Application: Sonia Sotomayor

Just a quick application of rhetorical logic to the discussion of Sonia Sotomayor's nomination for the supreme court.
Remember, I judge statements not by the the dichotomy of true or false, but by accurate or inaccurate, precise or imprecise, and if an opinion, then reasonable or unreasonable, valid or invalid. This discussion is not about Judge Sotomayor's nomination per se, her skill as a judge, or even her specific views and whether they are right or wrong, but just an academic exercise on how to apply rhetorical logic to the discussion.

Some complain that she is a racist, their evidence is that she made the following comment during a speech at a UC Berkeley lecture on cultural diversity:
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
Is this a racist statement? Does this make her a racist?

Sure, this is a racist statement, but it doesn't make her a racist. But remember, the meanings of words is only opinion. Words like "racist" carry connotations far beyond their dictionary meaning. I use Racism to mean a belief that people of a certain race are superior or inferior, because of their race. Certainly claiming that a Latina would make a better conclusion about certain court cases is racist. But it's also merely an opinion that is reasonable. Not that I would necessarily agree with it, but it is a reasonable conclusion for a contemporary American to make. Reasonable people can understand how living a certain life, with certain experiences, would allow a better understanding of certain situations than not having those experiences. A coach who has played the game before would be a better judge of talent than a coach who hadn' played the game. It is not fair to judge parents as good or bad unless you have been a parent. This idea is behind the concept of having a jury of peers. You want fellow citizens, people who live in your neighborhood and put up with what you put up with to be your judges. Of course there are limits. We don't want serial murderers to be judged only by other serial murderers. But usually, having similar experiences to another person would allow someone to be more fair towards that person, to ascertain what were truly good or bad attributes versus simply circumstantial misfortunes.

In contemporary America, it is reasonable to assume that race correlates with life experiences. This is becoming less and less so, but it still is above randomness. There are some Latina's who have lived a life of privilege, some who would relate to the wealthy corporation more, but in general wouldn't a Latina relate more to the immigrant or early generation life?

A good question I ask myself: If I met Judge Sotomayor at a party, would I come away with the impression of her being a "wise Latina woman" or "an experienced judge." Would I worry more or less if I had to argue a speeding ticket in front of her? Because she is a judge should she be considered "the Man?" Ah, but I digress.

So, her statement seems reasonable, albeit racist. Certainly not out of bounds during a lecture on cultural diversity. I haven't seen her whole speech, but we must also judge statements within context. I can imagine such a statement used to promote the thesis that we should have cultural, ethnic, racial, economic, etc. diversity among judicial appointments would be apropos. Making such a mildly racist statement during a conference on diversity is actually more accurate, one would want such statements to be made, to be considered, to be debated.

Let me analyze a counter point that some people make. They emphasize that she said "hope" and reason that this made the statement a "conditional" (whatever that means) and therefore not a true reflection of her thoughts. This seems specious. The phrase "I would hope that ..." is really a colloquialism about presumption, as in "I would hope a mother loves her child" or "I would hope that the pilot is not high on drugs." It is a statement of opinion so strong that its counter would be startling. I would hate for this to be used to mince her words, I think it is quite clear that she means that "Certainly a Latina woman could use her life experience to understand certain situations more than the typical white male."

So, does making a racist statement make one a racist? We've heard the saying "If you lie then you are a liar." I disagree. Saying racist statements, having some racist opinions, are part of normal life in race-conscious modern America. But we should reserve the word "racist" as applied to a person or a philosophy for those most egregious manifestations of the idea. There are people who are truly "racist", who belief that racial distinctions are necessarily important, who belief that various races should be oppressed or exploited for the benefit of other races. If we want to call her a racist to make the point that even well-educated, successful, ethical people can have racist opinions and need to be careful about their prejudices, then I would perhaps agree and could consider such a statement to be accurate. But if we want to call her a racist in the hope of smearing her reputation, then I would call that same statement inaccurate. When considering a supreme court nomination, we should avoid such ambiguous statements. If one is concerned that her statement is an example of her proclivity to judge not based on law, but based on some internal set of sympathies, then the rhetoric should be tempered toward away from inflammatory language that simply transfers the argument into semantics about what the word "racist" means. Frankly, it lowers the credibility of those making such arguments.