I’ve expressed this sentiment before in different ways, but wow, even today I’m sometimes flabbergasted by the stupidity we humans are capable of displaying!  Don’t get me wrong, crises like this bring out the very best in people and the degree to which folks are pulling together across the country and around the world perhaps offers some hope for the future.  And then I see, hear, or read about an instance that absolutely blows my mind.

Racism is my favorite indicator of humanity’s capacity for utter stupidity, and something I’ve long wanted to raise here.  So, the color of someone’s skin is an indicator of … what exactly?  Intelligence?  Character?  Health?  What exactly does this literally skin-deep evidence point to beyond the amount of pigmentation passed on to a given individual by the combination of their parents’ DNA?  Please, for the love of all that’s holy explain it to me!

And if you can pull off a remotely logical rationale (good luck!) how do you deal with changes in that skin tone?  Does getting a tan make someone different?  Does it suddenly add to or subtract from their IQ?  Does it make them a better or worse person?  Does it make them more or less likely to commit a crime?  Does it change them at all beyond increasing their chances of developing skin cancer?

No, no, no, no … and no.  So really, what exactly is the big deal, because racism has been around for a very, very long time.  The Romans hated and feared the Celts and treated them in a way almost unheard of since biblical times, pursuing a government policy of genocide that virtually erased an entire civilization.  The Turks with the Armenians, much of Europe with the Jews, Serbia with Bosnia-Herzegovina and, frankly, a young United States with the Native American tribes.  These are each examples of government-sponsored genocide, sprinkled across human history, and there are many, many more. 

The enslavement of Africans, while on one hand evidence of a long-standing tendency toward human bondage going back to humanity’s earliest days, became the poison pill of the nascent United States.  And it caused no small amount of disruption, leading to the most destructive and deadly war in our nation’s short but combative history.  While much is made of its long-term effects upon African-Americans today, I fear the greater effect was to instill a generations-long tendency toward racism and racist thought in our country.  A rather odd fit for a nation of immigrants hailing from a wide swath of first Europe and then the world!

But, as with so many things in the United States, change was virtually inevitable, and the abolition of slavery in 1865 marked the official end of government sponsored and subsidized racism.  Or did it?  Racist and racially-discriminating laws remained on the books in many states that took a very long time to amend or undo, and that process continues today in holdout parts of the country.  But to a certain degree, an undercurrent of racism has remained, always most detectable during times of crisis.

The internment of some 120,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry during World War Two is a prime example of such racist tendencies suddenly leaping to the fore.  All of a sudden, and for no other reason beyond their genealogy, the U.S. Government imprisoned its own citizens in the name of national security, all without a single act of sabotage, espionage or other crime warranting any action at all much less such an extreme measure.  The legendary exploits of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team in Europe—a unit recruited from within the Japanese internment camps—speaks volumes about the willingness of these folks to lay down their lives to defend the United States.  Is there any greater measure of the degree to which a given immigrant group has internalized American values?  And yet, they did so knowing their families were being treated like criminals back home.  Little different, really, than the famed Navajo code-talkers of the Pacific War, long treated as second class citizens in their own country, yet they fought, and fought decisively in a way that brought much honor upon their country.  I find this to be both sad and, to be honest, intensely beautiful, worthy of both veneration and emulation.

One might—and, frankly, should—ask where were the internment camps for those of German ancestry?  Or Italian?  Rumanian, Finnish … you see where I’m going with this.  Why were the Japanese treated differently than European opponents?  You know why, even if you don’t want to admit it.  In our time we’ve seen the same tendency re-emerge in the wake of 9-11 with personal attacks made against, and much distrust evinced toward, American Muslims, many of whose families had already lived here for generations.

Now let me take a moment from my ranting to make a caveat of sorts.  There are some individuals among us who want to portray EVERY decision in terms of racism or racist thought.  That’s just as extreme and, I suspect, generally motivated by political intent.  It wasn’t primarily racism that led the US to declare an oil embargo on Japan in 1941, nor the freezing of the empire’s assets that same year.  These were sanctions intended to force Japan to cease its war against China, already at that point in its fourth year.  Were those types of sanctions imposed upon Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy?  No, but the why is both interesting and important.

The relationship between the US and China in the 1930s was already complicated.  No doubt, as today, the lure of such a large population base—seen by capitalist countries as a market to which goods can be sold—had much to do with this relationship.  By April of 1941 the US was already supporting Chinese military forces with volunteer units—in the same way in which American volunteers were flying with the RAF.  The difference, however lay in the fact that citizens of the US well-remembered the devastation of World War One, and truly wanted to avoid another “European” war.  In fact, the US was poorly prepared to fight with anyone in 1941.

Imperial Japan, on the other hand, was thought to be a nation that could be deterred from further aggression through economic means.  Japan was and is an island nation, and as Harrison Ford in the movie “Six Days and Seven Nights” pointed out, “It’s an island, Babe.  If you don’t bring it here, you won’t find it here.”  Wonderful insight for dealing with any militaristic island nation, and Germany had understood this well during the first worldwide conflagration, seeking to choke off outside support to Great Britain using the world’s first effective submarine force.  It was thought, then, that if the means to continue the war in China were withheld, Japan would have no choice but to cease fighting and come to some sort of negotiated peace—an end that would have been very much in the economic interest of the United States.

Was there an element of racism in that?  Maybe, and enough of that way of thinking was certainly present to allow the internment of innocent citizens shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor, but the strategic logic of choking out a resource-poor island nation was sound.  In fact, the threat of being cut off from economic lifelines continues to haunt Japan’s security dialogue today, further validating the basic approach taken by the US in 1941.

So where am I going with all this?  Is racism driving the labeling of COVID-19 the “Wuhan Virus” or “Chinese Coronavirus”?  I don’t think so.  Look at other rhetoric around the world these days, this is how major powers compete in the information domain, in an age of hyper-connectivity.  In 1941, President Roosevelt simply didn’t have the option of tweeting a US position (or threat) to every citizen of the Japanese Empire with a cell phone.  Diplomatic exchange was then about the only form of non-military pressure that could be applied, and the oil embargo was just such an action—intended to prevent further violence.  But today, presidents, premiers, dictators, prime ministers … bakers, bikers, gas station attendants, and lifeguards have that power and can reach, instantly, around the world with any message at all from deep philosophical thoughts to ranting blog entries to lots and lots of pictures of cats.

Has this change in technology somehow undermined the power of—and thus a nation’s decision to utilize—diplomatic efforts?  This remains to be seen, I think, but the evidence seems to be pointing in the direction of direct, president-to-premier-level communication all but unthinkable at any time in human history since the advent of formal nation-states.

But I digress.  Where I do see racism popping up in our beloved country today is in the bizarre levying of the PRC’s arguable sins related to the spread of COVID-19 to average Chinese people—especially Chinese-Americans—and people of Asian descent writ large.  First, do you really think any of these individuals and families had anything to do with the current crisis?  If the pandemic was an intentional act, it would be an action decided upon, resourced, and carried out by the government of the PRC.  If it was negligent handling that allowed a localized outbreak in Wuhan to spread out of control … well, the same applies.  In what way can you with any integrity try to hold innocent, unrelated people responsible for such things?  What, because their parents, or grandparents, or great-grandparents came from the same spot on the globe?  Because they have some different customs?  Because their skin color is different?  Exactly what is it?  More to the point, perhaps, are you responsible for EVERY action taken by your government since the time of your birth?  Better yet, perhaps, by any government remotely connected to the birthplace of your ancestors?!?

Regardless, this type of racist thought makes about as much sense as holding me—genetically a quarter or so English—responsible for the historical oppression of the Irish … uh … another quarter of me.  Or for that matter holding the Norwegian part of me responsible for Viking raids into England in the 8th Century, or my German part for the sacking of Rome in the 5th.  Do any of you want to head down that path?  Do any of you seriously think you can identify a genetic strain that doesn’t bear the responsibility for some recorded historical sin?  I’ve read A LOT of history over the years … good luck with that!

As for the labeling of anyone who “looks Asian” as Chinese and thus worthy of abuse … seriously?  Is that the best you can do, the best we can do in the 21st Century?  Is that what we’ve come to in the US? 

I suppose I should just relax and take it as “progress” that we haven’t imprisoned everyone of Chinese descent, but I can’t, I just can’t.  We ARE better than that and HAVE come further than that, and this type of behavior simply cannot be allowed to continue in a nation with democratic values.  Free speech is a beloved tenet of our great Constitution, and people must be free to express themselves.  But when words turn into actions—or threats—they’ve crossed a line that freedom of speech was never intended to protect.

I guess what it all comes down to is asking yourself, “How would I want to be treated if the shoe were on the other foot?”  How would you?  Do I have to explain to you how I, as a noticeably “different” American living abroad, want to be treated here—now with COVID ranging across my homeland?  Shouldn’t take much imagination to figure that one out!

Treat people as people, just like you and me, and stop being threatened by differences in skin color, culture, manner of speech, and manner of dress.  Focus on that which makes one human truly different from the next, things like integrity, honor, trustworthiness, diligence, generosity, selflessness and other laudable attributes that we should strive to embody from day-to-day.  In short, focus on what a person does, not what they “are” (however you might define that) and treat them accordingly.

There might just come a day when you’re the “different” one … and trust me, you’ll want that same courtesy extended to you.

M. G. Haynes