Being Non-Racist is not enough!
When someone asks if you are racist, "No" might not be a good enough answer to stop racism, argues Marlon James.
In this short video produced by The Guardian, Marlon explains the difference between being Non-Racist and being Anti-Racist.
"(...)When you're thinking, climate change is terrible. This won't stop climate change (...) " He argues. Not being racist, in the same way, does not help fighting injustice. "We need to be active, we need to get people accountable. (...) to accept that what hurts one of us, hurts all of us", he finishes.
The trick is simple, being a "non-something" doesn't lead you anywhere but to passivity :
"What you are going to end up with is an entire moral stands, an entire code for living your life and deal with all the injustice in the world, by not doing a damn thing, he continues. That's the great thing about "NON", you can pull it off by simply going over in your bed and going to sleep."
That's the difference, according to him, with being an Anti-Racist.
Personnally, I understand and agree with Marlon's point of view, but I have trouble understanding how being "anti" will help us to change mentalities, and moreover, to take actions in a society. I'm anti-racist, yes, ok! then what? Did I put anyone unconfortable? It sounds almost like replacing a word by an other. Will this change our actions toward a cause? Not really, may be a little bit though, but passivity still remains, less but still...
What, then, could influence people in more concrete actions and to stand up against an injustice? Less agressivity in the society, less weapon traffic, less legalization. More diversity in society, less difference...
Maybe, a part of the answer lies in an other very common human traits : One will not fully acts or behaves for a cause until a prejudice happens to them or to their family.
What do you think?
N.B. : Marlon James is author of the 2015 Man Booker prize-winning Brief history of Seven Killings, published by Oneworld Publications