Ending Racism through Random Allocation

I came across this article I haven’t been able to unpack yet.  It seems to tap into one of the arguments promoting transracial adoption, and I thought it would be a great topic for discussion here.  transracial adoptees, your thoughts?

If babies were randomly allocated to families would racism end?

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Ending Racism through Random Allocation

  1. An adoptee unpacked this fairly well –https://snarkurchin.wordpress.com/2016/03/05/whiskey-tango-foxtrot/

  2. I know some may not like my post. However I think promoting transracial adoptions slowly over time kills the culture the child was born in. There is a higher chance of miscegenation when the child grows up into an adult. Due to the loss of his/her original people and roots to where he/she comes from. When we understand that much of the world has been colonized, speaking about the Americas, through a system of racial hierarchy all of what I previously said makes sense. Transracial adoptions especially for Natives full blood and mix blood is genetic genocide. It is the continuance of colonization. For example. I was born in Colombia. One of the main reasons why the government and institutions don’t allow so much in country adoptions is they get little money processing the child to a Colombian family rather then a wealthy foreign family whom typically are Caucasian. The Colombian inter-country adoption system has been caught in so many scandals as officials, judges, notaries, lawyers, secretaries, etc. have been arrested for forging/falsifying birth documents and legal documents. When intercountry adoptions end the means for corruptness ends with it.

  3. Adam Perman once claimed that the realocation of chidlren around the world–er, I mean international adoption, could stop war. After all, how could you hate the parents of your child. Seriously.

  4. I was a transracial adoptee. The original premise is correct. It does sort of stop racism, in that your family is more likely not to be racist. However, adopting a non white kid into a white community does not stop racism. (Trust me; I know.) Also, I feel sure that people would just hunt down their bio kids. It’s natural to seek out people like yourself. I’ve been a witness to that all my life.

    And finally, we aren’t your little thought experiment. We’re, like… actual humans.

  5. Sadly, American culture (global cosmopolitan culture) stops at the façade of racism to build arguments about the issue. I mean to say, the implication is that racism is an “individual act”, of one’s agency, and is simply a matter of opinion (or changing it). To ignore the structural aspect of how racism infects every aspect of every exchange in our given economic/political system is, in and of itself, criminal. And so white parents adopting children of color does not prove that they are “not racists”. The act of adoption in this scenario in and of itself is a racist act, and is driven by unspoken racist incentives. We’ve spoken about this elsewhere and at long length, so I won’t belabor it. Adoption Criminals like Mr. Pertman (et. al.) frame the argument as being based on family creation, which I still maintain is not the primary driving force of adoption, so I won’t argue along those lines. The very fact that someone in Ethiopia can’t go to France and adopt a white baby spells out the (race/class–based) power differential in play. Period. Speaking for myself, I no longer want to argue with plantation owners what they think about slavery. We know very well how functional it is to their well-being, and to the “ill-being” of those they lord it over. I want the slaves to rise up and fundamentally change the parameters we are forced to work within. These articles force us to run hamster wheels; waste our energy.

  6. Let me put out a few disjointed thoughts in reply.

    Plato said something like giving away our children to be raised by the state is a good to be desired for the upbringing of humanity. Aristotle opposed him, “what is common to many is taken least care of.” Other concerns (of Aristotle) – according to June Brown – “impossible to prevent some people from suspecting familial relationship between one another due to physical similarities”, “weaken ties of friendship,” “myriad…difficulties implementing” it. (“Plato and the Abolition of the Family” by June Brown – see Academia.edu)

    The value (meaning) of biological roots was questioned in the inception of sperm donation – “absolutely anonymous.” Nothing is transferred in sperm other than purely biological information. Meaning resides in social construction. Relationships are determined only by the society defining relational laws. Nothing escapes social determinations. This is a belief – not a fact.

    Our society is already on a course to test questions like this article proposes. What isn’t happening in reprotech to my knowledge is inter-racial mixing – except in the questionable instances of gestational surrogacy using a woman of a different race from the commissioning parents. Parents are not selecting donors of different races.

    Slavery did not end racism. The child of the slave – even the owner’s child – was not spared the slave’s destiny.

    The crux of the essay to me is a challenge to examine its values and beliefs – its ultimate reality. The article’s themes emerge again and again through western history but especially in our time. We are not done with thought experiments like these authors present because the thoughts are part of the common sense of the world, mixed up in all sorts of dishes. The article is not important for any original content but for its restatement of something often hoped for – the better society.

    If narratives are the key to human meaning-making, then the narratives of the children made in this social experiment will be like adopted and donor conceived people – the harbingers of the reality sought.

    The greatest experiment of genetic engineering was the Hebrew people – open to be seen – and engaged by the people from interior motives, interior assent. It was designed to produce a spiritual result. Their experiment would produce a social notion without imagination or lastingness. There is nothing to preserve or invest in for subsequent generations.

Adoptees, what do you think? We welcome your replies!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s