Colorblindness is bad, multiculturalism is good

Psychology Today turns Martin Luther King’s message on its ear:

Racial issues are often uncomfortable to discuss and rife with stress and controversy. Many ideas have been advanced to address this sore spot in the American psyche. Currently, the most pervasive approach is known as colorblindness. Colorblindness is the racial ideology that posits the best way to end discrimination is by treating individuals as equally as possible, without regard to race, culture, or ethnicity.

At its face value, colorblindness seems like a good thing — really taking MLK seriously on his call to judge people on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. It focuses on commonalities between people, such as their shared humanity.

However, colorblindness alone is not sufficient to heal racial wounds on a national or personal level. It is only a half-measure that in the end operates as a form of racism.

Research has shown that hearing colorblind messages predict negative outcomes among Whites, such as greater racial bias and negative affect; likewise colorblind messages cause stress in ethnic minorities, resulting in decreased cognitive performance (Holoien et al., 2011). Given how much is at stake, we can no longer afford to be blind. It’s time for change and growth. It’s time to see.

The alternative to colorblindness is multiculturalism, an ideology that acknowledges, highlights, and celebrates ethnoracial differences. It recognizes that each tradition has something valuable to offer. It is not afraid to see how others have suffered as a result of racial conflict or differences.

Fascinating.  

A person’s measure is dependent upon his/her skin color.  Their worth can only be arrived by taking stock of the pigment of their skin.  Ignoring skin color is racist.

Obama’s supporters promised that his election would bring race transcendence.  

Is this what that looks like?

H/T to William Jacobson who adds:

I hope I don’t get in trouble for playing this video:

Shortlink:

Posted by on January 1, 2012.
Filed under Race.
I blog more regularly at my own place where plain thoughts are delivered roughly. My about page gives you more on who I am.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Up to 90% off top rated local fun!
  • Pingback: Brutally Honest

  • Anonymous

    Obviously, Dr. King was a racist.

  • Anonymous

    I find this to be most illogical.
    The stupid is strong in the posted portion of the article.

    Of course, I can now expect the usual gang of leftist trolls to come along and attempt to “explain” it to me.

    I look forward to them attempting to explain just how MLK was wrong.

  • Anonymous

    A couple things occur to me.

    First, the author confuses colorblindness with a more general sort of cultural blindness.  Colorblindness means that you evaluate a person standing in front of you independent of that person’s race.  The more general blindness is ignoring the discrimination that people of a given race experience on a day-to-day basis.  I think the author means to say that if a person is “color-blind,” that perceptive approach can lead to people taking on the more general cultural blindness.

    Second, in the therapist-patient relationship, I would think that recognizing a person’s race would be part of the job description.  ”Race” isn’t merely an outward thing, but it is also part of a person’s cultural identity.  If a high-minded therapist says, “Well, I’m going to ignore my patient’s race as I attempt to diagnose his mental health,” I’d think that therapist isn’t doing his job very well.  

  • Anonymous

    Prejudice will always exist in some form

    Moochele doesn’t like “fat people”
    Holder doesn’t like white people
    Obama doesn’t like republicans
    I don’t like stupid people.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

    So how is this different from paleoconservatism?

    • Anonymous

      Judging people based on skin color sounds like current liberalism to me.
      Also like the (Democrat-formed) KKK.

  • herddog505

    So… does this mean that we can go back to “seperate but equal”, which was most assuredly NOT color-blind?

    / sarc

    My drill sergeant (a black man) was very much colorblind.  On our first day of basic training, he made it clear that, in the Army, everybody is the same color: GREEN.  All us dumb, green privates worked and especially suffered equally as a result.

    JWHThe more general blindness is ignoring the discrimination that people of a given race experience on a day-to-day basis.  I think the author means to say that if a person is “color-blind,” that perceptive approach can lead to people taking on the more general cultural blindness.

    This is an excellent point; too bad that the author apparently did NOT mean that.

    I suggest that there’s a fine line between recognizing the sins of the past and constantly atoning for them.  This is where the professional racebaiters like Sharpton, Jackson, and Holder make their hay: “Because your ancestors did bad things to my ancestors, you owe me a debt that, frankly, can never be paid… but I’m going to make you try to do so, anyway.”

    Another thought occurs to me: the official line about multiculturalism is that every culture has something positive to offer.  Yet, it’s built explicitly on such ideas as “colorblind messages cause stress in ethnic minorities, resulting in decreased cognitive performance”.  In other words, people of certain races / cultures are so psychologically delicate that they have to be coddled and given special treatment.  That’s not a “positive contribution” that anybody would welcome; it’s a HANDICAP.

    Finally, I find the term “muliculturalism” to be offensively Orwellian.  It has NOTHING to do with cultures in our American milieu such as the Irish, the Italians, the Poles, etc., all of whom suffered the effects of discrimination at various times in our history*.  It really has nothing to do with Asians, and not much to do with Hispanics.  The proponents of multiculturalism dare not call their program what it is, which is really nothing more than affirmative action implicitly for black Americans.  They dare not because the concept is infuriating to white people who refuse to feel guilty – much less pay – for things they didn’t do, and probably more than a little insulting to other minorities who are treated as (dare I say it?) second class citizens in a system that exists implicitly only for black people.

    —-

    (*) Does my white Southern “poor ignorant stupid redneck dirt farmer” culture deserve special treatment, too?

  • http://www.rustedsky.net Anonymous

    Sometimes I get the feeling it’s entirely possible to overthink and overcorrect on social problems.  

    Judging people by what they actually do and are is what MLK wanted, but now that’s not ‘enough’ because it’s damaging to do so?  WTF?  What sense does THAT make, if you’re looking for actual equality?

    But if you’re not actually looking for equality – then it makes sense.

    Man, I think we’re getting near a BSOD on our whole social OS.  Too many subprocesses fighting for CPU time, and no way to restrict the resources they use.  And we keep loading up stuff that pops up on the screen, always promising to fix all the problems, which causes a hell of a load on the system.  (Didn’t your mama ever tell you not to click on those damn popups or you’ll catch something nasty?  She was right…) I don’t see any real way out – we might end up having to reboot into safe-mode and uninstalling a whole lot of social malware before things will run right again… and it won’t be as simple as flipping a switch and then pressing F8.

  • Anonymous

    Let’s see.
    First we had racism. Obvious overt racism.
    Then we had covert racism.
    Next was institutional racism followed by economic racism.
    I seem to recall a subconscious racism somewhere along the line.
    And now, in the final effort to render white middle class america as hopelessly racist, we
    have colorblindness as racism.

    Ok. I get it. Only by embracing the white-hating mantle of multiculteralism can I be saved.
    And even then, with this constantly shifting position, I may still be racist sometime in the future when the label is redefined again.

    Well, screw it all.

    I still plan on judging people by their character, by who they are and what they do, race be damned. And if that make me a racist, I’ll gladly accept the label.

  • Anonymous

    What liberals are trying to do with this, is force everyone to “walk a mile in another man’s moccasins”, so to speak.  You run into this a lot in social justice circles, where you’re asked to imagine that you live on the other side of the Equator, in a perpetually poor third world country.  Then you’re asked to imagine what you would think of rich Americans.

    What I don’t ever see, though, is liberals asking racial minorities to imagine that they are middle class whites, and they are assumed to be racists and haters simply because of the culture they grew up in.  Funny how that never happens.

    • JustRuss

      I tried the exercise just now, and my response is “I hope someday to be rich just like those Americans!”  And I wasn’t talking about Trump or Gates, I was talking about the “poor” people with flat screen tv’s and xbox’s.  

      I am lower middle-class and I don’t own a flat screen tv, but I know plenty of government housing folks who do.