Recently, the idea of race and racism has reentered the public forum. Fuzzy Zoeller’ s comments, as well as the incident involving the police in Des Moines, have again forced Americans, and more specifically, Iowans to reexamine what the nature of racism is and how it affects their environment. Nothing about this dialogue is new; since Iowa State has had students, black and white, they have labored to come to a better understanding. White students have questions for black classmates, and black students have the same questions for white students. However, this sort of dialogue has failed for decades. In such conversations, it is rare that any level of mutual understanding or agreement to disagree is ever reached. In many cases, the strict division of races that characterizes the groups of inquiry remain, and in reality are intensified mainly because the apparent search for understanding is actually a debate in which each critical perspective is determined to prove the other wrong.

In most scenarios involving discourse concerning race, whether it be individuals or groups, there exists two very distinct positions, determined strictly by race. Far beyond simple notions of subconscious bigotry, or the Black Experience, this quandary is rooted in fundamental existence and expectation. The manner in which an individual views the universe around them is largely determined by experience and orientation. Opinion and critical perspective act upon one another with little outside influence. Of course education is a factor, however, the role of both the formal and informal classroom is generally one of support, not change.

Example is the best illustrator of how vastly different the orientation of the white student is from that of the black student. The lives of each student are, matter of fact, quite the same. They involve many of the same trials and tribulations. As with most citizens, there exists a large amount of commonality. However, there also exists a very real difference in perspective that is rarely visible unless an issue of race, or racism, is involved. For practical purposes, let us examine Fuzzy Zoeller’s comment about Tiger Woods. Upon being asked some questions about Tiger Woods, Zoeller responded with some spontaneous comments involving chicken and collared greens. During this reply, Zoeller also referred to Woods as a “boy”.

Zoeller’s comments were met with an across the board cry of inappropriateness. Individuals seem to agree that what he said was not only insulting, but bad for the sport of golf. However, the severity of Zoeller’s remarks are still largely a matter of debate. Many of his counterparts on the tour were quick to attribute the entire incident to Zoeller’s over-the-top sense of humor. K-Mart reacted by dissolving its long-time relationship with the golfer, and Tiger Woods remained silent. The reaction in the white community and the black community could even be characterized as typical.

It is safe to say that black individuals saw the entire incident as indicative of the same racism that has existed in the United States since its creation, while many white individuals would attribute the unfortunate episode to a lone person with poor taste and a small mind. These differences in opinion again return to a difference in orientation to life. Black people carry an inherent expectation of racism. This is not to say that all black people assume all white people are racist.

But black people do recognize that many individuals still believe there is a distinction that exists between the races. A natural one that can be used to justify much of what happens in America today. For most black people, Fuzzy Zoeller is not a lone individual who feels a certain way or told a joke that was in poor taste, he is an individual who is part of a collective. One guy in a sea of guys who feel just as he does.

There is, of course, no blanket white response or black response in matters such as this. However, it is fair to say that the very real orientation of a person has much to do with how they feel about a given subject. The world is systematic to many black people. One incident of racism is not isolated, it is indicative. This is not to say white people do not see racism or aren’t to aware of it, quite the contrary.

The usual response, however, is to treat it as something that happened once. Many times black people and white people see the same thing, they simply file it differently in their mental rolodex.

For many black people, the struggle for civil rights has not ended. Naturally there have been many strides made, but the existence of true equality is not something they see as a reality. When comments like Zoeller’s are made, many blacks feel there is much more at stake than a simple insult.

Allowing comments such as Zoeller’s to remain unchallenged perpetuates a kind of thinking, a mindset, that fosters racism and exclusion. Racism can be seen as either a belief or a practice. To many blacks it is a belief, which is far more dangerous than a practice.

The paramount goal involving discourse must be the implementation of protocol to circumvent the circle that is regularly passed as productive dialogue amongst the races. Too often the offense that may be taken from a particular remark or position becomes that focal point during a conversation, drawing energy away from true understanding. Many times, individuals also approach the symbolic table with the belief that the person they are going to dialogue with is fundamentally, or inherently, wrong.

In either case, this pre-dialogue dismissal of the other’s position is completely counterproductive. Rarely will an individual be successful if they enter a conversation with the goal of “straightening out” another person’s views. However, this is the usual manner in which the races address issues in an informal setting.

To engage in productive dialogue on issues of race, there must be a fundamental recognition that each individual is bringing to the table of discourse valuable information. Both parties must engage one another not as adversaries but as teachers. Viewing oneself and one’s partner as right or wrong is positionary. The discourse of race should be expository.

Zuri Jerdon is a senior in English from Cincinnati, Ohio.