An article which kind of validates what I was talking about in my first post.
Chidanand Rajghatta writes in TOI.
When will we learn?
Friday, October 19, 2007
Monday, October 8, 2007
Criticism or Racism
Discussing my previous post, a friend mentioned that our tendency to be defensive and sensitivity to criticism is not always our fault. She recalled some painful experiences where Indians were stereotyped as being lazy, lacking commitment or plain stingy.
What I was talking about is criticism - which usually has a justifiable basis and is applied to one person or a small group. What my friend mentioned was racism - which generally emanates from making generalizations about an entire populace based on a small subset of people who are being observed only in one capacity.
Life today is (or maybe it always has been) highly compartmentalized such that we generally interact with a set of people only within a pre-determined environment. Colleagues are for office and occasional weekend nights out. House-mates enter the picture when there are bills to be settled or a house to be cleaned. Activities which help people repel the insanity that professional life brings - things like gymming, joining a dance or sports club, reading a book, etc. are either done alone or with people who are normally not prominent in other parts of our life. There might be some overlap for sure, but generally we form opinions about individuals with enforced blinkers on.
Ideally speaking, judgments should be made only after observing people under a variety of conditions - relaxed, pressured, worried, happy etc. Of course, given the humdrum of everyday life, this is not possible and hence our proclivity for arriving at half baked conclusions, which in turn becomes the root cause of racism.
So all Arabs are terrorists, all Indians are funny (this is what a colleague told me once) or arrogant (read this in a blog), all Chinese are as hard working as a hot dog vendor in a fat guy convention, all Americans have single digit IQs and all Englishmen have upper lips stiffer than a piece of cardboard. Of course such blatant stereotyping can be funny at times but more often than not it is a malaise that causes unbelievable amounts of damage.
Blatant racism obviously cannot be condoned and should be stood up to but perceived racism like the one I mentioned in the previous post reeks of insecurity and brings with it an element of self-pity. Criticism is generally in two forms - directed at an individual only or directed at an individual who is representative of an entire people. Sreesanth is a public figure which is why any criticism he receives is taken as a personal affront by all Indians. Now, if criticism of an individual is extrapolated and applied to a bigger group it is racism. However, if criticism of a public figure is seen as criticism of an entire public then it is racism perceived.
It is the latter which I wish we would move away from. Thoughts?
What I was talking about is criticism - which usually has a justifiable basis and is applied to one person or a small group. What my friend mentioned was racism - which generally emanates from making generalizations about an entire populace based on a small subset of people who are being observed only in one capacity.
Life today is (or maybe it always has been) highly compartmentalized such that we generally interact with a set of people only within a pre-determined environment. Colleagues are for office and occasional weekend nights out. House-mates enter the picture when there are bills to be settled or a house to be cleaned. Activities which help people repel the insanity that professional life brings - things like gymming, joining a dance or sports club, reading a book, etc. are either done alone or with people who are normally not prominent in other parts of our life. There might be some overlap for sure, but generally we form opinions about individuals with enforced blinkers on.
Ideally speaking, judgments should be made only after observing people under a variety of conditions - relaxed, pressured, worried, happy etc. Of course, given the humdrum of everyday life, this is not possible and hence our proclivity for arriving at half baked conclusions, which in turn becomes the root cause of racism.
So all Arabs are terrorists, all Indians are funny (this is what a colleague told me once) or arrogant (read this in a blog), all Chinese are as hard working as a hot dog vendor in a fat guy convention, all Americans have single digit IQs and all Englishmen have upper lips stiffer than a piece of cardboard. Of course such blatant stereotyping can be funny at times but more often than not it is a malaise that causes unbelievable amounts of damage.
Blatant racism obviously cannot be condoned and should be stood up to but perceived racism like the one I mentioned in the previous post reeks of insecurity and brings with it an element of self-pity. Criticism is generally in two forms - directed at an individual only or directed at an individual who is representative of an entire people. Sreesanth is a public figure which is why any criticism he receives is taken as a personal affront by all Indians. Now, if criticism of an individual is extrapolated and applied to a bigger group it is racism. However, if criticism of a public figure is seen as criticism of an entire public then it is racism perceived.
It is the latter which I wish we would move away from. Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
