Similar but Different

Listening to a computer oriented podcast this past week and my pedantic author alter-ego chimed in to my subconscious and posed the question, “Is that correct? I’m not so sure.”

The discussion that I was listening to involved the hosts talking about, in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement, how the Silicon Valley set were making initiatives to change ‘racist’ terminology in everyday use in the computer industry. On the surface, sounds like a good idea that benefits everyone.

As the discussion ensued this ‘racist’ terminology included terms such as master and slave when referring to computer drives that are the original superior hard drive and the copy or inferior secondary drive. (Note: I don’t know the preferred terms for the master and slave componentry yet, so these are my descriptions rather than preferred replacement terms). In the mechanical world there are many more examples where a component is the originator of an action (master) and another component responds in kind (slave).

So don’t get me wrong, I understand the bigotry behind the real master/slave when it comes to human history. So if certain portions of any society find these terms disturbing in any way shape or form and replacement terminology can be agreed upon, all well and good.

However, I do agree with my subconscious when it asked me if these are ‘racist’ terms? In fact, to describe this as racist terminology is wrong. Keep reading because the argument here is terminology not ideology. These are ‘racial’ terms not ‘racist’.

I’m sure that all my life when referring to some mechanical component as the master and another as slave I meant no disrespect to any person, living or dead. Similarly, the terms ‘blacklist and whitelist are now receiving scrutiny. Again, I’m sure that the terms arise from the historical origins of night and day. Scary bad things happen in the darkness of night and goodness happens in the world in the light of day. Every theological text, fable and religion has its own form of the dark and the light being the bad and the good. Modernising the argument (or commercialising), just look at the Star Wars franchise. Darth Vader entices Luke Skywalker to the ‘dark side’ and it is up to the Jedi to help Luke ‘see the light’.

Anyway, back to what I was actually positing. None of these terms are ‘racist’. Racist is defined as “a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.” And, if you are a racist you are defined as “a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that one's own racial group is superior or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.”

I believe the term many commentators are looking for to describe the sensitivities around terminology in the English language is ‘racial’ as being defined as “of, relating to, or characteristic of one race or the races of humankind.” Or “denoting or relating to the division of the human species into races on grounds of physical characteristics”.

So, take a breath and calm down, these terms may indeed need changing due to their racial insensitivities or under or over tones, whichever may be the case. But it is unlikely that any of these terms arose to deliberately elevate one race above another at the time they were adopted.