I was writing up a response and then it disappeared as I was hitting the return button to skip a space. Anyhoo…what I was going to say briefly.

1. I don’t think you can be neutral about politics.

2. I think one can be complicit in “white politics” or “racial politicking” without knowing it. In other words, one group thinks, “Why wouldn’t they want that delivered that way?” really may not be what that group wants nor want it delivered that way.

3. Jeff said:

“No, I don't think my whiteness affects my politics. Libertarian government is as fair as it gets. That's why it has no chance of winning. ALL governments are evil -- even those in predominantly BLACK countries. Because they ABUSE power instead of seeking maximal justice.”

I think that is like saying that library systems are evil because they take on a life of their own and serve to exist for themselves rather than their patrons. If there is abuse of something then that means there is a point at which there is no abuse which means it is a good created thing. That’s the problem I have with Greg’s ideas on politics.

Let me say this. Injustice happens as in, “Shit happens.” It isn’t only the select few blacks or minorities where injustice takes place. This is why we should be concerned with a “justice for all.” Either way, there is a long, deep and complex history of racism in the U.S. and there have been ways which have been used to overcome it that are not necessarily the best ways for it to be overcome because those ways have produced other injustices. And in good ole principled pluralistic fashion, though it is not to say that governments should go soft on racism, racism must be opposed by many different means appropriate to and built on respect for the diversity of institutions and relationships all people have in our society. In other words, anti-discrimination efforts SHOULD be incorporated into the LARGER QUEST for PUBLIC JUSTICE in a complex, differentiated society. So for me the question goes deeper than racial issues.