Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
> >[WS:] Could you actually show to a non-believer what
> >those normative rules are in a matter of fact way? Or
> >to be more precise, demonstrate that these are
> >*structural* rules developed by one group and imposed
> >on another rather than individual choices?
> >
> >This is a bona fide query. Treat as if you were to
> >explain something you know to an outsider or a
> >foreigner. Although I got off the boat some 27 years
> >ago, I honestly do not see those structural racist
> >norms that you mention
>
> You want the work done for you? It takes about 27 years to figure it
> out and I would think a foreigner has a leg up on a native. Seeing
> it takes talking to people, reading books, watching movies, going out
> of your way a little, just like you learn anything else.
This is one of those aspects of reality which, on the whole, only reveal themselves to those following the Eleventh Thesis: that is, it is only when one becomes involved in a COLLECTIVE struggle against racism that one discovers the existence of structural racism and therefore is prepared to follow intelligently the arguments advanced in those conversations, books, etc. As an agitational slogan rather than the subject of theoretical exploration the phrase "structural racism" is directed only at those who already recognize it but don't know that they do: it raises to consciousness implicit knowledge. For example, those who for one personal reason or another find themselves involved in a particular local struggle against police brutality might well be open to even brief descriptions of structural racism, since it can help them make sense of patterns of behavior which seem immune to changes of personnel.
Carrol