Gerald Chow

Black and White Original photo by Phinaphantasy

Racism is nothing new, and there are countless articles on it written by better people than I who can give greater insight into the topic. That said, it is a subject worth looking at even from my not so expert perspective.

The general understanding of racism is a discriminatory attitude towards a person or people solely by virtue of their skin color, or to be more accurate, their ethnicity. Throughout history, people perceive those of a different ethnicity to be less human because they had lower (or just different) beliefs, culture and looks. This perception was propagated by colonists, believing that their culture and race were superior to those who were colonized, and at that time, more often than not, might is right.

I have a theory about how we humans make sense of the world. The essence of it is the forming relationships. We relate apple to fruits just as we relate oranges to fruits. The forming of relationships such as these are the basis for categorization, an important tool our brain uses to understand and conceptualize the things we see, hear, feel and experience. Unfortunately, this also means we inherently create those same links and relate people to attributes (categorization) , even if we may not do it consciously. We may observe a pattern in a particular group of individuals, and then subconsciously relate it to the entire group. We then extrapolate that information to form ideas about others that may fall into the same category. This is why I believe we have certain prejudices that come forth unintentionally.

Additionally, the concept of the “Monkeysphere” where we humans fail to conceptualize individuals as real living and breathing humans with feelings and emotions past a certain point only exacerbates the issue. It is inherently harder to sympathize with a person when we see so many of “their kind” that he/she becomes a statistic.

Unfortunately it doesn’t stop there. The formation of establishments involve people, and naturally, the prejudices and thinking of those who head and run these establishments will to a certain degree, carve what they believe into the very establishments they run. This is where it gets complicated. These establishments may impose rules or regulations that reflect their beliefs about how they view people. For example, the whole concept of Apartheid was simply a classification that certain ethnic groups were beneath and subhuman compared to others, and therefore accorded different rights. This belief was institutionalized, and for some reason, that didn’t sit well with a lot of people. Here’s my take on why:

There is a significant distinction between discrimination that is due to human prejudices, and discrimination by an establishment. It’s one thing when a person feels uncomfortable because you are of a “different color”, it’s another when the establishment labels you differently and thus treats you different. One has an element of human frailty and can thus be easily dismissed or brushed off, but the other is supposed to uphold the concepts of justice and equality as human society views it.

The huge outcry against racism is, I believe, due largely to our concept of justice, where the world needs to be fair and made equal as much as possible. We hang on to the concept that one should reap that which is due to him, and not be a victim of circumstances. Justice as we see it, is when good is rewarded, and evil is punished. We feel indignant, uncomfortable, uneasy when good goes unrewarded or evil unpunished.

Philosophers have long contemplated the meaning of justice, and it is is tied to our sense of rightness and wrongness that we perceive in the world. It is inherent to humans to strive for status quo, where equilibrium is when a person gets what is deserved, and blessings follow the “good” and curses the “evil”. When this equilibrium is distorted, we have the tendency to desire restoration of that balance.

Image by Giulio Laurenzi — Original by Giulio Laurenzi

The issue then, is what constitutes “good” and “evil”? It goes back to the idea of categorization, and how it affects our judgements. I believe we all try to draw a distinction between circumstances vs decisions. One is within our control (and thus can be classified good / evil), whereas the other is something that we cannot do anything about. Categorization actually covers both aspects and it is through this that we form judgements. Good workers are those who are hardworking, take initiative, articulate, responsible… all characteristics describing a person. When we try to add “is Caucasian” into the mix, our alarm bells ring. On the surface, to describe a person as “Caucasian” is not really different from describing him/her as “articulate” in terms of criterion; They are both just characteristics used to form that judgement. What makes them different is that one is a matter of attitude and choice, whereas the other a matter of circumstances. It appears good and evil applies only when there is an element of choice, and if the characteristic is devoid of any choice (like your ethnicity), then it cannot be good or evil.

That sounds simple, but if we delve deeper, it gets more complex. Consider if the criteria for making a judgement is punctuality. If a person is punctual all the time, we say it is a positive trait because things can function more efficiently (activities move according to plan). Also, it’s a choice a person makes to BE punctual. Now let’s say, hypothetically, we could change our ethnicity on a whim. This means that what ethnic group you are from is a choice. Would it then be fair to call someone racist if he/she prefers to work with someone who is say Chinese? Couldn’t you CHOOSE to BE a Chinese in order to be a “better worker”? After all, if that person finds it is more efficient and easier to work, on what basis do I say it is wrong? On the flip side, if all the tardy people in the world band together and demand that they shouldn’t be judged because they are “inherently” tardy, would you accept such behaviour?

It gets even more confusing when we hear news that even our attitudes may not be entirely within our control. For example, extremely short tempered and aggressive people have tended to be viewed as due to their inability or unwillingness to control their emotions, but studies have shown they may be victims of circumstances rather than just because they can’t. It seems that it is marginally harder for them to do so due to their genetic makeup. Before we had this study, no one batted an eyelid if we were to decide to fire someone for being unable to control his/her temper. Now that we know it could have been due to him/her being born that way, has it changed our perspective just a little?

From this viewpoint, I venture to consider how mankind years earlier may have viewed the world and hence formed conclusions about others in pretty much the same way. It was generally ACCEPTED by society back then that those of a “lower” race could be accorded less rights simply by virtue of their ethnicity. This is not condoning their actions, but merely a statement of my opinion on how things came to be. In fact, even now, people have a tendency to prefer the familiar, and can relate better to those of the same ethnic group. While it should not be a standard to judge competency, one cannot deny that it is easier in some situations for someone “select” ethnic groups, but not others, to excel certain jobs. Going back to the example I gave, if you felt that even if the temper problem was not in his control, yet your organization is right to let him/her go, would you do the same for someone who, due to his ethnicity, fails to “perform”, or would you be more lenient? Food for thought.

Avenue Q cast on Broadway on Broadway — Image by Michael Schamis

I personally believe it is impossible to remove entirely prejudices that people may have about certain ethnic groups. As the song from Avenue Q goes, “Everyone’s a little bit racist.” Acknowledging this fact will allow us to move forward to accept that perhaps the best way forward, isn’t to force everyone to “ignore color”, but to learn how to make important judgements based on a suitable criteria, one in which race is a minimal or totally irrelevant factor. I leave the last few lines of the song to end this piece:

Everyone’s a little bit racist
It’s true.
But everyone is just about
As racist as you!
If we all could just admit
That we are racist a little bit,
And everyone stopped being
So PC (Politically Correct)
Maybe we could live in –
Harmony!

I started writing my first blog many years back, but it died very quickly within a year. Since then, I have gone through the cycle of reviving my blogging activities and then letting it die a few times over because I never managed to continually maintain them for long. Each time I began, there was a sudden burst of energy and I had this picture in my head where I would churn out article after article that many would like to read. However, over time, the initial exuberance tapers off resulting in an old, out-dated archive which no one ever visits save for myself when I’m feeling nostalgic and need a trip down memory lane.

While I was embarking on this rebirth of my writing passion, I began to wonder what it was that inherently drew me to keep writing so much? Hadn’t the past “failures” taught me that I do not really have the required journalistic aptitude or stamina? Why do I keep coming back to this only to fail time and again? This bugged me because I knew that if I didn’t have the answer, or at least attempt to seek it, this project would not be sustainable.

So, struggling with my dilemma, I decided that in my maiden article I would try and justify why I’m reanimating my seemingly dead journalism attempts. Perhaps it’s some delusion of grandeur. Perhaps it’s just my stubbornness in not wanting to admit “defeat” or failure. Or perhaps it was some other inner desire to simply say what I want to say regardless of whether anyone is interested to listen.

While I was contemplating this, and attempting to do some research, I realized that the times I had such a strong desire to write was usually when there was SOMETHING to write about, and that something was always a new thought or idea that impressed me personally. The “enlightenment” brought about by the new idea became a driving force for me to become an outlet that shared this to others. It didn’t matter that the idea did not originate from me. I bought into the idea. I felt it was something WORTH TELLING.

It’s like when you discover this brand new restaurant that had great service, exquisite taste, and good value for money. You would definitely want to share it with your friends, your relatives, your colleagues and your peers! Have you ever wondered why, though? What drives you to want to take the effort to share something as trivial as a place to eat with others? I believe we all have this urge to share with others about things that we feel strongly about. Some may deem this obnoxious at times, but we can’t deny that such tendencies do exist, and it is so prevalent that there is even a marketing concept built on this phenomenon; The Word of Mouth.

My theory, is that this tendency is based on a rooted desire to be the one who can influence others. We do it with the intention of, hopefully, having the satisfaction to be the one who introduced something new and beneficial to the betterment of our fellow man. We have the desire to make an impact, a difference in the world, even if it is just as small as seeing your friends or relatives know of and enjoy a good place to eat, and it is all thanks to YOU.

Yes, there is definitely an element of egotistical pride in being the one who first brings this to the attention of others. This is especially evident when you hear statements like “And who was the one who introduced you to it/him/her?”. This also explains why some engage in activities like matchmaking. Altruistic? Probably to some extent, but it’s also true that we get a kick out of being a change agent in someone else’s life. I tend to see it as a combination of both. We tell ourselves that we just want to help. However, the tinge of pride will always be there, and it may not be a bad thing if it somewhat encourages altruism. Regardless of what the case may be, it appears that this prideful altruism is a factor in driving people to share.

I recently had a conversation about how some people ought to be grateful for what they have instead of complaining about what they don’t. While I do agree with this sentiment, I cannot feel that we should be contented to the point where we stop being dissatisfied with where we are. That leads only to stagnation in my opinion. Interestingly, Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs comes to mind. We know there are people who do not even have their basic needs met (bottom of the pyramid, the physiological needs) and we should therefore be grateful that we (may) have at least attained the second level, the safety needs? Do we then stop fighting for the next level of needs to be met? I do not see it as ungratefulness if we push for it, even while we are thankful we are not at the bottom. They are not mutually exclusive.

One of the key points of Maslow’s Hierarchy is that the highest need that a man can have, is for self-actualization. This is the need to realize one’s full potential, to become everything that a person is capable of becoming. Evidently, this relates to the concept of us trying our utmost best to influence the world around us, to express ourselves the best way we can, to make an impact in the lives of those around us.

It is important to note that this psychological theory has been criticized as it was formed based on individualistic qualities and disregards other societies which focus more on collective qualities. The basis for the hierarchy is thus brought into question; Do we all really aim for and value self actualization as the highest need? I then thought about this from the perspective of an Asian. Admittedly, we as Asians are more of a collectivist society and we worry constantly about “face”, or what others think about us. This is a domineering trait in most Asian cultures, although there are exceptions particularly those who are exposed to more “Western” influences. Again, no judgement calls here, but it does appear that those who adopt more “Western” beliefs tend to also be more individualistic.

If it were true, then according to Maslow’s Theory, we as Asians would more or less stop at esteem, where achievement and respect from others would be highest valued. This could explain why Asians tend to focus on bread and butter issues and there is a constant pressure to conform to the norm rather than to pushing self expression. The Asians who DO engage in self expression, more often than not tend to have been influenced by exposure to other cultures and values (the power of Western Culture through Hollywood and MTV). Conversely, the ones with a more Asian mindset tend to keep their self expressions in check.

So how does this relate back to my desire to write? I readily admit that I have been heavily influenced by Western culture, much more so than Asian ones. Yes I do retain many Asian traits, but since I grew up with English as my first language, and have been consuming American cartoons, movies and music for as long as I can remember, I would concede that I tend to identify with Maslow’s Hierarchy.

I have always been a big fan of TED talks. I have also tried to introduce others to TED (again, I’m trying to share this IMHO amazing concept with them). Have you ever wondered why TED Talks are so engaging and so interesting? Why do so many count it a privilege to be given the opportunity to speak at TED? It is a platform where we can share the newest ideas and information to others in the hopes that they will better themselves with it. The tagline for TED, is the phrase “Ideas worth spreading”. It appears the sharing of an idea, especially an idea that many believe is good, is something that invokes excitement and something that drives people to organize something like that.

We all have a desire to be the best, greatest person we can be, even if you are more “Asian”. We also desire to spread our influence, to see the effect we have on the lives of others. We take pride in sharing with others because when we come to know something that we believe is beneficial and good for us, we share it in hopes that we can also help make a difference by bringing that same benefit to them. This is the reason why when I feel enlightened, either by a new thought or a new idea, or if I have a strong opinion which may present a fresh perspective to an issue, I fire up my thinking juices and try to convert all the threads of thought in my mind into a decent piece of reading that will, hopefully, make a difference to someone… It remains to be seen if I will be disappointed.

The sensitive subject of race

Why write?