The anti-anti-racist

You may be thinking that's a double negative, but consider it as a
philosophy that calls for as pure objectivism as you can muster.

Consider the following article:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007457

Here, Shelby Steele exhibits the relationship between blacks and
whites in the same style as Simone de Beauvoir famously did between
men and women back in the 1950s. This method is definitely a very
useful approach to sociology. I myself have noticed the concept of
definition by the "other" in many aspects of life, particularly
Canada, and how much Canadian culture is defined by its difference
from American culture.

But let me apply some idealism here. The goal is for the "name, age,
race, creed" of people not to make them unequal. (Sorry, that was a
forced quotation from Ulysses). Using the sociological strategy above,
while it breeds perspective on the situation, does not lead us to the
ideal. As the means lie embedded in the ends, real racial equality
will not be obtained using this sociological phenomenon to guide us.

I'm young enough to remember when I was young enough to approach the
subject perfectly objectively. Unlike my parents' generation, I had no
need to be anti-racist, because I was never racist in the first place.
The fact of the matter is that anti-racism is a form of racism in
itself. So I became an anti-anti-racist. Which is to say I do not
support bastardizations of the language (and especially our laws!) in
support of some conquest over racism.

Unfortunately, after time, anti-anti-racism will be considered racism
as well. Which means that the true objective stance recurs infinitely.
A difficult proposition and one which I have yet to resolve.

The other point here is that I demand of my peers the same objective
stance that I have. Or moreso. If you can't take the heat, get out of
my generation.