Moral blindness is where you do not face up to the wrong you do. You are mostly just fooling yourself – everyone else sees you for the scumbag you are, whether they say it to your face or not. Meanwhile, you are doing nothing to set things right – either with those you have wronged or within yourself.
Moral blindness is important for telling if someone is guilty, lying or truly sorry. It is also an important part of racism and other abusive patterns of behaviour. It is common in people whose self-image is so fragile that admitting to themselves they did something evil would threaten their very being – which in turn makes them more evil, not less.
Signs that someone is morally blind:
- They make it about intentions. This moves attention away from the harm done to whatever was in their heads when they did it. Which is great for them because there is no way you can know what they were truly thinking – though nine times out of ten it is not hard to guess.
- They blame the victim. Common for rapists, wife beaters, racists and institutions.
- They make it about the accuser. Note that this is different than getting angry at the accuser. Anyone falsely accused would do that. But what the morally blind do is move attention away from the wrong done.
- They say everyone does it. As if they are eight years old, as if that makes it right. Some use this as a cheap excuse, but unfortunately some do truly believe in it.
- They point out that someone else did the same thing or something worse. The Arab Trader argument. Or: What Would Genghis Do?
- They point out all the good things they have done. Common but sickening. Think Joe Paterno.
- They point out how the victim benefits. Like Africa from Western colonization or Black Americans from Western slavery (“Go back to Africa!”).
- They distance themselves from the wrong done.
- They deny they benefited.
- They say it was an accident or blame circumstances.
- They play it down.
- They change the subject.
- They tell you to get over it, to move on.
- They want something for changing. Meaning they do not understand (or care) that what they did was wrong.
The morally blind do have some behaviours in common with the falsely accused, like disputing the facts. I did not list those. The beauty of this list is that they give away the person’s feelings of guilt since there is no reason for the falsely accused to use any of them.
Field study: Talk to a White American about slavery. You would think they would just condemn it no uncertain terms but many do not. Instead they do many of the things listed above. While no white person alive took part in American slavery, nearly all of them benefit from it in some form. That puts them in the position of a Mafia boss’s daughter. Deep down they know this since otherwise there would be no need to be morally blind.
Source: Me.
See also:
Reblogged this on oogenhand and commented:
Apt comparison of White Supremacism with organized crime. Morality is completely at the side of Abagond. However, morality itself is flawed. Abortion is killing a helpless, innocent child, and Abagond agrees with this view of abortion. But… avoiding abortion leads to large families, and large families lead to colonization and enslaving other people. Not having large families requires euthanasia.
LikeLike
Abagond
You NAILED this one!
Now watch as the army of wormy trolls come out of the woodwork with the same old worn out broken record arguments – low IQ, high crime rate, violence, blah, blah…
LikeLike
Aba
Moral blindness is a common part of being a psychopath.
LikeLike
Interesting post!
I can’t wait to read the comments
LikeLike
With enslavement, all too often, it’s just not discussed or taught. The “denial” of enslavement (I always use “enslavement” instead of “slave”/”slavery” to recognize the human element per se), then, becomes the fault of previous people and/or people in power. After all, you can’t acknowledge something you don’t know. In teaching, college-level students always have so much trouble thinking about enslaved peoples or accepting that enslaved existed “right here.” It’s so different than anything they are used to, AND it goes against what our (really bad) public school system and society at large has taught them for a really long time.
In Brazoria County, Texas, for example, in 1860, 72 percent of all people in Brazoria County were enslaved (2,027 whites; 5,110 enslaved African-Americans; and 6 free African-Americans). These enslaved peoples were located on over 36 plantations that made sugar, cotton, oranges, lemons, etc. Enslaved African-Americans in Brazoria County produced 3/4s of the entire state of Texas’s output. In the state at large, there were 182K enslaved African-Americans, and 68 percent of all public offices in the state were controlled by enslavers. YET, virtually no one knows that enslavement existed in Texas or in Brazoria County.
LikeLike
There was nothing wrong with slavery in the first place. Sorry your “civilizations” couldn’t defend themselves, but it’s no reason to get bent out of shape centuries after the fact.
LikeLike
I’m so glad you used a Planet of the Apes picture to illustrate this point. I’ve seen many parodies and the newer movie but it was only last month that I watched the original for the first time.
At the end, I had to ask, “Have white people really seen this movie?” I know they talk about it endlessly, but I can’t think they get it’s meaning. Especially Chuck Lorre who used it as a parody on The Big Bang Theory, but continually includes jokes that are beyond borderline racist.
I don’t think movies like this help white people overcome their issues with racism at all. If anything, I think they may even enforce their feelings of superiority. They don’t identify with the “lesser” beings in the movie – they identify with the powerful oppressor.
LikeLike
While seemingly as slight as not specifically saying some or a specific percentage “everyone else sees you for the scumbag you are”
would be an example of venting and slander , it would be cleaner if “villain” or “perpetrator” where used instead.
In my experience dealing with those who offend me (for whatever reason) naming calling (even in my mind) is usually not accurate and can lead to venting which is worse.
I ultimately blame our biological heritage and attempt to do my evolutionary duty and make effort to improve.
All these slander words we learn to use when angered or offended ,like so much else we inherited and must reject.
LikeLike
Slavery was awful it really was agruement over it doesn’t change the fact it happened nothing can change it it happened I am sorry it happened and I sorry you live with the aftermath. I am not saying get over it or move on only it was inhuman and awful but me agreeing that really doesn’t do much for fixing the underlying problem
LikeLike
@jane the jew
“Slavery was awful it really was,I am sorry it happened and I sorry you live with the aftermath.”
“I am not saying get over it or move on only it was inhuman and awful ”
almost there
“but me agreeing that really doesn’t do much for fixing the underlying problem”
and would that be??
LikeLike
“The morally blind do have some behaviours in common with the falsely accused, like disputing the facts.”
A difference is, the morally blind/lying person will say “You can’t prove that!” or “Who told you that?”. The falsely accused will say “That’s not true”, or something to that effect. One will try and question the way you found the information, but not the information itself. The other will question the information itself.
LikeLike
Good question. The racism of the system and other white people I suppose. I am a little confused on many race related issues becuse of my upbringing being my mothers only white child. But I honestly don’t know how to change anything beyond myself
LikeLike
@jane the jew
systemic racism or institutional racism is a intimidating problem as is a populations of people and as to changing things beyond yourself – I think all sapiens/humans have this limitation even the 1% who are alleged to be in charge or control.
May your confusion grow less and your knowledge more….
LikeLike
I know its a problem I just don’t know what I can do about it
LikeLike
Doesn’t this post describe most of the racist trolls and obtuse and stupid racist jerks that come to troll most black blog sites?
LikeLike
I usually call it sociopathic behavior myself, and I’ve been a victim of this kind of behavior from online troublemakers who whine when you call them out. It’s like they think they can do whatever they want and not expect anyone to step up and lecture them.
LikeLike
I like this post, it explains why many Caucasians in America downplay slavery.
LikeLike
And the so called morally blind individuals give me the blues always pulling these racist statistics out of their anal parts trying to prove how pathological black people are. They never focus on their transgressions and misdeeds.
LikeLike
Sounds like most politicians suffer from Moral Blindness
LikeLike
I thought it was cognitive dissonance ,oh yeah – moral blindness – is the current in term to explain why some people do things we don’t like.
I got one ,had it for a while but since I’m not socially adept it probably will not become popular in my lifetime – moral entropy – its always easier to do harm or destroy than help or create – its a principle of the universe (hypothetically) :tentative proof –
who can create or restore(help) life ;just about anyone can kill or injure….
LikeLike
“Deep down they know this since otherwise there would be no need to be morally blind.”
Sharp sentence. I think this relates to the cognitive dissonance Mbeti alluded to.The simple act of being openly ashamed of what was done in the past and incorporating that shame into the cultural narrative would do so much for the white psyche. Instead the culture often embarks on misguided attempts to be ‘proud’ of past atrocities by revering such questionable emblems as the confederate flag.
LikeLike
What is weird in white american denial is that even in Germany no one in these days deny what happened during the nazi regime. Not that it make things ok, but still, even the germans looked at the mirror and aknowledged what they had done. That happened in 1940’s. Now, in US the slavery was aboloshed offcially 1865 (was it??) and they still can not have an honest discussion about it.
Perhaps there is the fear about the Big One behind this one: if they admit honestly what they have done to blacks, they have to admit what they did to natives. Then they would have to admit that they too are just a bunch of immigrants, that they do not have anymore rights to the land than recent mexican immigrants.
LikeLike
Its been pointed out before what black person or even PoC alive currently living in the US doesn’t benefit from the slavery done?
The same statements that apply to white people in this scenario apply equally as well to other PoC.
What about the moral blindness that afflicts black people inregards to their involvement with slavery and wiping out the natives?
In White Paternalism, one of the other posters brings up the black seminoles who sided with the indians of the time until emancipation and once they had a chance to get in good with society, they turned on them and helped defeat their once native allies.
The arab/african slaver argument isn’t just to say other people do evil its to point out the moral blindness and hypocrisy of the other side.
What about the atrocities committed by the Buffalo soldiers?
What statement applies to black people that doesn’t equally apply to any ethnic minority that came over that was white inregards to committing atrocities and genocide?
LikeLike
@ V-4
You are doing the very thing the post says, particularly #4 and #5: “Everyone does it” and “Others have done the same or worse.” What are we, eight years old?
LikeLike
@ V-4
You do know, right, that slave owners said the same thing to excuse slavery?
In an earlier draft I had “Point out how the victim benefits”, but took it out as being too close to #6, the Joe Paterno one. Maybe I need to put it back in.
LikeLike
@ sam
Right. Even South Africa and Rwanda had a truth and reconciliation process to help put the ugly past behind them and move on. Nothing like that in America. Not even close.
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
I do not think America is the most racist of white-dominated countries. Israel is currently worse, for one. However I think part of what makes America worse than most is that it practised large-scale race-based slavery on its own soil. Making that seem “normal” has seriously warped its culture.
LikeLike
[…] Moral blindness is where you do not face up to the wrong you do. You are mostly just fooling yourself – everyone else sees you for the scumbag you are, whether they say it to your face or not. Mean… […]
LikeLike
Any country in the Americas that had slaves from Africa,practised large scale race based slavery on its own soil, in the case of Brazil , a much larger scale…that is the problem of having one of the more open diologues about racism, people start thinking America is the worst of them all..did you know Sao Paulo police kill more people than all of the police in the USA put together?
Actualy, I think it is immoral to go back in the cold war and only tell the story of what America did and try to forget what the other side was doing..just make America the boogey man to not have to look in the mirror of the ugly truth on all sides…I dont buy 8 year old fables when it comes to talking about international dog eat dog politics…The serious anti Americans play this immoral game to death…if we cant go back to the cold War and look at the whole story, it is just half truths and lies to push an agenda
I dont buy the Arab Trader argument anymore…several times on this blog, I made a tremendous effort to say up front that I thought the Atlantic slave trade was worse, but pointed out something racist in the Arab slave trade , and was slapped twice by a now proven manipulating deceitful plagiarist, and Abagond, you supported her…Fine if you want to go after Fox News anti Islam attack dogs,or, take that argument out of racists hands who try to dimminish the Atlantic slave trade brutality and legacy of slavery, but , if its used to just shut down someone’s arguments because they are white American male , something pretty much indicated by the plagiarisor,, an American white male who stated out front the Atlantic slave trade was worse, then the “Arab Slave Trade”, argument is moving to shakey ground…at least if its thrown at me in that mannor, I dont respect it
LikeLike
Abagond, you should definitely add it back and point out that Africa and Africans are in the state they are in after decades of colonization by white people. Africans would much better off if white people would have left us alone. We had been living and prospering Africa for hundreds of thousands of years before white people showed up and ruined everything. I had to point this out to my husband the other day. People have no understanding of history or cause and effect.
LikeLike
@Abagond
I agree with solesearch. I think you should really add that point back in. I frequently wonder how Africa would have been had colonization not taken place. Many Nigerian people I’ve spoken with truly believe colonization was a good thing. It’s horrible. Their idolization of white people shocks me every time I visit.
LikeLike
Solesearch and miss b – I’m not suggesting anyone go back anywhere – but what you’ve said sounds like you might support segregation. Would you? I happen to agree with you, I think most race based cultures would do better if they are homogenous. I think the multi-cultural melting pot has been proven a failure and it only adds to our discontent with one another.
I’m white, and I would like to live amongst my own, exclusively. Does that make me a racist or an evil person in your eyes – any of you? It would be an intersting experiment if the world were truly segregated. I think many cultures would be better off – they would get along differently and progress and receede in their own way in their own times, but people of similar stock will find a way to live harmoniously with each other. When our peoples are mixed is when resentments occur and crimes of an individual get painted on the whole of that community. It isn’t right, but I think it is human nature. We can do better, if we separate and set our own houses in order.
All that being said, another human trait is jealosy and lust for power – as soon as a segreated community felt they needed a resources possessed or occupied by another segregated community, they would war on that community – especially if an advantage were at hand. How to live within human nature without succumbing to human nature – tough question.
LikeLike
@ Solesearch @ miss b
Thanks. I put it back in. I agree, it is an important one in its own right:
LikeLike
Yet another awesomely concise and informative post!
I’m wondering, though — you just did a post on white “paternalism.” We generally live in a patriarchy. Would you ever do a post on male moral blindness? If not, why not?
(And I’m not trying to “change the subject,” just wondering if, in your multi-subject blog, you’d ever do posts against the patriarchy, since I do see a lot of, for example, male moral blindness in the world.)
LikeLike
@Riverside_Rob
Its quite interesting reading your own comments you make the following statement:
But you seem to be conveniently forgetting your own European history…Go back even just 500 years didn’t this state of affairs exist then?
Also what you refer to as “human nature” in this statement:
Again…what you are referring to, you forget in that 500 year period, was the “European Nature”!
Its analogous to the situation you find yourself in here occupying commentary in a predominately Black and POC blog.
The problems which you seem blind to, and the ones you seek solutions to, are entirely of your own making!
Unfortunately, it is YOU who could not survive in a a segregated community. This is the reality history shows you are clearly unable to accept…
LikeLike
@ aspergum
I think thats a fair point…
LikeLike
Kwamla, can you expand on why you think I (meaning whites or me as an individual?) couldn’t survive in a segregated community?
You maybe pointing out that Europe was segregated 500 years ago, but still communities warred on each other. You might also refer to the fact that a segregated Europe moved beyond it’s borders to conquer or colonize other communities. Is that the history that I’m unable to accept?
I hope you would understand that this phenomena isn’t isolated to white communities, but Persian, Arabic, Asian and African communities lived, fought and died exclusively within their own race. Your post leads me to believe that your position is that all the evils of the human race lie exclusively within the white European communities, and that the rest of the world lived in peaceful coexistence and economic prosperity. Is that really your position?
My real question wasn’t answered though, clearly enough for me to understand. Does my desire to live solely among others of my race constitute racism as you see it? another question that arises from your response is how do you think the black American community would fare if they were to live solely amongst themselves? Don’t you think both communities – within the confines of the larger United States to prevent warring could prosper out of sight and contact with one another for the most part?
LikeLike
@riverside-rob:
“I hope you would understand that this phenomena isn’t isolated to white communities, but Persian, Arabic, Asian and African communities lived, fought and died exclusively within their own race.”
Actually not. Persians fought wars against their neighbours for centuries, includin the now famous 300 spartans and other greeks, arabs, romans etc.
Asians did also the same. The huns came from asia, so did avars, the turks, the mongols, which also means they fought against other, mainly european adversaries for centuries.
Africans fought against the phoenicians, greeks, romans, the vandals, the europeans, the arabs and asians in some regions.
Arabs fought against romans, asians, turks, mongols, europeans, africans etc.
LikeLike
@Riverside_rob
The model of the Western world we see globally imposed today comes from where? and what period of history?
Are you in denial of this history of European expansion and colonialism. Or perhaps you believe it was basically a race by all the different countries to scramble and confiscate other peoples land and resources? Due of course to our “innate” European nature which is basically universal to all peoples on the planet. But it was the Europeans who got there first?
Place the last 500-600 years of the construction of what we consider the “modern world” into its historical context and determine who is primarily responsible for this?
Examine your own words, statements and comments here…It answers most of your questions….
You speak as if historically this situation has never been experienced in America before?
Given the history of Europe, and more recently the USA, what evidence is there to suggest whites could live by themselves in a segregated community?
Racism is basically about structurally, globally institutionalised inequality. Its nothing to do with desiring to live amongst your own community.
LikeLike
Kwamla – thanks for the response. I am starting to understand that the concept being expressed here is one of white’s needing other races simply to have an outsider to work against, rather than squabble internally among themselves (ourselves in my sake). On another thread, someone wrote, speaking of whites “you need us more than we need you”. If that is the premise – I’m not certain I disagree with it – I know that is a common technique to promote common interest and lead masses of people. I think you may be right.
Lastly – your quote “Racism is basically about structurally, globally institutionalised inequality. Its nothing to do with desiring to live amongst your own community.” That is an angle I’d not considered, but once I read it I knew that I agreed with it – and I would further add Classism to that, being that my people, Scots-Irish, were starved and oppressed by other whites in europe and in this country. My people were better able to blend in after a few generations and the inqualities gradually (I think) subsided. Thanks again for the thoughtful response.
LikeLike
Sam – you’re right – I wrote Persian, Arabic, Asian and African communities lived, fought and died exclusively within their own race.” I should not have said exclusively, and your list of battles and combatants is right on the money. The point I was trying to make was overly simple – people fight, first with their own kind, then with others. I was trying make that point to resist (what I thought was ) the creeping notion that all wars fought were initiated by white Europeans upon peace loving other-than-white races to enslave there people and steal their resources.
Kwamla asks some interesting questions about origins of the western world model, leading to a euro-centric version of history as taught in now obsolete Western Civilization courses. He asks if I deny European colonial expansion -which I don’t, but I do agree there was a scramble by different countries to confiscate other peoples lands and resources – and I acknowledge those countries doing the scrambling were in a large part European. But Sam – can you also see that Persian, Arabic and Turkic empires doing the same thing – trying to colonize Europe itself? Evidence the Moors in Spain, Turks at Constantinople and to the gates of Vienna, Persians in Greece as you’ve said. Those empires made slaves of many thousands of white Europeans, I might add. There was also the warring nations era in China and present day Korea, and the nations of Meso America, warring with each other for land and prisoners to sacrifice.
Don’t these examples show this behavior is not solely a white European trait –but one of human kind?
LikeLike
Kwamla,
“Again…what you are referring to, you forget in that 500 year period, was the “European Nature”!
Its analogous to the situation you find yourself in here occupying commentary in a predominately Black and POC blog.
The problems which you seem blind to, and the ones you seek solutions to, are entirely of your own making!
Unfortunately, it is YOU who could not survive in a a segregated community. This is the reality history shows you are clearly unable to accept…”
Exactly!
LikeLike
I put off commenting on this for a while because there is a fundamental problem in deciding if something is right or wrong. There must be a system of morality, or ethical values in order to determine whether a behavior is right or wrong. However, there is not always a universal system of morality or ethical beliefs that everyone can agree to. Also, even if there is a system of morality that one ascribes to, how can we distinguish between “moral blindness” and “cognitive dissonance”.
I think oogenhand alluded to some of the problem when he said
Abortion is a good example that most people can acknowledge that there is more than one viewpoint about what is morally “right”. It affects two person’s lives and bodies — whose rights count? When is it a right thing to do, and when is it a wrong thing. Most people on all sides agree that it is wrong to perform an abortion in the 3rd trimester — then it becomes closer to infanticide than fetal abortion. However, what about if the mother is a victim of incest or rape? What about if the fetus has a contagious disease, or is widely deformed (twins conjoined at the head, or two separate heads, but sharing organs like the liver and heart?) and would be possibly fatal to the mother if they were carried to term.
There are numerous other controversial issues which are very much moral and ethical issues but which people differ widely in their viewpoint, e.g., same sex marriage, status of transgender people, stem cell therapy, euthanasia, circumcision, even prayer in school, etc. I could go on and on. I remember when a majority of people thought that interracial marriage was morally wrong (and those who engaged in it were morally blind), So, morals do change over time.
A common dilemma is the idea of committing a crime in order to do something for family or loved one. Do you steal to feel your starving children? Do you hold people hostage until your son gets an organ donation? Another dilemma is whether to take an action that is likely to kill less people compared to doing nothing.
The other problem is cognitive dissonance. For example, in the recent past, many parents consider gender reassignment surgery for their children in the case of ambiguous genitalia or botched circumcisions. They made a decision to reassign the gender of the children surgically, but realized that it was wrong. However, in order to live with their past decisions, they have to enter the psychological mode of cognitive dissonance, forcing them to adjust their belief system to accommodate the dilemma. People do this every day, eg, justify cheating when they have been induced to do so, or when the cost of not cheating seems much worse than the cheating itself. My parents even did this – when they used a physical punishment that ended up requiring hospital emergency care for their child, they rationalized that it was merely a simple accident that they did not intend to happen. So they end up denying that they did anything wrong. Were they morally blind?
What about the drone attacks in Pakistan? Are the people doing this morally blind?
Most people believe that slavery is wrong. However, those that engage in it do reform their belief system to alleviate the cognitive dissonance created by the situation. In the case of slavery in the USA, they would even reform their interpretation of the Bible to rationalize or even justify it. And despite that most humans agree that slavery is wrong, it still goes on today. Even the difference between penal labour and slavery is a fine line.
We haven’t even discussed at what point there is “moral obligation” to act or react. We have all witnessed the bystander apathy syndrome.
I am not trying to justify any kind of inhumane behavior, but everyone, to a certain extent, is “morally blind”. They feel they have to “turn a blind eye” in order to avoid another situation which might be worse, or perceived that way.
And it takes courage to admit that a past behavior was morally wrong.
LikeLike
@jefe I think the drone attacks are definitely a case of moral blindness, and cowardice. It really beggars belief that a guy locked up in an office somewhere is killing people by remote control – it removes accountability from what’s essentially an act of state-sponsored murder.
I also agree that prison labour has many of the characteristics of slavery. I read a Huffington post article a while ago that prisoners are paid so little that some companies are actually using prison labor to remain competitive with the Chinese manufacturing sector. It’s good if prisoners can learn a skill but only if they choose too – otherwise its just more undercutting of human rights.
LikeLike
You may think and I may think that drone attacks are a case of moral blindness, but there is a bureaucrat who has the power to decide these things and who is operating under a different belief system. The president has the ultimate power to authorize the use of drones, he know they are being used, yet he lets it continue. Is he morally blind? Or is he simply operating under a different belief system?
I do some work in CSR, and both prison labour and slave labour are categorized as forced labour. In order for labour NOT to be forced, it must be entered into voluntarily and the worker can stop at any time within terms of an employment agreement or contract. Sharecropping is another type of forced labour, which falls under the category of a debt that a worker must repay and remain employed with the employer until it is paid off. So Indentured servant is also a form of forced labour (unless the employee can leave the employer and pay off debts otherwise — it can never be a condition of employment).
Or, as you may have read in one of Abagond’s prior posts, prison labour was used post-reconstruction as a replacement for slavery. Prior to the civil war, slave patrols rounded up blacks to return them to their masters. After reconstruction, police would round up blacks, find something to charge them on, then send them to jail. They would then work for free for a business owner or the local government for as long as they wanted.
LikeLike
Jefe, in the situations Abagond refers to the immorality of the issue is not in dispute.
LikeLike
The only one specifically mentioned above was about slavery (and by extension to human trafficking and compulsory labour). Another form of compulsory labour is debt bonded labour, which is still quite common and for many who engage in it. According to their value system, they did not see the moral problem with the activity.
I personally am not trying to dispute any moral position. All I am saying is that it is not as clear cut as it seems. And all humans engage in cognitive dissonance daily, and “moral blindness” is just one of the methods.
My mother cut my head with a knife when I was 7-8 years old, requiring emergency hospital treatment and leaving a very visible large scar right at the crown of my head. She used each and every one of those (#1 – #14) excuses to justify or rationalize the behavior, trying to get me to forget about it. But every time I washed my hair and combed it, I saw this scar and it reminded me of the incident. I could not part my hair at the scar to cover it.
I finally got her to make a sincere apology when I was 36 years old. She admitted that it was wrong. Since then, my scar became less visible, and now I cannot even find it.
There should be no dispute about the right and wrong that was done, but I see parents, spouses and children doing it within a family all the time. And even when you try to use a cultural moral code (eg, the Bible, the Quran, Confucius writings), they are often somehow twisted to make the perpetrator less guilty — he believes he was following what was right.
LikeLike
Can’t wait to see the comments? I wouldn’t waste my time.
LikeLike
Thank you Solesearch!
LikeLike
@ Jefe
To my way of thinking your mother knew deep down that what she did was wrong but did not want to admit it to herself. Like you said, that takes courage. You can tell she knew it was wrong because each of the 14 excuses imply guilt or a sense of wrong-doing. Innocent people do not talk like that. (There are some things that both the innocent and the morally blind say, but I left those out.)
LikeLike
Indeed the major religions are about to be enlightened from the outside again on the issue of homosexuality, a no brainer to those who are thinking rationally, but considered an “abomination” by the holy books, as black and white as their endorsement of slavery and genocide. In forty years time, when there’s a married same-sex couple on every street, and a child raised by same-sex parents in every classroom, the Christians of that time will say “Our faith is sophisticated and modern indeed, and not at all antiquated or irrelevant; of course we think gay marriage is okay, we affirm it! See how progressive Christianity is.” Instantly forgetting that the previous generation of Christians were merely forced by the laws of their country to discover that gay marriage is demonstrably fine; far from heralding a new era of acceptance, they were dragged kicking and screaming into one.
LikeLike
[…] moral blindness […]
LikeLike
[…] means not downplaying or excusing white racist words and acts, either now or in […]
LikeLike
[…] moral blindness […]
LikeLike
Yet do “white Americans” _choose_ to “benefit” from slavery? If not, then am I right in understanding that moral responsibility also accrues to things for which we have no choice in? If so, how do you take up such responsibility? Can a “white American” _stop_ benefitting? If so, how?
LikeLike