Chapter 16 race issues in the modern sense

Brother Lu, hello! Some of the questions you raised in your reply were almost anticipated before I even opened your envelope. First of all, you are extremely surprised to see that a crime of murder can be prosecuted and convicted in an American court for "violating civil rights", which can be said to be related or completely irrelevant. In this court, Zhonghua Book Company Publication of monographs. , murder is almost non-existent.Find it difficult to understand. All I can say is, I understand your "hard to understand".Because this is a very special case, and it is also a case of a special region in a transitional period.However, its existence lies in the "American logic" and is inherited from the entire American culture.As you already know, key cases that have gone to the Supreme Court like this and are connected to major historical events such as the Black Civil Rights Movement are an open and endless research and discussion object in the United States.No one can hide anything about the whole case, from the process of the case to the trial process.It has been dissected layer by layer through scholarly articles, memoirs, court records, expert analysis, and more.So far, while Americans have lamented the failure to convict murder, the outcome has been largely positive.

It's not that it's a deliberate creation of white society, as people who live outside this country might guess. They're the only ones who are satisfied.Remember that in my last letter, I told you that the black civil rights groups that were most concerned about this case also saw it as a victory.It's not that the people here don't understand that justice must be done, much less that they don't care about it being done.Rather, they understand that the progress of history, the improvement of the system, and the awakening of human nature are all gradual.Respect for a public contract established on the principles of humanity, the system, rules of the game, and modes of operation it contains is the basic guarantee for jointly promoting a humane society.

Therefore, after coming to the United States, we found that no matter what happened in this country, the paradigms we could hear, a discipline entered the normal science period from the pre-scientific period.When it's old, it's not a lot of condescending generic big comments.Americans are not keen on leading an event to a major line, program, general direction, etc.What we hear the most is that many experts belonging to the field of law, history, journalism, etc., come together to analyze and track such an incident and case with worry and detail.In order to try to find out what problems such a new incident or case has posed to the system, and what weaknesses or omissions have been revealed in the system.Then there's the scenario of discussing how to patch it up completely professionally.A large number of ordinary people like us have learned the ins and outs of an event, the legal historical basis, the possible development direction, and the reason why it is impossible to achieve perfection through watching TV continuously.

Therefore, people living here understand that justice is an extremely difficult and complicated historical process, and in this process, people can only achieve a staged result.However, one thing is fundamental, that is, the system must be based on the pursuit of justice. Even if it fails to be 100% fair, it is due to historical limitations rather than its design intention itself being unfair.When a specific event occurs, people must be able to see that this system is tirelessly pursuing justice in the greatest sense at that time.In addition, the handling of a specific incident, the whole process is open to all the people and under the supervision of the news, it is very difficult to hide the cat with one hand.Only in this way can people still have confidence in an imperfect system.If people discover that there is a force that is capable of surpassing the system and is manipulating secretly, then the entire foundation and confidence of this society will be wiped out in an instant.

Americans have not yet planned to start from the stove, but they still have confidence in the system that has been in place for two hundred years.But that doesn't mean that if you lived here today, you would hear praises for the system every now and then.On the contrary, what you see in all the texts is almost all criticism, criticism, blame, and even nitpicking.Because all the experts and professors consider themselves a special status called "intellectuals".This kind of people here has a "problem", that is, they deliberately keep a certain distance from the world, do not integrate with the broad masses of workers and peasants, and do not rejoice because they are part of the working class.At this point, it is quite a monkish taste.And to keep this distance, they think it is to be able to see the society more clearly, and it is more conducive for them to pick their noses and eyes.They always think that such a good thing as singing hymns is the exclusive property of nightingales.This society is also used to their faults, used to this kind of accusation or even prophecy that there is no good situation.This is just a little off topic.

My answer to your first question is partly an answer to your second question.It is why the people here still insist on jury trials composed of original residents when the small town jury in Georgia obviously acquits the criminals in the federal district court.I remember discussing this issue in general when we discussed the Simpson criminal trial three years ago.I have talked about two schools, Chuang Zheng School.During the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties, there were "Southern Studies" and "Southern Studies" that focused on the interpretation of righteousness, and any form of legal system was troubled by "people".Maybe we can go a little further.

When a criminal case occurs in a certain place, the local people get together to convict a suspect and decide how to deal with it. This is the most primitive court.Any other form is the "recovery" or "transfer" of this primitive form of democracy.However, when it is impossible to let all the people gather together to judge a case as soon as it happens, relatively speaking, the jury is the closest to the original intention of democracy and fairness. With the story of our last letter, you must have pointed out to me the injustice of the jury that has in fact occurred.However, if this is not the case, if the final decision is made by a judge, even if the judge has the personal qualities of "Bao Gong", or the final decision is made by a government agency, can everyone rest easy?Americans think that, in that case, they will not be able to sleep even more.

Quite simply, judges are human too, and if it is possible for twelve randomly selected individuals to reach a consensus and forcibly create an unjust case, then it is even more likely for one individual to do so.Therefore, in the American stage, the view of historical evolution was put forward, and the society was explained as "the people are many but the money is few".As for the conviction by government agencies, Americans will tell you that due to racial prejudice, almost all the Jews were sent to concentration camps and even gas furnaces. It was not a private act, but was directly organized by the German Nazi government.This principle is also easy for us to understand. After the Cultural Revolution, people who received unjust, false and wrongly convicted cases were rehabilitated. The verdicts in their hands did not lack the seal of the public security law.

As for the fact that the jury in this small town is suspected of making an unfair judgment, the right to judge should be transferred.Zooming in a little bit, it is like the outside world is dissatisfied with the judicial trials in a certain country and wants to take over the judicial power of this country from then on. The complexity and danger contained in this are even greater. Of course, this is the simplest way to approach a difficult question.In fact, of course, it is much more complicated, so that people have to build a huge judicial system, repeatedly balancing and checking various powers.This is what Americans are still doing every day trying to tinker and perfect.

Furthermore, the seriousness of a system is also the most basic feature of contract culture.Since the separation of powers is stipulated in the contract, it must be clearly separated.Those who have the right to manage, but those who do not have the right to manage, "Mao Shi", "Three Rites", "Book of Filial Piety" and other classics have promoted the direction of ancient Chinese classics, so we can only resolutely ignore them.For example, since everyone agrees, it is more reasonable to stipulate in the contract that the jury should be selected locally.Then, when this contract has not been overturned, it can only continue to implement this contract.If overthrow is to be considered, the Americans should first consider how to renew the contract, instead of ignoring the contract and acting on their own.That's how the word "murder" disappeared in federal court.Since the contract stipulates that the murder case has judicial power at the state level, no matter whether the state level can judge it or not.The federal court has no right to intervene, and cannot arbitrarily override it. It can only try its civil rights violations.In the United States, this is called "judicial self-control."

The benefits of this contract culture are actually clear at a glance, that is, every bit of advancement in the system is reliable and a solid accumulation.The whole society will not be accompanied by a few powerful figures, flipping pancakes over and over again.Therefore, President Kennedy's advancement of the 1964 Civil Rights Act will become a real social progress.Once you enter, you are entering. It will not be like dancing tango, shaking three times and taking a step back.It is difficult to promote, because it is not easy for everyone to understand.Once passed, it is a contract of the people, and those who understand it or not will have to implement it. Your letter also said, if this is the case, isn't there a great risk of a fair ruling?Indeed, at the end of the day, this country is still appealing to its founding ideals, which is to appeal to the true characteristics of human beings, humanitarianism and humanity.All the efforts the United States is trying to do are to gradually complete a process from ape to man.Even in the case we just discussed, the trial in federal court was with a local jury.However, we can already see that their conscience is being gradually awakened. In the letters I have written to you intermittently during this year, a large part of what I have talked about about American slavery and later racial segregation is concentrated in an area of ​​the United States called Occam (William of Occam (or Ockham) , about 1300—approximately, that is, the south, especially the extreme south of the United States. The territory of the United States has gradually expanded in history. You already know that there were only thirteen states in the United States during the founding of the country. The gradual implementation of the abolition of slavery solved this problem relatively early. As for racial segregation, it only existed in the South of the United States. When the black civil rights movement in the South started, the United States was already a large federation composed of fifty states .Compared to this big map, the few fortresses of racial segregation are only a small part of it. But under the principle of full autonomy, the United States has nothing to do with them for a long time. This is also one of the important meanings of Martin Luther King .Because the southern black civil rights movement he led was exactly the change that most Americans expected and hoped for within the South. Therefore, Martin Luther King was able to quickly receive a lot of support from regions outside the South and the federal government, is very natural. The final settlement of the racial segregation problem in the South brought a sigh of relief to everyone.The South has since changed very rapidly.An important reason for this change is precisely that the two murders we mentioned in our last letter, as well as the exposure and accusations of the violent acts of extremist KKK elements from across the country, finally awakened the most basic humanity of most southern white people. KKK has never recovered in the United States since then, and its notoriety among the people is a proof.Racial prejudice is an extremely complex problem that cannot be solved overnight.However, with regard to racial violence and the inhumanity of the racial segregation policy that existed in the South, the white people in the South basically have a new consensus.The education of the civil rights law in schools has made the younger generation in the South have made substantial progress on this issue compared with their predecessors.These southern states, either earlier or later, finally began to truly enter the American family.In this way, the last domestic conflict in the United States, which was very tense and had substantial differences in the concept of founding the country, was peacefully resolved in this way. Its resolution process is the process of everyone's reflection and discussion on human nature. Therefore, the consensus reached on this basis is relatively solid.This is also the time when the system is gradually advancing, and the underlying understanding of the people is changing.This is the difference between the solution to the racial segregation problem in the American South and the solution to the Civil War.This is a very important step forward for this young country.Everyone learned something from it and was touched in one way or another. During this year, we touched so many wounds in American history.For Americans, these wounds are far from healed.But they have to touch their own wounds all the time, and continue to reflect in pain.For them, this is history. People like Tu Luwei put on the cloak of Marxism, often approved by the tsar, and this is the role of history.Americans believe that these historical lessons are not only a warning to them, but also to all mankind. Therefore, they are still looking for and publishing new historical materials and analysis to the world.At this time, the discussion of history is a positive process.American TV has a history channel, where their own historical lessons are repeated and discussed to the public over and over again, all the historical sins we may think of that can make Americans ashamed, from before the founding of the country to today, They are all included in the public discussion of TV special programs, and none of them are omitted. Sometimes, when we see historical discussions, there will also be a negative effect, that is, when two cultures are discussing, when one side is defending itself, it will tear open the other's historical wounds to prove its similar behavior today "Based".If this is the case on both sides, that is, both sides stretch out their hands and grab the other's long-standing historical tail. Since everyone is originally an ape, no one can escape.However, in this kind of irrational discussion, no one cares about the real historical lessons. There is no introspection here, but in the process of exposing the other party's historical shortcomings, they cover up their own shortcomings today. Therefore, if we find that in our view of history, we can always cleverly discover the evil deeds of others, and at the same time always correspond to our own glorious deeds, but we can rarely see ourselves in the mirror of history. When we once had that clear and ugly ape face like everyone else, or even that ape tail, we can probably wonder if we are too smart.Under such a view of history, it is difficult to make any substantial progress, because all possible historical lessons are rejected by us. Let's go back to the racial issue in the United States today.After the problems left over from history in the South are solved, will the racial problem in the United States be solved?Obviously not.You must remember that in my previous letters, when I introduced the racial issues in the northern United States and other regions, I emphasized the tendency to show meritorious deeds in the comments.There is a printed version of Huang Tifang in Guangxu of Qing Dynasty. In China in 1976, this is a racial issue in the modern sense, and it cannot be compared with the problem in the South.why?If we say that the racial problem in the South was based on the fact that the black and white races were separated from each other and did not communicate with each other, so they did not understand each other and lacked basic human sympathy. caused problems.This issue may not be as sharp, violent, and bloody as the racial issue of the year, but it is far more complicated. If a region, for some specific reasons, for some reasons, such as skin color, race, different opinions, or even blood, etc., it agrees to treat these same people unequally, or even impose Cruel persecution, this is a problem of the barbaric era in the process of human evolution.However, in a region where freedom and equality are guaranteed by law, different people live together. The contradictions, frictions, and even conflicts caused by their various differences are a problem in modern society that human beings may have to face forever. These states in the southern United States quickly integrated into the modern life of the United States after ending their history.Although compared with other regions, it still has many characteristics of its own, and is always different from the north, but it is no longer that special region that is very eye-catching in history.However, it, like other regions, has racial problems in the modern sense.Since most of the northern United States was not segregated, these problems have existed in those areas for nearly two hundred years.In different regions, in different eras, and under different immigrant combinations, the problems and conflicts that occurred are also different. Generally speaking, people with completely different backgrounds and cultures meet unexpectedly for their own life goals.They may be different in everything, not even the language.They can be so hard to get to know each other.But one of the other.It is believed that the origin of the world is the objective existence of "self" (original), among which, this is a free society, free to come and go.Nothing is planned.Naturally, there are times when we get along well. For example, if you want to eat, I will open a restaurant.But inevitably there will be times when you can't understand me, and I can't understand you either.There are more conflicts of interest, and even fights. For example, Cuba and the United States are not at odds, and Castro himself has lived in the United States for many years and is well aware of the nature of American culture.So for a while I saw the United States take in Cuban refugees.In a fit of anger, they simply acquiesced to people smuggling, including deliberately allowing some criminals to smuggle here.Due to the long-term slavery in Cuba's history, there are also many black people, and there are brown and black ones sent over.But they are Latino, which is completely different from the culture of African Americans.In addition to the crime rate of criminals, it also brings new racial problems. In the past two hundred years, the United States has been struggling with racial issues.Don't think that only minorities have the right to be dissatisfied. In fact, everyone has the right to be dissatisfied.Racial issues in the modern sense are full of complaints, and everyone has the right to complain.Why was the South so peaceful in the past?Because they are isolated and do not communicate with each other, the problem we are facing now does not exist.Therefore, the South was very proud at that time, at least most of their people (whites) were satisfied.And the blacks in the South were incapable of complaining under the circumstances at the time.This was the "Southern Order" that the South was proud of at that time, and it was indeed "well-ordered." The modern racial problem in the United States has always been the object of criticism.How does the United States itself view these accusations?To be honest, they seldom think about and care about these accusations because they can't care.They can only care about solving various new problems that arise.The problem is indeed insanely complicated. For example, the 1964 Civil Rights Act we mentioned, and a series of civil rights laws that came out in the next few years.Their positive significance you have seen in the letters I mentioned earlier.However, even this seems like a bill that is entirely historically progressive.It also followed and a lot of new problems followed. It is undeniable that the civil rights laws did expand the power of the federal government.It caused a lot of controversy.Civil rights laws not only governed public servants, but also, for the first time in American history, began to restrict the behavior of private companies and their employees.For example, not only are public servants free from racial discrimination, but employees of private companies are also free from racial discrimination.If you open a store, you can't say that a black man has come. I don't like this black man and I won't sell to him.It's not a moral issue in America, it's illegal.You must feel that this is the simplest truth, and there is nothing in dispute. However, it is actually not simple.Not to mention that in the United States, it is the first time that the federal government has interfered with the operation of private enterprises, and many people are worried: Will the government make further progress if it opens this gap?Such a principle quickly begins to expand, even on a matter-of-fact basis within the sphere of racial discrimination.Within a few years, there were regulations on selling and renting houses without racial discrimination.Before that, the federal government did not interfere with this "purely private behavior". Many communities stipulate that anyone who sells a house in the future cannot sell it to blacks or people of color. You can still see it on many old house deeds The contract with such provisions is printed, because if the people in a community do not want to be neighbors with black people, they can prevent black people from buying houses in this community.This was legal before the establishment of civil rights laws governing housing transactions. But now, this kind of 'buying and selling by color' is illegal and violates the federal civil rights law, so, from now on, if a person wants to sell the house he lives in, he can't say, come on a black man, I don't like black people I will not sell if I live in this community.Realtors who do this will be sued.As soon as we arrived in the United States, we read such news from the newspaper that the defendant's real estate agent was fined 5,000 U.S. dollars.Perhaps, you will still say that this is still a simple truth, and there is nothing to dispute. However, such a simple law has a direct relationship with the decline of the downtown areas of many large cities in the United States.On the issue of racial integration, the United States is a pioneer in the world, and New York is a pioneer in the United States.If you were to go to New York today, you would see a sight that would be jaw-dropping.Only a few blocks away from the most luxurious residential areas, there are a large stretch of "dead buildings" with doors and windows nailed to death and windows burned black.This is what happens when blacks enter and whites retreat.It's just that this situation in New York gradually began at the beginning of this century.After the 1960s, indeed, many areas where they lived and worked in peace and contentment were suddenly changed, the peaceful life of many families was broken, and many residents were even forced to move away from their former residences where they had lived for decades or even generations. why?It is because of the immigration of blacks or other minorities.Perhaps, you will say, this is due to the racial discrimination of those original residents.Who made them unwilling to be neighbors with ethnic minorities.This is their own problem.Of course some people have this problem, but not all of them.As this is still happening in various regions to this day.Therefore, we even have the opportunity to witness such a process with our own eyes. A friend of ours lives in a residential complex close to the university.It turned out that the main residents here were the faculty and staff of the predominantly white university.Gradually more and more people of all ethnicities and backgrounds moved in.So there began to be cars with deafening music driving past the door, noisy parties, weeds began to grow in front of some houses and no one took care of them, and the neighborhood became no longer beautiful and picturesque.The neighborhood is quite large, and the changes were not too noticeable at first.Gradually, however, it began to unsettle the original residents. In the United States, neighbor disputes are rare.One is because the living spaces basically do not overlap, the other is that they cannot freely enter the scope of other people’s private land, and the third is because if there is excessive disturbance such as noise in the middle of the night, it is generally not necessary to call the door, but to call the police.Therefore, the problem in this community is not neighbor disputes, nor color prejudice, but economic law. Because the overall image of the tranquil community, which was originally very tidy and full of flowers, had flaws, real estate prices began to fall.Once such a phenomenon emerges, there will be a domino effect.Although it is convenient to buy and sell houses and move here, it is a big event for the family after all.People are not willing to move easily.However, as long as the land price cannot be maintained and a certain number of people move, people will panic.Just like a stock sell-off, a vicious circle begins. The lower the land price is, the more people who can afford it and are willing to move in are more diverse, and there may even be safety concerns.As a result, the prospects of the community are even more worrisome, and the original residents will flee faster.Our friends haven't moved out yet, but they are seriously considering finding a new house. In your opinion, a very simple provision related to housing transactions in the civil rights law, which seems to make sense, has changed many residential areas in the United States, and it has also affected the lives of many people.And the vast majority of these people are not racists.These ordinary Americans are paying the price for an ideal of equality, respect for the liberties of the less privileged, and respect for the citizenship rights of every individual, for a more humane society.This is just one example of the countless costs they paid.Of course, they have complaints, but civil rights laws have become the consensus of the majority.That is to say, although people sometimes complain about the loss and injury suffered, almost no one in the United States today proposes to overturn this civil rights law.This is the progress of this country. This bill, as I said earlier, has changed the appearance of large cities in the United States, and even the downtowns of small and medium-sized cities.Many downtown neighborhoods have changed beyond recognition.Minorities, mainly blacks, have become the majority of residents there.As a result, many large cities in the United States have had or are currently having black mayors because the majority of mayoral voters are black. What is "racial discrimination"?In English it means "racially differentiated", and sometimes this refers not only to actions but also to "racially differentiated" in opinion.That is, when you meet a person, your opinion of him is not based on his personal behavior, but on his racial affiliation or skin color.For example, when I was in China, I heard many people say that Americans are actually very racist.No one realizes that this sentence itself is the most typical racial discrimination. I don't know if you have noticed that Americans have very high requirements for the prohibition of discrimination.Because it means that no discrimination is allowed.Nowadays, you rarely hear the new generation of American young people use sentence patterns like "how are black people" or "how are Asians", because this sentence pattern tends to stereotype a certain race and is suspected of racial discrimination .In contrast, we often use this sentence pattern, because in our own culture, there has never been such a high requirement.We are used to "treating differently".We have also been used to this logic: if young people in the city go to live in the countryside, this is called a "revolutionary" behavior.If a young man in the countryside tries to live in the city, this is a "blind flow".Maybe it was an act of "sabotaging the revolution".Regarding such logic, we never thought that it would fall into the category of "discrimination". However, a conceptually high requirement of prohibiting discrimination is based on such a place where "races are vastly different, cultures are vastly different, and life is closely connected". How can we not "racially discriminate" in fact?You are already familiar with the American way of thinking, that is, to solve it through legislation, that is to say, to advance the system.The point of civil rights law is to link discrimination based on race with the violation of a person's civil rights.Covering all government agencies and private companies, there must be no acts of racial discrimination and language violations.Its authority, like all laws in the United States, is backed there by the precedent of the courts.If real estate developers would definitely be punished as long as they traded based on their skin color, over time, the number of businessmen who continue to do so with a fluke mentality will obviously be greatly reduced. For example, in the recent case of Texaco, a major oil company in the United States, its black employees jointly sued the company for unequal promotion and racial discrimination.At first, the company denied it.However, in the end, a senior executive handed over to the court his privately recorded recording, which showed that at the meeting of the company's senior executives, there was a discussion on how to destroy the documents that the black plaintiff requested from one party to the lawsuit.Only eleven days after the recording was released, the oil company, which had resisted the lawsuit for two years, immediately announced a compromise.Because they know that this recording is not direct evidence of "unfair promotion".However, the recording is enough to make them certain to lose in future lawsuits.Therefore, they voluntarily requested an out-of-court settlement and paid a fine of 176 million US dollars to compensate the loss of the company's 1,400 black employees. Such a boundary here is very clear, that is, as an individual, if you have racial prejudice, it is not against the law. This is freedom of thought.If you make general racist remarks, it is not illegal, because this is freedom of speech.But if you point at a specific person and say racially offensive things to him specifically, that's illegal.Because it's language aggression.If you are a government agency or a private enterprise, then your language, behavior, and everything related to racial issues must be cautious, cautious and cautious, because this may violate federal civil rights laws. This is a country ruled by law.Therefore, the passage and implementation of the Civil Rights Law cannot fail to drastically change the original status quo on the issue of "racial discrimination".Because the original moral issue has now become a legal issue. An act that was not regulated by the law and judged morally has now become an illegal act with clear legal punishment provisions, and according to the rules here, violations must be investigated.Such a situation has indeed greatly restricted human behavior, especially racially offensive language and behavior.The social outlook and people's thinking and habits have also changed accordingly. What has really changed is people's perceptions.Although there were a lot of disputes in the passage of the following civil rights laws, compared with the obstacles encountered in the 1964 civil rights law, they are no longer comparable.If you're still skeptical about the substantial, popular-based progress America has made on race, look no further than the so-called affirmative action. "Affirmative Action" was mentioned a few years ago when I wrote to you about the "Bill of Rights".The so-called "Affirmative Rights Act" is not a separate bill, but part of it comes from a series of bills with the same nature in a series of bills after the 1964 Federal Civil Rights Act.It has since been supplemented by a series of Supreme Court precedents, so that the "Affirmative Action" also includes some precedents that have been cited as legal basis. Strictly speaking, "Affirmative Action" is just a name for these laws in the United States.This translation is also problematic.I have seen some scholars translate it into "affirmative action", but over the years, "affirmative action" has become a fixed name in the Chinese society here, so I will call it that way first. As you already know, federal laws are passed through the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government, the House and Senate.Each of these councilors was directly elected by the people in their own area, and none of them got the status of councilor without going through five trials and defeating six generals and desperately campaigning.Their only basis is public opinion.So the U.S. Congress may have passed some unusual bills in hindsight, precisely because the public knew this at that time.It will not pass a bill that has no basis in popular opinion.That's why "affirmative action" has such an unusual meaning for Americans. This is not a legal norm for future American society, but a formal compensation for the harm suffered by vulnerable groups in American society in the past.That is to say, it is not to announce that everyone will not be discriminated against and compete fairly from now on, but that the powerful groups in this society agree that they must cut out their own interests in the future and give them to the disadvantaged groups.Not only is it a compensation for them, it is also at the starting line of fierce free competition, allowing disadvantaged groups to run for a while before the start of the competition. If the powerful groups here are not sincerely willing to do so, there are enough reasons for the "affirmative action" not to pass.First, the bill is "unequal".Second, it substantially interferes with a part of the freedom of private enterprise, the subject of a free economic state.This kind of interference is different from other provisions of the civil rights law, because those provisions are interferences based on the principle of equality, that is, you must treat every customer and employee of yours equally.And "affirmative action" is an intervention based on the principle of inequality.It calls for prioritizing care for vulnerable groups. It has almost a thousand reasons not to pass.既然这是一个以私营经济为主体的国家，企业家就有极大的发言权，用我们所习惯的话来说，就是这是一个资本主义社会，当道的资本家如何能够同意这样一种对他们的干涉。这当然是一条重要的理由。更为广泛的理由，是这条法案有可能影响到这个社会的强势群体的每一个家庭，每一个人的最基本利益。 因为，对于这里的普通民众来说，人生最基本的经历，影响一生幸福最重要的因素，就是两件大事，就学和就业。而“平权法案”涵盖了这一切。它规定公立大学在招生的时候，必须招收规定比例的少数族裔，由于高中以前是全民免费义务教育，所以这个规定从高等教育开始。它也规定，每个政府机构和一定规模的私营企业，必须雇佣一定比例的少数族裔。也就是说，任何一个白人的孩子，都可能在考试分数在高于一个黑人孩子的时候，遭到拒绝。而那个考分相对较低的黑人孩子，反倒可能被录取。 就业的情况也是一样。美国是一个始终有失业率的国家。不论是哪一个层次的工作，都存在激烈的竞争。在“平权法案”之下，不仅能力相同时可能是黑人优先，就是白人能力高于黑人，依然可能是黑人取得工作而白人败下阵来。“平权法案”还包括了政府机构发包的工程和采购。例如在一些公共设施工程的招标中，少数族裔承包商会得到优先照顾。 在美国疲于应付的大量种族矛盾中，少数族裔几乎始终是不满意的，也很少有人看到美国社会所作出的这种努力，因为，旧的问题尚未完全解决，新的种族问题还在层出不穷。 最近，终于有一个叫做凯斯.李奇堡的美国黑人记者，写了一本名为“走出美国”的书。谈了他的很不寻常的感想。 凯斯.李奇堡是华盛顿邮报的非洲分部主任。他走遍了非洲，亲历了非洲的同肤色但是不同种族的黑人之间的种族歧视和种族灭绝性的杀戳。例如胡图族对于图西族的屠杀，仅在三个月不到的时间里，就杀了一百万。比在三年半里屠杀了一百万人的红色高棉统治下的柬埔寨，远为恐怖。他也因此发现美国今天的黑人民权组织的一些领袖的局限。他们似乎也是只认肤色。因为这些美国黑人领袖在访问非洲的时候，和当地的黑人独裁者握手言欢，共同指责当时的南非白人统治。可是，根据他的实地考查，就人权状况而言，大多数黑人统治的非洲国家，状况要比当时白人统治的南非糟糕得多。当他再回到美国，看到美国黑人关注点，是在争取更多的优先上大学的名额，只觉得恍如隔世。经过一个“走出美国”之后的对照，他才对美国在种族问题上的推进，有了深切的理解。 美国的少数族裔，也是一个远比其它国家复杂的问题。一方面，它的少数族裔的比例特别高。从每一个大分类计，如，黑人，拉丁裔，亚裔等，每一个少数族裔的比例看上去并不高，可是，假如把几个大分类少数族裔加在一起的话，比例就相当可观。在前三年的统计中，这三大类少数族裔的总和，在人口比例中达到近四分之一。这可是一个相当大的“少数”。 美国还有它特殊的移民问题。移民问题经常和少数族裔问题搅在一起的原因，是移民进入美国的有色人种的比例大大高于白人。你千万不要看到一个黑人就以为他是当年的奴隶后代，我有几个黑人朋友，都是在深谈了以后，才知道他们来的时间和我差不多，只是来自当年的非洲英属殖民地，在语言上占了不少便宜。这么一来，就是在照顾少数族裔的“平权法案”里，也涵盖了每年以百万计的来自外国的新移民。而世世代代在这里已经生活很久，以他们的税金积累了公共财富的一部分“主体美国人”，却要在就学就业这样重大的问题上，承受一个不平等的待遇。 就象我在前面所提到的。问题不在于应不应该有这样的法案，问题在于只要这个社会的大多数人对人道主义，对自己的心灵是否变得美好是不在乎的，那么，他们有一千条理由不这样做。在这个国家，他们习惯了自己作主。如果他们拒绝去做，谁也没有办法。但是，这个称之为“平权法案”的，一系列对弱势族裔的赔偿性优待条款，就这样逐渐被一个白人为主体的国家通过了。至今已经实行了三十年。许许多多象我们一样的新移民，都因此受惠。在平权法案后来通过的一些条款里，优先照顾的对象还包含了残疾人，妇女，病患者，等等一系列社会弱势群体。使得“平权法案”有了更高一层次的意义。 我想，“平权法案”的确立，在美国几乎是必然的。假如你还记得的话，在美国建国时期，它的思想主流，已经在寻求自己的自由平等地位的时候，在为黑人奴隶这样一个当时毫无还手能力的弱势团体寻求公道。已经由奴隶主以及在当时有合法蓄奴权的白人社会，自行提出废奴，并且在相当广泛的地区，放弃自身利益完成这样一个从非人道到人道的转变，“平权法案”只是这种精神两百年来逐渐在在民众中的扩散和传播的一个结果而已。 可是，我仍然要重申，基于美国的特殊状态，它今天依然存在着极为复杂的种族问题。你想，仅仅在纽约市的皇后区中，总人口为八万八千多的艾姆赫斯特小区，在过去五年，就迁入了一万三千名来自123个国家的新移民。这是任何一个没有同样情况的国家，都难以想象的“美国常态”。而“种族歧视”也是任何种族的人在美国生活中最可能发出的抱怨之一。所以，美国社会迄今以来能够做的，就是以最大的努力，以立法的形式，保护每一个人的公民权不受侵犯，给弱势团体以帮助。 尽管在可以看到的相当长的时期里，它确实还没有能力解决如此缤纷陈杂，千奇百怪的人种与文化，由于事实差异而带来的种族问题，但是，相比在美国历史上曾经出现过的一些具有对少数族裔歧视的法案，不仅对于美国本身，一个个进步的脚印十分清晰，而且对于少数族裔来说，今天所受到的帮助和支撑也是实质性的。只能说，种族问题在美国是层出不穷的，种族歧视的抱怨是不绝于耳的，但发生的种族问题进入侵犯民权的范围，法律的干预也是行之有效的。 在美国，一方面，在观念的逐步进步过程中，自然还有不少人，是没有接受多元文化的概念，是歧视异族的。这种情况就是我们自己也会碰到。另一方面，少数族裔也是敏感的，很难摆脱“种族歧视”情结，因为他们是弱者。有时候，就是单纯的“歧视”的问题也不单纯。 我记得我们自己在刚来这里不久的时候，就遇上了这么一件事。我们当时想“看看美国”，就开始自己开车“横跨”，在东西海岸之间依两条不同路线，打了个来回。就在游到大峡谷的时候，已是日落时分。于是，就在旅游区内找店住下。第二天一早，我们就在这个旅馆的餐厅吃早饭。当我拿着信用卡去付账，并且提到小费的时候，账台上的服务员告诉我，小费已经由他们事先开在帐单上了。我这时才发现，帐单上有百分之十五的“服务费”。 当时，我们在美国的时间还不久，好象觉得什么地方有点不对，可还是稀里糊涂地就接下收据离开了。出门之前我还扫了一眼别人的餐桌，看到一对白人夫妇的桌子上，明明白白放着一些显然是小费的现金。直到离开大峡谷已经很远，在单调的长途行车路上，这件事情才渐渐又冒了出来。我突然意识到，不对！这家伙是怕我不付小费，给预扣了！ 在美国，上餐厅一般都给百分之十五小费，也有给得高一些的。可是，原则上来说，小费是自愿的，给多少更是根据服务的质量来的。因此，预扣小费在美国是非常不礼貌的做法。想到别人并没有被预扣，“区别对待”就是“歧视”的新学概念顿时涌上心头。显然这不仅是歧视，而且还是“种族歧视”。这使我们相当不舒服。回家以后，我把这件事告诉我们的好朋友迈克。他听了以后十分生气。说这确实是对你们很大的冒犯。事情就这样过去了。 隔了一段时间，有一次，去一家中餐馆吃饭。在结帐时，看到一个拉丁裔的顾客正在质问账台，为什么在他的帐单上预扣小费。我们看着这个愤怒的拉丁裔顾客，想想自己的遭遇，觉得这真是一个“循环歧视”，令人啼笑皆非。 可是，再静心想想，两个餐厅的“歧视”性做法，都不是出于“知道你肯定会付小费，而存心做出一个歧视的姿态侮辱你”。而是他就是担心：不预扣的话就根本拿不到小费。在这里，小费是餐厅服务员的主要收入，他不愿意损失这笔钱。那么，他为什么“种族歧视”，以“种族”为依据这样做呢？事实他是依据经验来的。 大峡谷是接近西海岸的著名旅游区，来访的国外游客很多。大量来自亚洲的旅客在自己国内根本没有付小费的规矩，如果没有人关照，当然就想不到要付。这样不付小费的亚洲旅客一多，“区别对待”，也就是“歧视”自然就出来了。 那个中餐馆的情况也是这样。在那个大城市，大量拉丁裔的非法移民，生活处于很不稳定的状态，他们之中有一些人，吃完一看帐单嫌贵，就免了小费了。只要遇上几个都是拉丁裔的，“区别对待”自然就出来了。 虽说，站在哪一面，都是有一定的道理。餐厅也许有它形成自己看法的道理，可是，事实上的“种族偏见”因此形成，而且很难再改变。此后导致的“种族歧视”，“区别对待”的行为，又事实上伤害了一个无辜的少数族裔顾客的感情。受人“歧视”的滋味是很不好的。几次这样的经历之后，又形成了这个少数族裔对外界的“种族偏见”。例如，这名拉丁裔顾客假如在中餐馆屡屡被预收小费之后，就会有“中国人有种族歧视”的结论。因为他不能理解中餐馆的理由，作为这名顾客本人，也许他和我们一样，从来都不在小费上赖帐，他只觉得是“无缘无故”地受到了不公平的待遇。 刨去“真实的歧视”，少数族裔所感受到的“歧视”也可能会多于事实发生的“歧视”。因为少数族裔既然是少数，当然相对处于弱势，而弱者的心态往往是敏感的，脆弱的。 例如一个升迁问题，其实原因非常复杂。有纯粹由于上司是种族主义者的，有移民雇员本身在语言和其他方面，还不象其技术性业务那么杰出的，也有白人上司与某一个移民雇员就是性格上合不来，格格不入的。就象同种族的上司和雇员之间，也会由于万千种原因，影响上司对于雇员的升迁考虑。在不同族裔之间，只是又增加了一个种族因素而已。但是，在美国，只要上司和雇员不属于同一个族裔，而雇员又对升迁不满的话，雇员几乎立即就会把原因落实到“种族歧视”上。 由于现代种族问题的起因是差异，因此，确实难以避免问题不断发生。因为差异事实存在。这样，“不歧视”就是要求大家“同等对待”一个“不同的”（有差异）的对象。The difficulty can be imagined. 更何况，在现代意义的种族问题中的少数族裔，面貌实际上早已不是被压迫的“小媳妇”的形象。即使人数只占美国总人口百分之三点一的亚裔，在自己的报纸上经常讨论的一个重大主题之一，也是研究要如何“打入”美国主流社会。这是极为正常的。因为，尽管在自己的文化里，看到“老外”，只有“外宾”的联想。即使一些在中国生活了将近一辈子，几乎把自己的整个生命都献给中国人的事业的外国人，在我们的眼睛里，依然难脱“宾客”的外衣，难以当作“自家人”。但是，今天我们来到美国，当家作主的文化几乎是在一夜之间就接受下来。而且，考虑的不是融入这个平常社会，而是理所当然地就要“打入”其主流。不仅要“打入”主流社会，还要“打入”政治决策，“打入”白宫。甚至有的同胞在试图“打入”的时候用了一些非法手段，大家都比较容易抱以谅解的态度。好象既然尔等势单力薄，不“略施小技”，又何以“打得进去”。 移民对本土美国居民，或者说，有色人种对白人的恶性刑事案件，几乎可以说天天都有。美国人最喜爱的黑人大明星考斯比的独子，就被一个来美国不久的乌克兰移民抢劫杀害。因此震动全美。我告诉过你，亚裔犯罪集团也已经升格为联邦调查局的第二大打击对象，也是罪行累累，可是今天美国社会的基本民众，已经完全习惯把罪犯和他所属的族裔彻底分开。这固然和美国文化中的强调个人，也强调每个人对自己的行为负责有关。同时，这和两百年来美国民众在种族问题认识上的实质进步，也是密不可分的。 这种进步也从这样一个侧面反应出来。成千上万的美国儿童是从动画片中接受最初的教育的。迪斯尼公司每年推出的一个动画巨片，更是具有难以估量的影响。从我们来到美国以后，看到的几乎全部是热情赞扬世界上各种文化的动画大片。“狮子王”那充满原始生命力的，色彩浓烈的非洲文化，不仅在动画里大放异彩，而且在此后改编的，获得六项东尼奖的音乐剧中，被推到极致。不仅“风中奇缘”中的印地安女孩披着一头黑色的长发成为孩子们喜爱的主角，就连古老的中国传说中刚柔兼备的花木兰，也成了美国孩子最心爱的动画人物之一。新一代的美国人就在这样的基本教育下，习惯了一个多元文化的环境。 从娱乐业的影响来说，与此相对应的，就是美国南方历史上的大量种族迫害的真实案例被拍成电影。从这些电影里，今天南方的孩子可以真切地了解，在他们生活的土地上，曾经发生过一些什么。这些电影的主题都是呼唤人性。在这些电影的结尾，都有一些字幕，介绍电影故事后面的历史事实。提醒人们这一切并非虚构。 这是一个历史非常短的年轻国家。这也是一个具有反省功能的国家。这里的历史不是过眼烟云。这也是美国最根本的活力来源之一，因为毕竟反省是进步的前提。 要聊的话实在太多，得留到下一封信再写了。 wish it is good! Linda