Systemic racism: another view
A recent column by Dr. Jim Guy on the lobster fishery question (“Systemic racism plagues Nova Scotia’s fishery,” Cape Breton Post, Nov. 23) is most thought provoking. In it, Dr. Guy posits that at the core of this dispute lies systemic racism, luridly comparing the situation to the segregationist Jim Crow south of America’s past.
I do not agree with his position, instead seeing the dispute as one between fishers contesting jurisdictional licensing and conservation issues and not one of race, much less one of systemic racism, where the very administrative arms of society are imposing racially biased polices against Indigenous fishers.
The people involved in this dispute are now working toward a solution and I am confident they will find one. The facts involved are complicated and deserving of more analysis than this or any other single opinion piece can provide.
Yet, what of the evil spectre of systemic racism as it relates to this issue and more broadly as an instrument of state power and influence? It having been raised and its very nature so frightfully horrid, is it not proper to explore it from more than one perspective?
No sane person can suggest that racism does not exist. Equally, systemic racism is part of our history. Yet, neither of these facts are the issue. Rather the question is whether the instruments of contemporary society, public and private administration, the provision and delivery of publicly funded services and all things that relate to the relationship of the individual to the state, are influenced by racial bias? Is there evidence of such a compelling nature and kind to substantiate such alleged nefarious practices?
The so-called system is quite easy to excoriate. It is a nameless and faceless target. Ultimately, however, every system comes down to the people who fill its ranks.
So, who are the people in the system who are racists and what are they doing that merits this egregious appellation? Tell us; bring forward the facts.
It is safe to suggest that our intellectual, media and political elite power structure believe that the nation’s administrative and judicial systems are infested with racism. In fact, this narrow band of opinion makers are rushing to the front of the line to proclaim the existence of systemic racism. It is an ersatz purging exercise, as if stating it exculpates them from any personal responsibility, elevating them to a position of unassailable social justice supremacy.
It is the great opportunity of those who think it proper that they should dispossess themselves of some misplaced notion of collective guilt and demonstrate their sense of self-enlightenment. In saying systemic racism abounds they are at once displaying their virtue and removing themselves from the great mass of the unwashed who constitute the ranks of both avowed and subconsciously motivated racists.
Theirs is the world of Critical Race Theory, which basically asserts that all people, not of a visible racial minority, are either outwardly or inherently driven by racist bias. The proponents of this theory divide society into two classes: oppressed and oppressor. The ultimate goal of the oppressed and, more particularly, their champions is to create a new utopia where everything is determined through a prism of racial and political acceptability. Every problem, social ill and issue is to be adjudged based on what is this belief system, eschewing rationally based analysis and reasoned debate.
Our elites, while admittedly being in the oppressor class, nonetheless regard themselves as sufficiently enlightened to realize it, enjoy self-flagellation and virtueseeking through self-loathing. They regard virtually everything about western civilization as negative and therefore worthy of condemnation. Next, there is the matter of cultural conformity. Their taking the knee or exposing supposed systemic racism removes them from criticism and elevates them to a level of moral superiority near, though not quite equal to that of those they see as the oppressed. Hence, they derive power from righteousness, a classic totalitarian concept which mutes all opposition. After all, who among us would dare criticize those who publicly proclaim their opposition to evil?
Theories are fine but must pass the fact check test. The facts do not support Dr. Guy’s thesis. For those who disagree, bring on your evidence. Let’s discuss facts and move beyond convenient narratives.
David Delaney lives in Albert Bridge.