In
The world Of Racism,
Is Brown The New Black?
By Mary Shaw
27 February, 2007
Countercurrents.org
10
years ago, when we thought about racial profiling, we would think about
the unfair, prejudicial suspicion of people who were caught "driving
while black". These days, however, "breathing while brown"
appears to be a much more suspicious activity.
Ever since the attacks of
9/11, swarthy Middle-Eastern-looking men are often viewed as potential
terrorists by the public and law enforcement alike. Middle Eastern men
were responsible for 9/11, the logic goes. Al-Qaeda consists mostly
of Middle Eastern men, they say, and so that's who law enforcement and
security personnel should look at first.
By that logic, then, why
didn't we crack down on all white European-American men after Timothy
McVeigh blew up the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995,
or after Eric Rudolph bombed the Olympic Park in Atlanta in 1996? Is
it because McVeigh and Rudolph look like any other guy from the American
heartland? Is it because without the dark skin they don't look scary?
If so, doesn't that attitude actually make us less safe?
According to the human rights
group Amnesty International, "discrimination based on race, ethnicity,
religion, nationality, or on any other particular identity undermines
the basic human rights and freedoms to which every person is entitled."
Racial profiling is a violation of the basic tenets of the U.S. Constitution
and international human rights laws and treaties. Furthermore, it simply
does not work.
Racial profiling gives terrorists
a formula for greater success. It tells them who they need to recruit
in order to be more effective. This became apparent way back in World
War II when, despite the massive internments of Japanese Americans and
visitors, none of the people convicted of spying for Japan were of Japanese
or Asian ancestry. Moreover, the arrests of John Walker Lindh (a white,
middle-class Californian), Jose Padilla (an Hispanic gang member), and
Richard Reid (a British citizen of West Indian ancestry) suggest that
terrorist organizations have already been successful in recruiting a
diverse group of sympathizers who by their nature could not be identified
through racial profiling.
And these days, when illegal
immigration is such a hot issue, Middle Eastern people share the burden
of racial profiling with Hispanics. No Mexicans were involved in the
9/11 attacks. Why then does the issue of migrant workers provoke such
hysteria? Are they really such a threat to our national security?
No, they're not. It just
seems as though Americans have somehow been programmed to feel threatened
by our brown-skinned neighbors. And they need to get over it if we want
to achieve greater homeland security.
In a nutshell, racial profiling
is ineffective, impedes the process of finding the real criminals, encourages
hate, and undermines national unity. It fails to address the true roots
of terrorism. And, for these reasons and more, racial profiling in itself
will likely fuel even more anti-American hatred.
Indeed, America will be much
better protected if law enforcement and security personnel focus on
what people are doing, and not on what they look like.
Mary Shaw is a Philadelphia-based writer and activist. She currently
serves as Philadelphia Area Coordinator for Amnesty International, and
her views on politics, human rights, and social justice issues have
appeared in numerous online forums and in newspapers and magazines worldwide.
Unless otherwise noted, the ideas expressed in this article are the
author's own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Amnesty
or any other organization with which she may be associated. E-mail:
[email protected]