One relates to Yancey’s appeal to his own racial background. I am, however, left with certain questions and concerns. And I appreciated his critique of secular frameworks, like antiracism, for expressing a naive confidence in human perfectibility. He’s right that too often in conversations on race, we neglect a range of perspectives. As Yancey remarks, collaborative conversations allow “those we disagree with to hold us ‘accountable’ to their interests we are forced to confront the ways we have fashioned solutions that conform to our own interests and desires.” It also means an openness to having our opinions changed and our blind spots exposed. This means, for starters, that when it comes to conversations on race, “everyone is allowed to participate, and everyone’s ideas are taken seriously.” What can succeed where colorblindness and antiracism have failed? Here, Yancey emphasizes an ethic of mutual accountability and a reliance upon moral persuasion. As for antiracism, he faults it for exacerbating racial division, in part by issuing an implied permission slip to disrespect white people and creating a clear expectation that whites “defer to nonwhites.” As he puts it, colorblindness ignores the realities of racial injustice, past and present. In different ways, Yancey sees colorblindness and antiracism erecting barriers to this goal. As Yancey argues, both colorblindness and antiracism result in “racial alienation,” which prevents us from working out our racial issues together in a way that honors the dignity, value, and worth of every individual. In Beyond Racial Division: A Unifying Alternative to Colorblindness and Antiracism, Baylor University sociologist George Yancey seeks a new way forward, one grounded in a vision of healthy interracial communication and community. Instead of aspiring to colorblindness, its proponents say, we should acknowledge that America is plagued by deep-seated racism-and then take aggressive steps to stamp it out. In response, groups like Black Lives Matter have seized on the rival paradigm of antiracism. Over time, however, the persistence of racism has raised doubts about the colorblind approach. Both legally and culturally, they have sought to build a society where, in Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous words, people are judged not “by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Yancey's vision offers hope that people of all races can walk together on a shared path-not as adversaries, but as partners.For a long time, Americans committed to fighting racism have rallied around the ideals of colorblindness. Part two offers a new "mutual responsibility" model, which acknowledges that both majority and minority cultures have their own challenges, tendencies, and sins to repent of, and that people of different races approach racial reconciliation and justice in differing but complementary ways. The first part of the book analyzes four secular models regarding race used by Christians (colorblindness, Anglo-conformity, multiculturalism and white responsibility) and shows how each has its own advantages and limitations. Sociologist George Yancey surveys a range of approaches to racial healing that Christians have used and offers a new model for moving forward. Adding to this complex situation is the reality that Christians of different races see the issues differently. Many proposed solutions have been helpful, but these only take us so far. Christians have struggled with racial issues for centuries, and often inadvertently contribute to the problem.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |