Rainier Spencer, anthropology & ethnic studies professor

Rainier Spencer didn't take a typical undergrad-to-doctorate path in becoming a professor. The former military officer stumbled into his second career after Army personnel reviewed his record and discovered his art major. That somehow made him a candidate for teaching philosophy at West Point if, at the Army's expense, he wanted to go to Columbia University for graduate school. "It was considered a career detour and I nearly turned it down," he says. Spencer's wife was perhaps the wiser one, pointing out that more education could only lead to more opportunities.

The One-Drop Rule: I didn't really question the issue of race until I began teaching philosophy at West Point. It was like going from night to day. Everything I knew no longer made sense. I grew up under the one-drop rule, which for 400 years has defined mixed-race people as black. In philosophy this is an illogical argument. How is it that my father's contribution overshadows my mother's? I gravitated toward the multiracial movement, but that didn't make sense either.

Bucking the Trend: My area of study is in "multiracial" identity, and what I have to say isn't politically correct -- I think I'd get booed off Oprah for saying this, but the term is bogus and it's overly rife with emotion.

Multiracism: People from mixed backgrounds will say they're discriminated against because they're mixed. They're not -- they're discriminated against because they're part black, because of the part that's not the majority.

The Fallacy: The movement for the "multiracial" label largely grew out of white moms advocating for their children from a black father. They wanted their children to have what they felt was a better identity. But you can't have "multiracial" children unless you believe there is more than one race, and there isn't. And you shouldn't base your identity on something that doesn't even exist. Race is purely a social construct. All humans are a single species. Ask any biologist or geneticist.

Deceiving Appearances: You see Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant dominating basketball and you draw this conclusion that blacks must be more naturally gifted. Then you might conclude there's a biological basis in that. But in the 1920s the best professional basketball players were Jews. They lived in the inner city then. They excelled in basketball because that's what they had access to.

Those assumptions hurt white kids, too. They don't try basketball because they think they can't be as good as the black kids.

Eliminating Racism: We have to think it can be done, otherwise the future is too dark.

Approach: I'm not out to be a social force or to advocate for one way or another based on how I feel about it. All I can do is be an academic, to critically study the issues and bring scholarly integrity to the discussions.

The Double-edged Sword: Race doesn't exist, but the concept of race is deeply ingrained. So we can't take "race" off the census forms because racism is very real. So how do you track the effects of racism without asking people to selfidentify?

Language: Who says the preferred term is "African-American" or "black," and what does that actually tell us? I'm male, a professor, Christian, live in the West -- these things tell you who I am. But saying I'm Afro-American doesn't tell you anything. It doesn't mean I like hip-hop or I'm from an inner city.

Still, I don't have the answer for where to go from here. It's hard to imagine what the language would be other than it must be different. I do know that "race" and "multiracial" shouldn't be a part of our vocabulary.

Ethnicity: Ethnic identity is a stronger support to hang a person's identity on, but it shouldn't become a shorthand for race. Ethnicity has to do with customs, dress, and beliefs. It should be a very, very rich set of adjectives that can help define a person. A lot of Americans don't really have an ethnic identity. Most of us are just Americans.

Ancestry: Would you be proud of your grandfather if he was Jack the Ripper? We like to assume the greatness of our ancestors, but not the evilness. I think you ought to be consistent.

Training: Sensitivity programs are the most counterproductive things you can do. Forcing people into something just doesn't work. The people who are closed to it are not going to accept it by going to a class. And those who are open to it are going to be angered by the fact they have to go to a class -- the message will be lost.

In the Classroom: Students are drawn to learning about their own cultural history. It's not something they really get in high school. Here they seek out the deep well of information that exists at universities.

As a professor, it's not your job to get students to think a certain way. My job is to provide history and background -- the kind that's founded in good research, not what they get from reading mainstream media. Newsweek and Time -- they're just filled with what's trendy.

The End Product: More than anything, I hope that students leave my classes able to articulate and defend their opinions with solid information.