INTERRACIAL VOICE

Speech

Nathan Douglas
Semantic Equality

(Transcript of a speech made by Nathan Douglas in Washington D.C., 7/20/96, as part of the "Multiracial Solidarity March." For permission to reprint, contact N. Douglas @ P.O. Box 2500, Kensington, MD 20895.)

I'd like to thank Charles Byrd for making this day possible and for giving me the opportunity to speak. Charles is a courageous trailblazer who single-handedly gathered us together in cyberspace, then brought us safely here. Congratulations, Charles.

Greetings! My name is Nathan Douglas. I live a few miles from here, so I want to welcome you to hot, humid Washington, our nation's capital and home of the A.R.C. -- that's the Asylum for the Racially Confused. You may know it as the Census Bureau.

I'm here to share my thoughts on semantics, specifically a principle I call semantic equality. But before I get to that, I'd like to reveal a little of my background. For the past two years, I've been writing a collection of vignettes and essays that trace my personal evolution from a Southern racist upbringing through my racial enlightenment in the Army and onward to an interracial marriage which led to the birth of my youngest son. If you would indulge me a few moments, I want to read some brief excerpts from that manuscript.

My son revealed his curiosity or concern about skin color for the first time, precisely four-and-a-half years after his birth. He said...

"Daddy, are you brown?"

That question caught me off guard. I regrouped and said everyone is brown: some light brown, some medium brown, some dark brown.

"I don't want you to be brown," was his reply.

"Why?" I asked.

"I want you to be like me."

I tried to piece together what he might be thinking and how best to respond. I was well aware of the nuances inherent in the term brown, but his meaning was unclear. Instinct told me that he was in charge of the conversation, so I waited for his lead.

"Daddy, who painted you?"

How was I to answer? Should I acknowledge we have all been "painted" some shade by the creator, like cars or houses? Or should I begin to establish, at an elemental level, the concepts of melanin and natural selection? Given his age, I decided to say I was not painted by anyone. He accepted my response with a polite "oh" and returned to his play. I knew harder questions would come later.

Exactly one month...(later).., he explored further an apparent need to establish color order. His concern revolved around his older brother and sister, whose mother (my ex-wife) had given them a different set of skin color genes than his mother (my other ex-wife) had given him.

"What color is her face?" he asked, referring to their mom.

"What do you mean," I replied, knowing he had seen her many times.

"Is it brown?"

I assumed he was trying to reconcile skin color differences among himself, his siblings, their mother, his mother and me.

"Her face is the same color as mine," I countered.

"Is yours brown?"

"Mine is light brown. Some people are light brown, some are dark brown," I lectured.

"It's not dark brown?" he said, seeming a bit disappointed.

"No, mine is light brown," I reminded him.

"Why is your face like that?"

"Because that is the way God made me. God made everything and that is the way he made me. Is that okay?"

"Yes," was his satisfied response.

October, 1993 - My son calls after spending the weekend with his mother. During our conversation he tells me that I am white. I say that I am not. He says I am. I ask who told him that. He says his mommy. I say she's wrong. He says no, she is not. I say yes, she is. I tell him people aren't white, clouds are white. I ask if I look like a cloud. He says no. I say people are brown. I ask what color he is. He says "dark brown." I say okay. I remind him everybody is brown, some light, some dark. He tells me his friend Cathy says he's white. I say no, you're brown. God, when is this black-and-white insanity going to end?

Any of this sound familiar? As you can probably tell, I'm very concerned about the mindless use of the societal slang words: "Black" and "White."

Hey, if you ordered a black Mercedes and they delivered one the color of Oprah Winfrey's skin, what would you do? You'd refuse delivery, right? And if you ordered a white Jaguar and they delivered one the color of Phil Donahue's skin, what would you do? Refuse delivery on that sucker, too, wouldn't you? Well, it's time for all of us to refuse delivery on our government's racial classifications.

When the Feds, in the name of social science, publicly endorse these divisive antonyms, "Black" and "White," I get very upset. Let me give you three good reasons why the Census Bureau, and the rest of the government, should not be using the terms "Black" and "White" to refer to race.

1. It perpetuates the widespread myth that Nubians have black skin and Caucasians have white skin. This is obviously not true. Why do we allow our government to say it is?

2. It validates the adversarial, oppositional relationship these two groups have been traditionally forced to assume by racist entities and interests -- "Black" against "White."

3. It discriminates, because while our government categorizes Nubians and Caucasians by alleged skin color, it does not do likewise for Asians and so-called "American Indians." More on that in a minute.

(Of course, there is another, more subtle reason I should mention in passing. One only has to look up "black" and "white" in any dictionary to see which one is associated with "evil" and which one is associated with "good.")

Let's talk a little bit more about semantics -- words, their meaning, their relationship to each other. Semantics are, after all, at the core of our movement. You see, we don't like the word, "Other," right? Well, I'm not an English professor or some journalistic guardian of the mother tongue. I'm just the proud parent of a so-called "bi-racial" child. As such, it appalls me that in 1996, he and I, along with you and you, are being forced to lie by our own government. I'm not just talking about the pressure brought to bear on every multiracial to choose one parent or race over another. I'm talking about all those silly racial categories the government tries to pass off as legitimate. Hey, I'm not "White," and I don't know anyone else who is.

Think about it. "White," "Black," "Asian/Pacific Islander" or American Indian/Alaskan Native"? What kind of choice is that? (And I'm not even going to get into the Hispanic dilemma.) What I want to know is why does the federal government refer to two racial groups by their alleged skin color and the other two by their alleged geographical origins?

Today, I want to propose a new strategy for the budding multiracial movement -- a strategy based on the principle I call semantic equality. Instead of merely petitioning our government to replace the "Other" category with something like "multiracial," let's up the stakes. If race-conscious social engineers are going to expect us to disbelieve our own eyes, then we should immediately demand all of their color-logical choices. Give us full semantic equality. Instead of "White," "Black," "Asian" or "American Indian," the categories should be: "White," "Black," "Yellow" and "Red." I'm serious! Be consistent in your inaccuracies, Census Bureau. Don't discriminate! Call everyone by his or her alleged skin color, as you see it.

On the other hand, if Census gene counters prefer the slightly more rational, geo-logically based categories, then they should do that consistently. Labeling Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese, Thais or Japanese as "Asian" infers someone with my heritage must be "European." Okay, give me that choice! Give me semantic equality. Geo-logically, our government's racial classifications out to be: African, European, Asian and, perhaps, American. Let's demand an end to the government's semantic discrimination. Let's demand full semantic equality. Color-logic or Geo-logic, take your pick, Census. But you can't have it both ways. That's discrimination.

(Parenthetically, I should say that I prefer the classifications: "Asian," "Nubian" and "Caucasian," but that's another speech.)

Now, how about those of us who are racially blended? They currently call you "Other." "Other" -- kinda sits there like an afterthought, doesn't it? Like the "miscellaneous" category always used for the pieces that don't fit well elsewhere. It's too nebulous, too negative. Personally, I prefer "multiracial," if we must categorize. It has a positive, inclusive sound to it. Of course, the very best, ultimate option is this: "Stop asking about race, stupid!"

Well, when we finally get the "multiracial" category, and WE WILL GET IT, I hope every racially-liberated American of clear conscience and good intent immediately adopts our box as theirs, and begins choosing it instead of the one they normally would. Wouldn't it be great to see the day dawn when everybody, regardless of their alleged race, chose to call themselves "multiracial"?

We could begin abolishing that illegitimate "Black/White" dichotomy which haunts us: the one that incessantly tells us we are opposites, forever doomed to a self-imposed semantic isolation. We could begin to be true brothers and sisters, joined by one word, no longer portrayed as polar opposites. "Asians" would cease being the overlooked race in America, because ALL races in America would be overlooked. Man, that would be great!

Well, I hope you all seriously consider the principle of semantic equality. The implications of it are quite profound. But putting that aside for now, let me leave you with a few other thoughts about race and semantics.

First: Today the terms "Black" and "White" mean a whole lot less about color and a lot more about culture. If you observe closely, you'll see most of our society's "Black-White" debate and conflict is not racial, it's cultural. We should demand honesty about that and stop pretending our discussions of culture are really discussions of color or race.

Second: Americans must get beyond their racial pride. Yes, there is no reason to be ashamed of your genetic history, but there is also no reason to be proud of it. You had absolutely nothing to do with it. It is an inherited physical characteristic like your hair texture, body type, eye color, etc. We all know racists are individuals who hate groups of people because of their race, but I'm here to remind you a racist is also a person who loves others of his or her race because of that shared racial heritage. Liberated people must acknowledge race is an illegitimate basis for forming opinions or feelings about anyone. Individuals establish their worth through their actions, their deeds, their character, not their race.

Third: I'm going to step on some toes here, but I want to comment on three insidious little buzz words: "people of color." I cringe every time I hear this phrase. This crazy concept is being promoted by lots of well-meaning folks, some of whom may be in this audience. They fail to see that the term "of color" is, of course, racist. It presumes to amalgamate so-called "non-whites" into a large counter-mass for political purposes.

In this "of color" world, Japanese and Korean folks with my skin color are miraculously transformed to reflect the skin color of Jesse Jackson. How do they do that? How did all Asians, regardless of skin color, join this "of color" diaspora, while Caucasians -- presumably with the exception of Hispanics, East Indians or Middle Easterners -- manage to get excluded. You know the answer, and it's racist. This is a classic piece of illogic being used to serve a political purpose. Illogic is the methodology of racists. "Of color" is racist insanity, folks. Please don't embrace it.

Finally, we activists cannot sit around waiting for a racial savior. Colin Powell is not going to bring our salvation. Nor is Jesse Jackson or Kwesi Mfume. Bill Clinton? You've got to be kidding. What does he know about race? No, we are our own saviors. We, the multiracial community, are the ones poised to move this country forward toward racial liberation. It's up to us -- multiracial offspring, racially-conscious parents, friends and allies. We are the next wave of the Civil Rights Movement. We are the best hope for a truly multiracial, multicultural future, because we have already been there. We know what it looks like and how to achieve it.

Oh, make no mistake about it -- the quest for racial liberation is going to be difficult. So is the battle for multiracial recognition. And ain't nobody gonna thank us for our insight and effort. But this is our destiny. Give it your best effort and with the grace of God we will accomplish truly great things for ourselves, our kids, and most important, all the children of the future! Thank you.