RSS Feed
"Isms": Reflections on Allergies
The Question: Which "ism" is more entrenched in America, sexism or racism? Which should religion address?
Emmanuel Levinas argues that much of Western thought "suffers from an allergy to the other." All over the world this is demonstrated through the unlimited lists of isms; sexism, ageism, racism, classism, etc. There is no monopoly on hatred of the other.
This reality is manifest in the ill-treatment and prejudice against people because they belong to a certain demographic which is different from our own. The histories of genocides, slaveries, concentration camp internments, and holocaust against groups like Armenians, Jews, Native Americans, African-Americans, Japanese-Americans, are all examples of the sin of racisms and xenophobia. In addition, the history of patriarchy and kyriarchy has left too many women ill-compensated, marginalized, exploited, abused, raped, and murdered at the hands of a society that sees woman as less-than man.
What should not go unsaid is that classism is an "ism" that dominates much of the world. People wrongly associate human value with net-worth, assets, and income. Many of our towns, cities, and nations are de-facto segregated across economic lines. Regrettably, a prejudice against poverty is still acceptable among many in society. The inheritance of Plato's hierarchy of human existence still rears its ugly head.
The history of humankind shows that we as humans often label what we don't know so as to control, dominate, and too-often extinguish that which is radically other. The moral call to embrace the other as my sister or brother is still a challenge. The radical call of Jesus Christ is to love not just your neighbor but also the stranger, and yes, even your enemies. This is no simple call and I don't always get it correct. Still if we understand that we as humans, in the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., "are connected in a web of mutuality," and "are part of one global household" we must shun and repudiate our "allergy to the other." Sexism, classism, racism and all of the other prejudices are interstitial and are an affront to our common humanity.
Much of public discourse surrounding the recent U.S. elections and public policies has regrettably sunk into the moral slue and slough of demonizing the other. In this election, some people are focusing on age, gender, and race in divisive ways. There is still another call to all people of good will to provide an antidote to our learned allergies to the one we label as other. The antidote is love. Not love as some second-hand emotion but one steeped in justice and the dignity of the other. For in loving the other we affirm their humanity and ours.
By
Gabriel Salguero
|
March 27, 2008; 10:38 AM ET
| Category:
Morality
Share This: 
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Christians Are Called to Fight Both "Isms" |
Next: Divided We Fail
Posted by: garyd | March 27, 2008 9:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Well said Gary D.
The problem is government 'officially' recognizing groups and giving them special consideration. Taxes are always involved. And taxes go both ways. There's "tax breaks for the [already]rich" as an easy example.
I think the thing that brings us here with this discussion is the involvement of a group of 'official' tax breakers known as faiths -their opinions about isms and how they can get [more]involved in government.
http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul points out the danger of getting too involved with them. That should be warning enough to at least make a few folks rethink their position on tax breaks for already rich ministries. Going to hell is one thing but having to buy one's own ticket mandated by law sorta rubs salt into that painful wound.
Get religion out of government and as a by product get isms out of government. Else it's government of the people by the righteous for the benefit of the better class of people determined by free elections. This is the kingdom of God where free elections are not necessary for God will decide all. In the absence of God we can call upon rich ministers, and those that want to be rich, beginners and long timers alike to tell us what God decided.
The Devil Lucifer sure looks like the God thats behind that to me. Isms that is.
Posted by: BGone | March 27, 2008 6:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
What you are describing is the nascent tribalism that has infested humanity ever since we discovered the planet was inhabited by people who were not our aunts, uncles, moms, dads, brothers, and sisters.
In most tribal societies the word for human beings is identical with the word for whatever self identifier the tribe used. What this meant was that if you weren't a member of the tribe you were not protected by tribe which meant you were fair game for what ever some member of the tribe wished to do with you and you could in fact even be considered as a food source. Things are better now and would be better still were it not for government having decided that some groups were worthy of special protection and others were not.
Until one moves beyond group think one will never be rid of racism or sexism. And You can't do that if the government is going to continue to identify us by groups extending beyond those who are citizens and those who are not.
Posted by: Garyd | March 27, 2008 4:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Is there a way to end economic discrimination?
Those is first class shall be served complimentary cocktails and those in last class can buy them. Shouldn't there be complimentary cocktails for all?
The poor boy realized he was standing in a bed of gold at Sutter's mill. He reached down, picked it up and put it in his pocket. Did the gold belong to Sutter or him? Shouldn't all, every person alive have an equal share of the gold?
Speaking of gold, did you talk to the pope about returning the gold robbed by the Conquistadors?
Somebody gets the neck of the chicken and somebody gets the rumble seat. It's been that way ever since people found chicken to be tasty.
Didn't Jesus say, "the rich you will have with you always"? Jesus realized how important rich folks truly are. Without the rich we wouldn't be able to identify the poor so we can feel sorry for them.
Who shall the poor feel sorry for? We'll need to create an even poorer class.
Jesus also said, "sell all your earthly possessions and distribute the proceeds to the poor" and the rich man walked away shaking his head. The difference between the rich and the poor stays the same if the rich man gives all he has to the poor man. All that changes is who has the wealth.
Repeat after me: "I believe free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity." Get "In God we trust" off the money and put that in it's place.
Money follows money. Capital is money. Shouldn't all benefit from money risks taken or just those who risk their money? It turns out that all do benefit with some living in Westwood and others in South Central. Those living in South Central must get themselves over to Westwood. The nice part is they can but only if they play by the rules the first rule being, "I believe free market capitalism is..."
There is no economic discrimination, just the perception there is. That perception springs in part from a false creed, "I believe in God the father...." No Stupid!! "I believe free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity."
Need I notice the other false creed only leads people to hell?
Posted by: BGone | March 27, 2008 12:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
And yet Bgone all you did was just define more groups rich and poor to be precise. In my view if you would help the poor let rich keep enough money to hire them. The only way to truly help the poor is to give them a job and make sure the rich are able to compete among themselves for their services.
The current method of helping the poor which basically consist of stripping money out of the top half of the economy using 90% of it to grow government and stuffing the other ten percent back in at the bottom is little more than a disaster waiting to happen.