. . . and this is the end.

I will continue to commend Mark Nelson for taking an unpopular position on community-l and defending it sanely and rationally; I also agree with some, though not all, of his opinions. I will quote a link he sent to the list today:

See reply #148 on page 10

From: conor_friedersdorf

I'm always amazed at Claremont College students who try to enforce community social norms because if society ever actually practiced that standard, Claremont Colleges students would find themselves outside the mainstream on nearly every single topic.

Value systems propogated by social norms and enforced in part through social pressure stood in the way of school integration, inter-racial marriages, etc. Ellie, if we applied the approach you seem to favor to fight racism to gay marriage, the vast majority of Americans who oppose gay marriage would be able to stifle rational debates on the matter by shouting down their opponents and marching in front of the homes of gay spouses.

In our opposition to racism, reason is our greatest tool because we are right. Convince as many people as possible that racism is wrong through reason, and it will not be an acceptable view to hold in society - as it isn't currently.

But if you start trying to enforce certain conceptions of how best to fight racism, not through reason, but through social coercion, you will ultimately invite your opponents, who vastly outnumber you, to use the same tactics.

I don't agree with this whole quote. The last sentence, in particular, seems inflammatory, Nevertheless, I think the writer raises an important point: community values are not good in and of themselves.

My brother said today something to the effect that, for activists, agreement isn't enough: you have to also be an activist, that activists use the word "apathy" to tar those who they don't feel are doing enough to support the activists' cause. My mother compared to this to the behavior of evangelical Christians: they will not be satisfied with you until you not only accept their beliefs but feel committed to try to convert others as well.

There are many evils in this world. Racism is one of them. I have a few particular causes that I maintain above all others: racism is not one of them. I don't expect others to care as much about my causes as I do, because I know there's not enough time. A racism activist might say, "It's only a single day of your life." But how many days do I have in my life? I believe that there are more evils than I have days and I cannot spend all days, or even most of them, fighting for social, political, or moral causes, for reasons both practical and personal: I have neither the financial resources nor the strength.

I do my best to be a good person. When I've encountered racism, I've explained as best I can why it's wrong and why I find it repugnant, as I've done for sexism and antireligiousism and many other isms you could name. I've said my share of thoughtless and stupid things, I'll admit. I've apologized for some, and others I will carry with me to my grave. However, by the lights of some activists, because I don't scream as loud as they do in the defense of their causes, I'm in the wrong.

I find the attitude that, "If you're not for us, you're against us," dangerous. It leaves no room for debate about means, even in the case where ends are the same, and it doesn't recognize that the real world exists in shades of gray. Racism is not an either-or: there's a continuum stretching from individuals who have devoted their lives to anti-racist activism on one side to the leaders of the Ku Klux Klan on the other. In the middle are many people who are apathetic about racial issues but who don't support racist opinions, actions, or violence (for the curious, I'm a little further to the antiracist side of the spectrum because I like to argue my principles, but as I said, it's not one of the things I care about most). These individuals are not necessarily evil: they may just be putting their energies to doing other good.

The argument that the rallies today did anything to defend against racist violence on the colleges is prima facie ridiculous. It's obvious that the perpetrators realized their actions were abhorred and criminal. They won't be convinced by marches; if anything, they will adopt a siege mentality and harden their views.

The other argument, the one that makes sense, is that people gathered to seek comfort. I wish I could say something to make people safer, but I feel those who committed the violence will not be dissuaded by words or protests. Also, while there is value in helping others feel better, I don't gain any personal solace from meeting in large groups. I prefer talking with close friends in small groups, or thinking on my own.

And now to come back to where I started, with social coercion: I am uncomfortable in large groups because they frighten me. Individuals are smart, but people are dumb. Groups define social norms and crush the diversity of individuals into the norms. This is not a rational process. Some conformism is necessary to protect the members of the group from the destructive tendencies of other members: here, the United States legal system serves that role. It's possible the legal system will fail; such is the imperfect nature of the real world. However, I tolerate no further coercion, because I think the path to truth comes from allowing individual opinions and small-group discussion to percolate up to create a consensus, without having top-down enforcement. I fear the possibility that racism is redefined to such a broad extent as to close off truth.

To conclude, I understand the reasons people meet, but I remain wary of the possibility coercion. I remain angry at the administration for their mixed messages.

If I have offended with my words, I apologize. This is the truth as I see it.



This will be the last thing I write on this topic in this journal; I would like to say it is the last thing I will write on it, period, but I don't trust my discipline that much. I've lost most of today because I've been so upset; I need to box it off so I can deal with other aspects of my life. This bit of personal psychology, and that I'm not sure I trust Livejournal's message board format for further communication about this topic, are the reasons I'm disallowing comments. If you wish to talk with me further about this, my HMC CS address works and I can be found on AIM at Iaimeki.

Addendum: it sounds like the discussions on HMC today went well, that they helped people deal with their emotions while remaining calm enough to be rational and noncoercive. This is the best that we can hope for. As others have said, my thoughts and feelings are with you.