In comparing the competing conceptions of racism that we find in Garcia and Shelby, I feel that J.L.A. Garcia offers a more compelling argument. Garcia explains that an account of racism is only adequate if it clearly proposes what is wrong with it at the same time. He describes is stance in the following excerpt:
“My proposal is that we conceive racism as fundamentally a vicious kind of racially based disregard for the welfare of certain people. In it's central and most viscous from, it is a hatred, ill will, directed against a person or persons on account of their assigned race. In a derivative form, one is a racist when one either does not care at all or does not care enough (i.e., as much as morality requires) or does not care in the right ways about the people assigned to a certain racial group, where this disregard is based on racial classification. Racism, then, is something that essentially involves not our beliefs and their rationality or irrationality, but out wants, intentions, likes, and dislikes and their distance from the moral virtues” (Timmons).
Garcia believes that racism is rooted from “…disregard for the welfare of certain people.” He goes on to describe that in its most viscous form, racism is a “hatred, ill will, directed against a person or persons on account of their race.” Garcia’s …show more content…
He describes the model as “…an action is wrong because of the moral disvalue of what goes into it rather than the non-moral value of what comes out of it.” Garcia explains that “…actions are immoral if insofar as they are greedy, arrogant, uncaring lustful, contemptuous, or otherwise corrupted in their motivational sources” and “…desires, wishes, and intentions are racist when they either are, or in certain ways reflect, attitudes that withhold people from, on the basis of their being assigned to a particular race, levels or forms of goodwill, caring and well-wishing that moral virtue demands”