Andres definition of racism is wrong

It was instructive to read ("Klamath Falls to form equity task force," July 22) about Todd Andres educating the city council on the nature of racism.

His definition is 100% wrong. His definition of racism is one race receiving benefits over another. His concept of benefits should be expanded. Historically, Black Americans received the benefits of plantation slavery, and today, the benefits of disproportionate mass incarceration, high mortality intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, and brutalization and death at the hands of big city police.

If Andres seriously wants to understand the difference between forward and reverse racism, he might imagine himself driving home in Minneapolis after a long day in the unemployment line, out of money and facing eviction. He rolls through a stop sign and gets pulled over, dragged from his car, beaten, tazed, and suffocated by a knee on the neck.

Andres ponders, Are we really, truly tackling the issue? Or are we ... doing something thats popular right now?

Does he mean that opposing the brutality just described is just a fad, an exercise in liberal political correctness? If so, he contradicts himself by emphasizing that racism is 100% wrong and that we must attack all racism.

Fair enough. We should attack the grant proposal for Black business owners with the same ferocity as we oppose the rampant killing of Black Americans. If I see Andres, that social justice warrior in executive clothing, out on the streets of Portland facing down the storm troopers with nude Athena, then Ill send a sharp message to Kate Brown opposing help for Black business owners.

Ed Silling

Klamath Falls

Read the original:

Letter: Andres definition of racism is wrong | Letters - Herald and News