Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

suspended in her jar

Home
Catholic
White Supremacy is Not Mere “Difference of Opinion”

White Supremacy is Not Mere “Difference of Opinion”

Last updated on: February 12, 2018 at 2:57 pm by Rebecca Bratten Weiss

White Supremacy is Not Mere “Difference of Opinion” 2018-02-12T14:57:49-04:00 Rebecca Bratten Weiss

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Cox Farms in northern Virginia is one of those family farms where you can buy plants, get fresh apple cider, and attend fall festivals. You’ll find baby animals and giant pumpkins there. You can go on hay rides. It’s all very wholesome and family friendly, but Cox Farms has still managed to anger a lot of people. Including Christians.

How?

By posting a sign reading “resist white supremacy.”

As they stated in a Facebook post clarifying their position:

We sincerely believe that fighting injustice and white supremacy is a responsibility that can- and should- unite us all. We struggle to see how anyone other than self-identified white supremacists would take this as a personal attack.

This is pretty straightforward, no nuance about it. And that’s good, because while there are some ethical issues that demand nuance, the evil of white supremacy is not one of them.

In spite of this seeming reasonable approach, however, Cox Farms is still being criticized and boycotted for their position. According to one commenter on their page, “this is not an inclusive message. When you single out a group of people you exclude them. This is a sad message.”

Another commenter objected to being called a racist for expressing a “different point of view.”

Now, one could certainly argue that no human being is reducible to a single label, and no one is ever “just” a racist. It could even be argued that we should refrain from calling people racists when this isn’t likely to induce them to reject racism. But, with these caveats, if your ”different point of view” is to take issue with the statement that we should resist white supremacy, your point of view is a racist one. And if you harbor racist points of view, yes, you are a racist.

Maybe you don’t want to admit you’re a racist? Maybe you don’t like being called one? Okay. But it is a truth universally acknowledged that “I’m not a racist” is invariably followed by a “but” and then by “something super racist.” And, as I have argued before, the first step in eradicating the sin of racism is to confess it and try to do better.

And it’s disingenuous to argue that one is failing in tolerance or inclusivity because one fails to include those who promote an ideology intrinsically dedicated not only to exclusion and intolerance, but exclusion and intolerance backed by violence. As a Jewish catholic, I can get along with many people of different belief systems. I can agree to disagree with Protestants on the nature of the sacraments. I can politely debate atheists about the existence of God. Co-existence is more than just a bumper sticker; it’s a civilized and virtuous goal. But it has its limits. I can’t agree to disagree with a Nazi who thinks I’d be better off in an oven. And a black person can’t be asked to tolerate the opinions of someone who thinks she’s less than human. I will quite happily exclude from my dinner parties those people who are committed to violence against me and my children, and I would rather go to farms where I know those people won’t be lurking in the corn mazes.

This is relevant in academic arguments, also. Freedom of speech and open inquiry are important, and debate – even over difficult matters…in fact, especially over difficult matters – should never be shut down. But there are viewpoints which of necessity militate against the premises of free speech, by asserting that there are some types of persons – the racially different, the queer, the “illegal” – who are not even entitled to exist, let alone express their beliefs. Academic freedom can not flourish in bigoted spaces.

There’s a limit to tolerance. Tolerance is an important humanist virtue, but there are places of darkness where it can not and should not go. “Love your enemies” does not mean “invite a convicted pedophile over to play with your kids.” Nor does it mean “let white supremacists express themselves by lynching black men.” We need radical charity to deal with this level of evil. And the need for charity does not de-legitimize the value of tolerance…but only among those who are willing to make a certain social contract in mutual good will.

It’s interesting, though, to see the point at which some people – people who have promoted intolerance towards LGBTQ persons, Muslims, and immigrants – suddenly decide that “tolerance” is a virtue. If the one thing you’re willing to tolerate is white supremacy, I’m going to take an educated guess that you might just be a white supremacist.

If you’re not a white supremacist, though, at least you know where you can take your family for a pleasant agrarian experience in a racism-free environment, because the racists are all now saying they won’t go there. “Let’s see how this affects your profit margins,” they say – and, what a disturbing thought this is. Because, there have been many times in history when business owners have suffered for taking a stand against white supremacy. Think of store owners who served black persons along with white persons. Think of those in Germany in the 1930s who happily catered to Jews.

If a statement against racism leads to a business losing money, we should be very alarmed about the culture of the United States today.

image credit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Resist_fascism_-_demonstrators_at_London%27s_anti-Trump_rally._(32602442016).jpg

Previous Post

February 10, 2018

In Defending Life, Draw the Circle Wide

Next Post

February 15, 2018 Yes, We Have a Gun Problem

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category abortion anti-semitism art Atwood Betrothed church clergy abuse coronavirus culture economics education environmentalism ethics faith family feminism gardening gun violence immigration Judaism literature MaddAddam New Pro Life Movement news pandemic personalism poem politics politics blue Pope Francis racism religion salvation sexuality social justice spirituality Station eleven Stephen King The Stand Trump Uncategorized war World Health Organization

Select a Month March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What city did God command Jonah to preach to?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Tyre Jericho Babylon Nineveh

Support this
Column