The references to the importance of 2042 (or thereabouts) raise for me a most interesting question for America. One of our fundamental premises is the equal protection of the law, inscribed on the front of our highest court. But what is equal to what? Or more important, who to whom?
The most simplistic views of race -- white vs. black, or white vs. non-white are similarly crude -- should lead to the legal conclusion that white people who worry about "minorities" should be laser focused on equality under the law, because as a potential future minority, that would eventually be their own most powerful defense if these "minorities" take over the government. (I leave aside the arithmetic of deciding which non-majorities will be aggregated into which assembled majority configurations). Absent some major constitutional revision eliminating or undermining equal protection, Americans who feel they have a stake in their whiteness have an overriding interest in all Supreme Court cases clarifying that "equal" means equal, period, when it comes to racial classifications.
As Mr. Davis eloquently points out though, our current conversations about race aren't about legal equality, they are about gut-level impulses, felt needs to care about race in ways that short-circuit our reasoning. While these impulses are no longer characteristic of most Americans, even their presence in the margins of our society (where our media and politics keep their relentless focus) continues to infect our nation.
Germany's Nuremberg Laws from 1935 went to microscopic extremes to enforce the purity of their people. In our modern and necessarily varied culture, purity of blood is simply impossible, as anyone with a subscription to Ancestry.com or 23andMe can demonstrate. I think and hope that is the impulse that will prevail. Mr. Davis is one of the reasons I have for being optimistic. Thank you so much for this wonderful interview.
The references to the importance of 2042 (or thereabouts) raise for me a most interesting question for America. One of our fundamental premises is the equal protection of the law, inscribed on the front of our highest court. But what is equal to what? Or more important, who to whom?
The most simplistic views of race -- white vs. black, or white vs. non-white are similarly crude -- should lead to the legal conclusion that white people who worry about "minorities" should be laser focused on equality under the law, because as a potential future minority, that would eventually be their own most powerful defense if these "minorities" take over the government. (I leave aside the arithmetic of deciding which non-majorities will be aggregated into which assembled majority configurations). Absent some major constitutional revision eliminating or undermining equal protection, Americans who feel they have a stake in their whiteness have an overriding interest in all Supreme Court cases clarifying that "equal" means equal, period, when it comes to racial classifications.
As Mr. Davis eloquently points out though, our current conversations about race aren't about legal equality, they are about gut-level impulses, felt needs to care about race in ways that short-circuit our reasoning. While these impulses are no longer characteristic of most Americans, even their presence in the margins of our society (where our media and politics keep their relentless focus) continues to infect our nation.
Germany's Nuremberg Laws from 1935 went to microscopic extremes to enforce the purity of their people. In our modern and necessarily varied culture, purity of blood is simply impossible, as anyone with a subscription to Ancestry.com or 23andMe can demonstrate. I think and hope that is the impulse that will prevail. Mr. Davis is one of the reasons I have for being optimistic. Thank you so much for this wonderful interview.