Racism in the World

The argument put forth is one from a very idealistic point of view, to create a world where race is insignificant and would allow "full freedom, equality, and justice." But to do this it is said that it is necessary ("the only way" to be exact) to eradicate racism. To eradicate racism is an inquisition of extremely large stature, but I do not believe it is possible. This is only an underlying aspect of the larger request for "full freedom" though, which race plays, what I believe to be, a mandatory role in the hearts of those consumed by a passion. Is race prohibiting us the freedom, the equality, or the justice that is so explicitly stated in our founding documents of our nation? I believe not, for it is choice that allows this to take place. Choice, which is made by both the racist and the recipient of racism, the choice to play the roles previously mapped out by others previously in their positions. This choice, as stated by Shelby Steele, is a choice to remain in a position of power; or this choice, as stated by Satre, is the choice to hate another for a reason being completely unrelated to the veil race provides over an individuals actually identity. In quest for power, very little is just and once power is attained justice is difficultly and clumsily wielded by the governing entity. To better understand how racism barricades our society from this ideal nation I believe it is best to discuss the preceding terms (freedom, equality, and justice) to help grasp what is meant and expected when they are stated.

The first term I will identify is the only term necessary, for the other two (freedom, and equality) are branches off of Justice and are easily achieved once it is understood. John Rawls states, "the fundamental idea in the concept of justice is fairness"(20 Ques. 760), but is not meant to be mistaken for fairness by any means. For justice is composed of three other virtues which Rawls states are: "liberty, equality, and reward for services contributing to the common good." When one hears justice, usually they jump to the conclusion that fairness and vigilance is what is meant. Truth being it is composed of the three virtues that Rawls states, for justice to exist it is necessary for all three of these terms to simultaneously exist. Liberty is necessary for the equality and vice versa, these two must coexist, without one the other cannot exist. As for servicing the common good, this is the byproduct of liberty and equality being assertively administered to society. Put these in a bottle, shake Ð''em up and you got justice (in a nut shell). There are many other aspects and layers to the virtues of justice but they are not necessary for my argument, for I am attempting to explain how racism and justice cannot exist.

A world full of justice cannot exist with the racist, and a racist could not be in a fully just world because it would not be one. Why is this? Is it because racists thrive off of a racial hierarchy, a racial superiority? The racist is more than just one who believes a select race is superior or inferior to another, a racist is one who makes a choice. As previously stated the racist chooses to hate another of a different creed, ethnicity, or race all of which are only dissimilarities of the human race. Racism gets in the way of justice by inhibiting the sight of rights or "liberties" the chosen race is allowed to have. To deprive one of rights is to strip one of their "equality" to the rest of the human race. Once these are gone, there is no way justice can exist, for they are the antonym of justice. Even though human nature is to categorize things by peculiarities, differences, to better understand and classify them it creates other