ALMOST two weeks ago, the world was shocked to learn that former "Seinfeld" star Michael Richards repeatedly used a racial slur while reacting to two black men who were heckling him during a stand-up show. Richards, who played the eccentric neighbor Cosmo Kramer, apologized. Discussion about the event has continued, but has rightly expanded beyond this isolated and relatively unimportant incident to more universal issues. Jesse Jackson and other black leaders met Monday and called for a ban on the n-word in entertainment. This effort, while well-meaning, is a waste of time. Even in the unlikely event that it is successful, it will carry with it no concrete benefits for minority groups. Leaders like Jackson should focus on more concrete issues of racial inequality rather than campaigning against a word that is merely a symptom of racism.
It is hardly news that there are racists in America. The only reason so much attention has been given to this one incident is that Kramer was such a beloved character. It is shocking and unexpected to discover that the actor who played him is a racist, but it is also only one person. The widespread condemnation of his disgusting rant is justified, but insufficient.
Much debate has now centered on whether Richards is actually a racist or if he simply lost his temper. Based on the video from his performance, it is hard to defend the man. He could simply have been irritated to the point that the racial tensions present in many Americans forced themselves to the exterior, but his rant went well beyond what most people would admit to, even in their most candid moments. Regardless, any racist attitude, no matter how small, is harmful. Unfortunately, racism is also somewhat inevitable. Hatred for others based on ethnic, religious or other characteristics has been a part of human history for a very long time. The question, then, should not be how to eliminate racism, but how to mitigate its real effects. Jackson and the others intending to ban the n-word missed this point.
The word is understood by now to be offensive and is certainly only used with racist connotations. However, it is separate from racism itself. George Carlin, another comedian, once performed a routine about racial slurs. After listing all of the slurs he could imagine, he noted, "the words are completely neutral," but context makes them good or bad. He used the n-word as an example and pointed out that when black comedians use the word, no one cares. Separate from its racist context, the word is just a combination of letters. What one ought to be concerned about, in Carlin's opinion, is "the racist... who's using it." Leaders like Jackson, therefore, should look to solve the root problems that create people racist enough to refer to minorities using a racial slur.
It is also conceivable that one could be extremely racist without using the n-word. The most shocking part of Richards' rant was not the use of the slur but his comment that "50 years ago we'd have you upside-down with a... fork in your ass." Whether he is a racist or not is a personal issue, but the hatred that manifested itself in his rant would have been present with or without the n-word.
Ultimately, the problem with an attempt to remove the n-word from society is that it will accomplish nothing more than that. Even if the word disappears entirely, racism will exist. The issue may be more important that mere semantics, but it would certainly not usher in substantial change.
Walter Benn Michaels argues in his recent book "The Trouble With Diversity" that Americans put too much emphasis on promoting mere diversity and ignore issues of equality that are central to social justice. The response to Richards's actions is subject to this critique. Eliminating the n-word might make us feel better about our society's race relations, but it will do little to improve the lot of minorities. It will not lessen the gap between white and black incomes, eliminate racial profiling or free blacks from any of the effects of racism they now feel.
To condemn racism is an important function that minority advocacy organizations have carried out well. In a free society, however, completely eliminating racist viewpoints is impossible. If Jackson and other black leaders want to improve the lives of minorities, they should focus on alleviating poverty and removing the causes of racial inequality -- not on changing the words racists use.
Daniel Colbert's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at dcolbert@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | 5 hours agoTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 5 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
