Why Talking About Race Is Pointless

The issues are more complicated than our "conversation" will concede.


So suppose we did it? Suppose we Talked About Race as so many say we do not? Desmond King and Rogers Smith have just said, to great acclaim, that neither major party has wanted to talk about race much since the 1970s. Cornel West and Tavis Smiley’s Poverty Tour is nominally about the poor, but what truly animates them is race. Smiley’s problem with Obama during his campaign was whether Obama cared about black people, and West has famously said that Obama is afraid of “free black men,” not free poor ones. Critics hating on The Help accuse its creators of not wanting to “confront” race as directly as they should, with Valerie Boyd even referencing Attorney General Eric Holder’s 2009 point about America’s cowardice in not wanting to have a “conversation” about race.

The implication of this call for a conversation is that it would teach whites that racism still exists. Sure, blacks would learn something along the way — undefined, one senses, however, and less important than what whites would learn. If they would only listen.

But a national conversation about race would take us to exactly where we are now on the topic: a messy controversy, typical of complex, adult issues rooted in the vagaries of social history and its legacies. Jim Crow’s over. The Archie Bunkers are mostly dead or close. There are no crystal-clear fundamentals to take white people into a corner to “school” them about.

Example: Let’s have a conversation about education. A white teacher, hit by a black student, recently rued on Facebook that she was educating “future criminals.” Syracuse University’s Boyce Watkins thinks she was “educating black kids without sufficient cultural competence.” Here’s a “Can we talk?” kind of story — this lady’s in the dark, right?

But exactly how would we teach her this “cultural competence”? Watkins describes how easily he connects with inner-city black kids, but via what lessons could we pass his ability — rooted in lifelong traits of identification, demeanor and language — on to a white lady? And remember, the second we try to list any specifically “black” traits to teach this woman, we will be roundly accused of stereotyping. The issues here, while urgent, will not yield to a “conversation” at — I mean, with — whites.

Let’s have a conversation about crack. That is, laws that penalize possession and sale of crack cocaine, sold most by blacks, over powdered cocaine, sold most by whites. King and Smith think this is about “targeting blacks” and that America doesn’t want to “talk” about it. But the Congressional Black Caucus was strongly behind these laws in the 1980s because selling crack on the streets destroys communities in a way that selling powder in your parents’ basement in Scarsdale doesn’t. Plus, inner-city residents right now typically wish the cops would do more to keep hoodlums from selling dope on their streets.

So apprising whites of their racism in a “conversation” would not do anyone any favors here. Stopping the war on drugs, which has had disproportionate effects on blacks — as much to the surprise of black lawmakers as white ones — would be more appropriate.