There are also many things that should not be described as "systematic". In this post, I will mainly be talking about such things, and why I think "systematic" is not the right term for them. I'll be addressing a few highly controversial discussions that I usually avoid engaging in at all costs, so I will preface this with the disclaimer that these are my opinions, based on my limited experiences and my even more limited knowledge. My main purpose is to spark deeper thought on some of these issues where it seems to me that the prevailing dialogue only skims the surface of the real issues. So here we go.
Suppose I am a student at a high school. I get decent grades, I try hard, but not too hard. Suppose also that I enjoy math. I like learning the concepts, I do my homework at night, and I study for tests at least 4 days in advance. On the first test, I do pretty well, and I end up with a B. I might be content with this, but, given my propensity for math, I might tell myself "That's pretty good. Let's try to do better next time." So the next test rolls around, and I study a full week in advance. I do additional practice problems, I'm on Paul's Online Calculus notes and Khan Academy for supplementary learning, and on the test, I feel pretty confident. But I still end up with a B. "That's a little disappointing," I might think. "I'll have to try even harder next time." The next test rolls around, I put in even more effort, and I still end up with a B. But this time I notice that I only made one small mistake, which, on previous tests, would have meant a maximum of 5 points off (out of 100), but this time was worth a full 15 points. I might talk to my teacher and ask why, and get an answer like "I'm sorry, but that is the grade that I deemed fair this time." If this pattern continues, with my mistakes becoming more and more minute, and yet my grades continuing to stagnate at a B, eventually I will get upset. And--here's the punchline--I might claim that my teacher has systematically given me a B on every test, even when I felt I deserved an A.
This is a silly example compared to the real issues that I want to relate this to, which is the issue of equality, particularly sexism and racism. We like to find patterns in events, such as incarceration rates differing among the races, or police brutality differing among races, or harassment incidences differing among the sexes. And, just as in the above hypothetical, we may be perfectly justified in making these statements. Or, at least, we may think we are perfectly justified. We might say, for example, that police in general systematically discriminate and arrest minority races more than majority races, or that women experience systematically lower wages in the workplace. I'm not disputing the facts that back up these claims. What I am suggesting, though, is best explained by continuing the analogy.
In our analogy, I have, understandably, come to the conclusion that my teacher has systematically given me a B on every test, even when it was not fair to do so. In this case, though, what if I added the information that I have actually gotten a B on every single test, even in other subjects, and with the same appearance of unjust grading patterns? Now, all of a sudden, the problem isn't just with my math teacher, but all of my teachers. I might say that all of my teachers are systematically giving me B's. But we could go one step further and find out that not a single student has received a single A on any test. Now the pattern is not about me, but about my teachers.
To return to the real issues, my suggestion is that the "patterns" we claim to find might be bigger than we realize. And to be fair, a lot of these conversations have developed just so: people started to realize that it wasn't just them, but everyone of their race/gender that was experiencing these issues. Then they realized that this wasn't just their city, but a lot of cities all across the country. The problem, though, is that I believe we've stopped too soon. We claim, understandably so, that there is systematic violence against women, or systematic educational discrimination against poorer citizens, or systematic discrimination in the justice system against minority races. I'm not disputing any of these. Now, I might argue that we need to make a distinction between intentional discrimination (i.e. a teacher purposely failing a specific student for no reason) and de facto discrimination (i.e. a student failing because he was in the hospital and therefore could not complete his work), but that's a different discussion altogether. For now, I will stipulate that, regardless of the cause (intentional or de facto), discrimination exists. But I think we've stopped too soon.
In the analogy, we have stopped at the level of the teachers. The blame now lies with them for never giving out any A's, even when they were objectively earned. But what if the problem doesn't stop there? What if we are blaming the wrong group? What if, for example, the reason no teachers gave out A's is because the school has a policy that any teacher that gives an A is immediately fired. Now the problem isn't the teachers, but the policy. The teachers could try to stand up, but they will simply be fired. The school administrators might be blamed, but they, too, might be powerless to change the policy. Even they have to play by the rules.
So now to the heart of the issue. My position is that we have stopped too soon in all of these discrimination arguments. We have called something "systematic" that is simply a part of a larger system. Please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. I am clearly acknowledging that these problems exist, just as I would clearly acknowledge that not receiving an A on any exam is a problem. But stopping at the label of sexism or racism is simply not far enough for me. We are blaming the teachers for simply following a rule they didn't create. To be sure, they are still choosing to give out B's and not A's, and in that sense we can still hold them responsible. But if we want to change this, we need to go to the root.
In the case of discrimination, I don't think the root cause is simply men, or white people, or rich people, or even rich white men. Like the teachers, they are easy to blame; and, like the teachers, I think people should be held accountable for their actions. But to see real change, we can't simply fire the teachers, because that is not the root problem. I hope I do not need to remind anyone that much of the slave trade started with African warlords selling rival citizens into slavery.
So the root problem, as I see it, goes deeper than race, sex, or even money. I say this because a close study of history and humans will, I claim, reveal that the problem exists independent of those factors. The root problem is power; that those with power lord it over those without; that having more power allows one to achieve one's own goals at the expense of those with less power; and that those with power will consistently choose to exert this power to further their own interests at the cost of others' interests. This, I posit, is the problem. Power can come in many forms: physical strength, influence, control, geographical location, psychological manipulation, financial stability, intellectual superiority--anything that can be used to gain an advantage or further one's own interests. I will admit, we have run into the problem of a circular definition: power is anything that lets us gain an advantage over another, and power causes us or allows us to gain advantage over another. The reason for this apparent fallacy is that power is simply the word I have chosen to use to describe this concept. This idea, though, is not circular. I firmly believe it has a definitive origin, and that origin is human nature. By this, I mean that this pattern, or desire, or motivation, is not unique to any culture, class, or group, but is common to all humans; that, on some level, all humans have this tendency and, given the opportunity, will desire to take advantage of it. And from that single, base desire, we have the whole story of sexual subjugation, racial enslavement, ethnic cleansing, political tyranny, intellectual superiority, Eurocentrism, and a thousand other atrocities committed throughout human history. A bold claim, I know. But I invite everyone to ponder it, and to see whether it really seems appropriate to analyze each of these issues in a vacuum, separate from the others. We can, of course, simply worry about a single test in a single subject with a single teacher. But I claim that there is a larger picture here, and that, in order to see real change, we need to do a lot more than argue over points. We need to change the policy. And in this case, that means changing our very nature. Seldom have I heard anyone claim to be able to change human nature. In fact, I have only ever heard one proposed solution to this problem. But that is a controversy for another discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment