When those such as Sam Sommers speak of or allude to racism and institutional racism as being the cause of disproportionalities are they picturing a villainless crime? Perhaps I differ from them in that I assume otherwise. I reason, perhaps erroneously, that:
1) Racism and institutional racism implies racists
2) Contemporarily, racists are deemed to be morally wicked
3) Therefore, the claim that such and such a disproportionality is due to racism or institutional racism is equivalent to the claim that there is some group of morally wicked people causing the disparity
This leads me to take the charge seriously. To my mind, accusing some of iniquity is no slight matter.
But perhaps my mistake is that I do take the charge seriously. I reason, perhaps childishly:
1) An accusation of individual or group iniquity is serious
2) Therefore, the case for this accusation should be strong, the evidence for conviction beyond a reasonable doubt
This leads me to vigorously investigate and demand investigation of the situation. Which is what I have been doing. I’m not sure where my reasoning runs afoul. I will confess though, that my thinking has become rather simple, almost embarrassingly so for me and surely so for some of you.
This cognitive simpleness, perhaps, is the true root of my difference with Sommers-like folk. I consider that it’s worse to wrongly accuse (and convict) some of iniquity than to wrongly state (or rightly establish) that some tend to be — in this case — less clever.