereof, is an issue of justice. Justice is an ideal that may be uniquely human. It is certainly not the natural state of things. We don’t see rival members of the plant and animal kingdoms establishing territory based on what’s fair. Justice is like a garden where we conform the natural world to our own standards of symmetry and beauty. Left untended, a garden abandons those human-imposed standards. Similarly, an untended society tends to lose its standard of justice. Like all human creations, the ideal of justice requires effort to advance and maintain. Without that effort, the world likely becomes less just, not more so.

If we expect a more just and less racist society, then we need to acknowledge that it requires work from both sides. It is not enough for minorities to petition for their own cause; the majority must also work to advance true progress. Minority revolutions sometimes work when the objective is separatism or secession. But if the goal is to reform and better integrate our society, there must be positive engagement from both sides. Whether it’s the abolitionist movement of the 1860s or the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, progress required the engagement of the enlightened majority in order for the minority efforts to succeed to the degree they did. My fear is that the engagement that our current problems require is retarded by a cultural habit of avoiding most discussions of race by a large proportion of the majority. Broadly speaking, the majority splits into three groups. There are the bigots who maintain some form of belief rooted in White supremacy or victimhood. There are the woke who accept every premise of racism without challenge. Then, there is the middle, who are wary of any pendulum that swings too far in either direction.

These Middle Majority Americans feel trapped in a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t situation. For most White people who hold to the fundamental notion that racism is wrong, responding to specific ideas about we should do to address it requires caution. If your position aligns with the accepted wisdom of the minority advocates, you can support it openly without reservation. There is no conflict between your ideal views of the world, of yourself, or maybe most importantly, of how you think others might perceive you. Yet if you disagree with that accepted wisdom, you twist through a briar patch of emotional and intellectual challenges. Yes, you are against racism, but no, you do not see this idea as a valid solution. That puts you in an awkward conundrum. The problem is that you find yourself on the opposite side of the argument from the people who are hurt by racism. And worse, you’re on the same side as the people who dismiss or even support racism. You resent being grouped on their heinous side of the argument. In this situation, claiming that some of my worst enemies are racists is no more effective than the some of my best friends defense.

Especially for the self-perceived progressive White person, this leaves a choice between two uncomfortable positions. One is to avoid the tangle of thoughts by remaining silent on the issue for fear of being misunderstood or mislabeled. This is the path taken by many White people in America today. It is easier to resentfully avoid the argument than to engage in it.

The other choice is to voice your opinion. But this comes with its own basket of complications. Like all opinions, you’ve got to explain your position. In this case, you first explain why you think a particular program or policy is wrong. And in the culture we find ourselves in at this time, when you share that explanation, you must also establish that you are not a racist. That is because the first response of someone on the opposite side of the argument is typically an accusation of racism.

That situation has played out in familiar patterns over arguments from Malcolm X to Jussie Smollett. All these cases seem to have points on which reasonable non-racist people may differ. But there is the perception that there is nothing to be gained by engaging in the argument—and everything to lose. At best, your view will have little bearing on the social and political policies in place, and at worst, you will be tagged as a racist. At rare times, in trusted company, you will hear someone surreptitiously confide a thought starting with I know this is politically incorrect, but … These same people would not hesitate to state a contradictory thought on religion, government, or economics. For the most part, one can disagree with the government without being called an anarchist; one can disagree with a religion without being called a satanist; one can disagree with a corporation without being called a communist. But someone who disagrees with a statement from the minority about discrimination should expect to be labeled a racist.

The opinions expressed here are an attempt to confront that fear head-on. This is an attempt to override that instinctual protection of silence, and to initiate a forthright conversation from the perspective of the quiet Middle Majority. Because, at the heart of this constituency, there is an idealistic desire to advance the great experiment, to have a country that lives closer to the principles on which it was created. If there is disagreement on what that entails, then better to have that disagreement be clear and open. Let’s put the goal of progress before perfection.

I can’t pretend to approach the subject objectively. In short, my fundamental position is that the racial policies of the United States are misguided. I feel we are at a point in our cultural and political maturation where many of these policies do as much to prolong our racial struggles as they do to resolve them. I believe a sinister mix of political opportunism and naïveté has clouded our view of how to address issues of race. While I dread being accused of racism, let me cop to the charge from the beginning. Returning to the scenario that started this chapter, let me say that the presence of a Black person in the room would indeed change something in my behavior. There are words I would avoid, topics I wouldn’t bring up, metaphors I wouldn’t use. If you define racism as the belief that one race is inherently superior to another, I can confidently say I am not a racist. If you define racism as treating people differently solely because of their race, then I must confess to being a racist.

But that admission comes with my own accusation. If letting someone’s race inform how I behave with them is a form of racism, then to comply with the programs and policies of the United States, we must all be racists. I must take race into account if I’m hiring people; if I’m negotiating a government contract; if I’m applying to college; or if I’m attending a concert. Ironically, I must do so to avoid being accused of racism. Because I follow the laws and customs of the United States, I have been compelled to act as a racist. But no confession is sincere if it isn’t accompanied by a willingness to redress the behavior in question. What follows is meant to fulfill that requirement. Let the argument be joined.

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

I’m sure we all agree that we ought to love one another, and I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that.

Tom Lehrer

Different minorities face different challenges based on different histories. Latinos face different issues than African Americans, and Arabs face different issues than Asians. For the United States, the hottest part of the flame remains the relations between African Americans and European Americans—Blacks and Whites. Except for Native Americans, it is the racial conflict with the longest history and most institutional participation on the part of the US government. But the size of the affected population and the roots in slavery make it the largest scar on the American body politic. Because of that, while the intent of these essays is to discuss racism in general, a greater proportion of the points focus on examples of White and Black issues in our society.

Racism is a sensitive topic often treated in insensitive ways. My goal is to be honest without being insensitive. Nonetheless, I am sure there are those who will read little of the arguments recorded here before condemning them. Many attempts to approach the topic with nuance—that is, to hold a position that doesn’t follow the standard activist handbook —are quickly branded as racist. So, however unnecessary it may seem, I feel it is important to acknowledge that I believe racism does exist in our culture. I believe that minorities suffer disproportionately from racism. I believe that we will be a stronger, freer, and more prosperous country to the extent that we can eliminate the racist elements in our national character. The thread that runs through this discussion, therefore, is not that racism isn’t a problem. It is that we have reached a point in our social and economic development where the current perspectives and solutions around addressing racism are at best, ineffective, and at worst, contributing to the problem.

NOT QUITE FULL DISCLOSURE

Character, not circumstances, makes the man.

Booker T. Washington

In each of the following chapters, the intent is to give a forthright opinion on selected race-related topics, along with the reasons driving that opinion. Because of the suspicion often arising around these types of discussions, there’s usually a search for a hidden agenda. In the interest of trying to put my biases in full view, here is a top-of-mind list of personal background and beliefs that shape these views.

Family Background: