The Heretic
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 340
- Reaction score
- 0
A lack of sexual interest.
Yes, you read that right. Not something forbidden in this egalitarian era - the desire to be superior - but a cultural tweaking of an existential condition.
Why I think sexual interest is at the root of racism is precisely this: the fundamental drive of man is "desire"- not necessarily libidinal sex drive- but best characterized as "lack." Human consciousness is always aware of itself, that it is imperfect, that it lacks.
However, this creates problems when other human beings are the object of the desire. As an object of desire, the Other never coincides with the desiring consciousness. Sexuality vacillates between sadism and masochism, in which either the other or oneself is merely an object, a thing. This plays on as long as both practitioners remain in bad faith. All intersubjective relationships are doomed. Coming to grips with this futility, that human intimacy is sentimental bad faith, the consciousness attempts to define the "other" as an object with a simple look by perceiving the person in an act that defines his existence. One freedom threatens another. Objectification is a threat of freedom, a simple look endangers the absolute freedom of the consciousness. This look reifies and deprives the Other of his transcendence, diminishing his freedom by reducing him to an object, a thing. The other has two options- dominate the situation and suppress his/her own freedom, or allow himself/herself to be dominated by the looker's freedom. But the "other" will fail, because he/she will always recognize his/her own freedom as well as the observer's in order to suppress it. Then his/her world, as "whatever he was doing," no longer belong to him/her anymore, for it belongs to the "observer." So there is a tug-of-war battle of wills between the consciousness and the Other in defining one another with the "Look." This is called objectification or projections. Life is a series of relations with other people that amounts to "stare downs" of an existential nature.
You may be asking at this point, how does this relate to racism? This phenomenological exposition on human relations plays a part when the look objectifies the "other." It takes a racist to categorize a "race" and consequently the people in that racial class is defined by the racists. However, taking a person to be an "object" is in bad faith, and denies the "other's" freedom. A person is not a racist in the same way he is a brunette. He chose to be a racist, because he fears freedom, openness, and change and desires to be as solid as a thing. He is in search for an identity. With the façade of a racist, the person escapes his freedom (momentarily) and once this 'façade' has become second nature, the racist has abdicated his humanity. Racism is not merely an opinion, but it is a global attitude, a passion and a way of living one's life. It is an emotion and involves a choice of oneself as that of a particular passion. The racist cannot incorporate his prejudice into his other attitudes as if it was a separate entity among other separate entities. His prejudice dictates his worldview and consequently brought to bear on all men in general.
Bottom line: If a person judges a group of people as a substandard race, he or she has ruled them out as potential partners in a relationship.
Yes, you read that right. Not something forbidden in this egalitarian era - the desire to be superior - but a cultural tweaking of an existential condition.
Why I think sexual interest is at the root of racism is precisely this: the fundamental drive of man is "desire"- not necessarily libidinal sex drive- but best characterized as "lack." Human consciousness is always aware of itself, that it is imperfect, that it lacks.
However, this creates problems when other human beings are the object of the desire. As an object of desire, the Other never coincides with the desiring consciousness. Sexuality vacillates between sadism and masochism, in which either the other or oneself is merely an object, a thing. This plays on as long as both practitioners remain in bad faith. All intersubjective relationships are doomed. Coming to grips with this futility, that human intimacy is sentimental bad faith, the consciousness attempts to define the "other" as an object with a simple look by perceiving the person in an act that defines his existence. One freedom threatens another. Objectification is a threat of freedom, a simple look endangers the absolute freedom of the consciousness. This look reifies and deprives the Other of his transcendence, diminishing his freedom by reducing him to an object, a thing. The other has two options- dominate the situation and suppress his/her own freedom, or allow himself/herself to be dominated by the looker's freedom. But the "other" will fail, because he/she will always recognize his/her own freedom as well as the observer's in order to suppress it. Then his/her world, as "whatever he was doing," no longer belong to him/her anymore, for it belongs to the "observer." So there is a tug-of-war battle of wills between the consciousness and the Other in defining one another with the "Look." This is called objectification or projections. Life is a series of relations with other people that amounts to "stare downs" of an existential nature.
You may be asking at this point, how does this relate to racism? This phenomenological exposition on human relations plays a part when the look objectifies the "other." It takes a racist to categorize a "race" and consequently the people in that racial class is defined by the racists. However, taking a person to be an "object" is in bad faith, and denies the "other's" freedom. A person is not a racist in the same way he is a brunette. He chose to be a racist, because he fears freedom, openness, and change and desires to be as solid as a thing. He is in search for an identity. With the façade of a racist, the person escapes his freedom (momentarily) and once this 'façade' has become second nature, the racist has abdicated his humanity. Racism is not merely an opinion, but it is a global attitude, a passion and a way of living one's life. It is an emotion and involves a choice of oneself as that of a particular passion. The racist cannot incorporate his prejudice into his other attitudes as if it was a separate entity among other separate entities. His prejudice dictates his worldview and consequently brought to bear on all men in general.
Bottom line: If a person judges a group of people as a substandard race, he or she has ruled them out as potential partners in a relationship.