PERSPECTIVES ON THE SIMPSON TRIAL : A Dare to Face Our Dark Side : Bad as Fuhrman is, be honest--isn’t there a touch of prejudice in each of us? What matters is how we respond.
Mark Fuhrman is certainly the villain of the moment, a taut and true champion of our darker leanings, affording us a splendidly dual opportunity, the chance not only to recoil but also to reflect. So, much as I’ve watched his downfall with glee, I’m increasingly faced with a gnawing feeling and some serious questions have begun to emerge: Is my bristling righteousness just a bit facile? Do I merit this lofty vantage point from which I judge? Is the contrast between me and the detective as impenetrably diametric as I’d like to think?
The human mind is a well-guarded fortress; its yielding of secrets is stubborn and slow. We are often least able to fathom ourselves, so here’s my best shot at the truth. When it comes to our actions, and I include speech, the gap between me and Fuhrman is cosmic--a difference, virtually, of black and white. But when it comes to our thoughts--those meteorites that pulse through our psychic skies--the contrast between us is more a matter of opposite shades of gray. Lest you jump to the wrong conclusion, let me explain.
Consider each of the following groups: Whites. Blacks. Jews. Christians. Koreans. Mexicans. Gays. Straights. Now ask yourself this: As each particular group was mentioned, did your mind offer up any images? Any stereotyped or preconceived notions? Were any of these notions negative? If so, does that make you a racist or a bigot?
No, not in my view; it makes you human. I’m quite sure that from the ugly underbelly of our guarded selves we could all contribute our fair share of filth. I make snap judgments about people I encounter all day long, based on the revolving criterion of the moment: race, gender, height, weight, sexual preference, choice of clothes. My mind is a tireless judgment machine. The only redeeming factor in all this is that I endeavor not to take these readings too seriously, and that after the initial, unexamined response, I allow for a real, individual encounter. That willingness to go beyond the preconceived notion is what keeps bigotry at bay. The question is not whether we harbor foul notions; the question is what we do with them.
As a society, what we do with prejudice is attempt to eradicate its vicious results. We create policies, programs, new positions, new schools. Vital though this macro approach may be, it is, regrettably, limited in scope. The locus of bias remains the individual, whose heart is immune to the law of the land. To change that heart requires great courage, for we cannot transcend what we will not acknowledge, we cannot cure what we will not confront. Denial alone surely won’t do the trick, hence the utter folly of political correctness. Try telling yourself, “don’t think of pink elephants,” and see just how quickly they come stomping by. Our pious investment in disowning our darkness is a counterproductive, childish charade.
None of this, of course, excuses Mark Fuhrman. He’s a racist, a liar, a rogue, a disgrace. His actions may make him a criminal, too. But from my mind’s cacophony of condemnation, a weak but insistent voice whispers: Beware the impulse toward righteous wrath. Behold, the rose-colored mirror speaks.
