Dear Editor,
Re: “Puzzled by reverse racism claim in Richmond,” Letters, Online, June 11.
Alvin Lee’s superficial response to my letter about bigotry, racism, and the use of race-related epithets conveniently ignores the issue that is most relevant to any discussion about these specific issues - what is the intent behind the use of certain race-related words irrespective of any distracting and deflecting debate about what the definition of a term is or should be.
Is Mr. Lee suggesting that the term “Gwailo” is directed at people in a respectful, complementary way - that the person using the term is using it in a polite way as a demonstration of respect and polite regard?
Both logic and practical experience undermine the validity of any such claim. Even if the term is defined in a relatively contemporary way as being “foreigner” as opposed to “white devil”, I see nothing but arrogance, bigotry, racism, and deep-seated ethnocentricity inherent in the comment when someone who probably wasn’t born in Canada calls me a foreigner, given that my family has been in this country since 1649. Quite laughable, really.
In ignoring the basic issues I outlined in my letter, Mr. Lee has helped to make my point about the fact that we will never be able to transcend the negative aspects of race and ethnicity-based differences and conflicts as long as we cannot engage in well-reasoned, entirely objective, and respectful conversations and debates about important issues that affect everyone.
And honesty, with oneself and with others, is one of the keys to breaking down the walls that some people want to maintain between us.
Ray Arnold
