On Aug 20, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Eric Beck wrote:
> There *is* a hint of analysis-is-paralysis in the original question.
> I'm not sure what it implies: If realities lead to no obvious
> practical political programs, they can't be considered foundational
> problems? they should be excised because they reduce clarity?
No, the blank one draws on practical politics shows up the emptiness of the concept. If you can't address "racism" in any practical sense, how does applying the word improve your understanding of anything?
Joe C's illustrations don't persuade me. You fight against mass incarceration because it's horribly unjust, regardless of racial disparities. Ditto for the rights of Palestinians - they're being treated horribly, and in large part with U.S. weapons and money. I don't get what adding a racial dimension does for you.