[Peace] query: de-gendering, de-racing, de-religioning our political discourse

[Robert Naiman]

I see your point. But then maybe the song could benefit from two more
verses.



Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
(202) 448-2898 x1

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Debra Schrishuhn <deb.pdamerica at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Excellent food for thought, Robert. We all--all of us--need to reexamine
> our underlying assumptions continually.
>
> But I cannot resist asking(and maybe I am showing my age here), didn't
> John Lennon write a song about this?
>
> Smiling with victory at Standing Rock, contemplating the battles to come,
> Debra
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 5, 2016, at 3:09 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace <
> peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>
> I'm sure that other folks here have studied and thought about this
> question more than me. I'm very interested in your insights. I awoke from a
> dream with the eureka sparklers dancing. What if…?
>
>
>
> What if it's the case that the collective we is carrying around a
> collection of unconscious assumptions about who has and who will have
> political power that are associated with identity markers. What if it's the
> case that this doesn't matter very much when we have good information. When
> we have good information, we tell our conscious brains to make a decision
> on the merits. But what if it's the case that when we don't have good
> information but feel forced to make a decision, we throw up our hands and
> shrug our shoulders and toss the ball to our unconscious brains. Here, you
> figure this out. I'm not sure which choice is better.
>
>
>
> And what if our unconscious brains are then like: O joy, O rapture.
> Finally, we are free at last from the oppressive jackboot of the
> politically correct busybody bureaucratic thought police in our conscious
> brains who are constantly caulking up our creative juices and cramping our
> style. Finally, at long last, we get to use our unconscious prejudices to
> make this judgment.
>
>
>
> This train of thought started in my mind several years ago when I read an
> interview with a local dentist in the News-Gazette. By the time of the
> interview, this guy was very well established in his practice. But, he
> said, when he was first starting out, he had a bit of a challenge
> establishing himself, because he was black. And at the time, people didn't
> believe that a black man could be a dentist. Well, the guy said, I had
> taken some marketing classes in college. So, I looked at it as a marketing
> problem. The first thing I did was I put a bunch of ads around with my big
> smiling black face on them. Like, I'm offering a new service, called "black
> dentist." And the second thing I did was find out what other dentists in
> town were charging for various dental services. It's not creative writing.
> There's a basic set of things that dentists do, fillings, crowns, and
> everyone charges a fixed price for these things. And then I offered all
> these services for a cheaper price. So now what I'm saying is: I'm offering
> a new service called "black dentist." It's not exactly the same as the
> "white dentist" service that you're used to. But my new "black dentist"
> service is significantly cheaper. Now I knew from my marketing classes that
> a certain number of people are early adopters, looking for a deal. Soon I
> had all the patients I could handle. As soon as I had all the patients I
> could handle, I started raising my prices to match what the white dentists
> were charging. Now I don't need to give you a discount. Because now you
> know me. Now you don't see me as a "black dentist." Now you just see me as
> a "dentist."
>
>
>
> What if political actors are like dentists? What if, once you know them,
> you judge them on the basis of merit, but before you know them, you are
> susceptible to judging them on the basis of prejudice?
>
>
>
> I happened to be visiting my parents in Elmhurst in 1984 when there was a
> debate between the Democratic presidential candidates on WBBM-TV in Chicago.
>
>
>
> Walter Jacobson asked Jesse Jackson,
>
>
>
> "Jesse, are you the dark horse candidate?"
>
>
>
> Jackson responded:
>
>
>
> "Let's not talk about whether this is a *dark* horse or a *light* horse.
> It's a *good* horse, and it's a *fast* horse, and it's a *winning* horse."
>
>
>
> Jacobson's face turned bright red. It was a world-historical moment.
>
>
> ===
>
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
> (202) 448-2898 x1 <(202)%20448-2898>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace mailing list
> Peace at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace/attachments/20161205/87ea8280/attachment.html>