Matt Theis

Philosophy 101
Mark Charles Essay Response
6 February 2017

Mark Charles speech on dehumanization and racism in America was a heavy speech that
was intertwined in the concepts of structure and direction. After listening to his speech, I feel that
he had many great points that were directed in right and wrong ways. I did not agree with
everything Mark Charles said, however I can see where he was coming from and accept his
opinion.
In order to properly interpret Mark Charles speech one first has to know the concepts of
structure and direction. According to Wolters, Structure is anchored in the law of creation, the
creational degree of God that constitutes the nature of different kinds of creatures (Wolters, 59).
My interpretation of this is structure is involved in the creation and order of all things. Because
God handles structure, it is inherently good and everything is structured in a specific way for a
reason. God has a plan for everything. This is directly related to direction, where Wolters says,
Direction, by contrast, designates the order of sin and redemption, the distortion or perversion
of creation through the fall on one hand and the redemption and restoration of creation in Christ
on the other (Wolters, 59). To me this means that we take structure and take it in one of two
directions; one bad and one good. All things are inherently good and structured good, however it
is our choice whether to guide them in the right direction or not. Good things can be misdirected
and take on new bad qualities because of humans perverting them.
In terms of structure and direction, Mark Charles speech had a lot to offer. Mark Charles
took the concept of freedom and explained what he felt the United States version of freedom is.
He took the idea and freedom and liberty and directed it into a realist way. His realist way was a
way of explaining that not everything in the world is fair and that there are many injustices that
people are ignoring. Mark Charles had something he believed in. He wanted to take a stand and
explain the problems the United States is facing. He explained that white people are the
privileged ones in the United States and the rest of the people of color are suffering because of
this. He took the structure of racism and directed it towards a national situation. Rather than
explaining injustices in general, he took his speech in the direction of racism and
dehumanization. According to Mark Charles, The Doctrine of Discovery is a racist doctrine.
He stated this because he felt that the United States concepts of freedom only pertained to a
select few. He felt that the constitution did not value people of color, because it stated All men
are created equal. He directed this statement in the direction that there was no sense of equality
after the constitution was written. His interpretation is essentially All white men are created
equal. People of color are not people according to the constitution. This is what I believe he was
thinking when he spoke.
 Mark Charles took structure and direction even further by covering what he believed the
United States considered to be feats. He felt that these feats were selfish and unfair to people
of color and people of other countries. He talked first about how Americas days of discovery
were actually dehumanization. He says this because the United States would come imperialize
other states and countries in order to exert its power. He then went on to say that the concept of
equality was actually only for a select few. He believed this to be the case because white men
prospered the most in history, while everyone else was at a distinct disadvantage. He then went
on into the concept of expansion. The United States took the concept of expansion and put it in a
positive direction. It was a time of expanding our nation and liberating people to our version of
freedom. Mark Charles directed this idea of expansion into a negative light by explaining that it
was a time of ethnic cleansing. He believed this because the United States, at the time, would
take over foreign countries and impose its beliefs and customs on them. Mark Charles took all of
these topics that the United States was once proud of and explained that there is nothing for us to
be proud of. He felt this because he looked into history and saw that while the United States,
prospered, other countries suffered.
Now that I have the details of Mark Charles speech, I can make a proper evaluation. I
felt that Mark Charles made many excellent points in his speech and I could definitely see where
he was coming from. I could accept his opinion and understand him, rather than being like some
students I talked to that simply wrote him off as a nut job. While I acknowledge many of his
points and agree on some things, I do not agree with Mark Charles speech overall. I felt that
Mark Charles focused too much on racism in his speech. Rather than explaining the problems the
United States has been facing, he directed it into racism. This upset me because I feel that
anyone can suffer and race should not be the sole reason for inequality. I feel that economic
inequality is a major issue and it can affect people of all color and ages and genders. I do not
think it would be right to say that all white people are privileged, as there are many homeless
white people I have seen. I have seen them on the streets and heard of them from friends too. The
concept of inequality is not just rooted in racism. I also did not like when Mark Charles talked
about the triggers of America and mentioned Eight years of a black president. Mark Charles
directed his argument on the triggers of America and took it in yet another racist direction. He
disregarded the possibility that people may not like Obama because they do not agree with his
policies. I personally was adamantly opposed to Barack Obama because I felt he spent far too
much money and put our nation into even greater debt. I also felt that he enforced many policies
that I did not agree with. I could care less if he was black, white, Asian, or whatever other color
or gender. When Mark Charles made this statement, he completely lost my understanding.
The final area of Mark Charles speech that I am going to cover was his covering of
United States history. I felt that he made many good points about the terrible things that United
States has done. He accurately described some of the most horrific events in the United States
history, such as The Trail of Tears. I agree that we should not be proud of all of the terrible
things our nation has done in the past, however I feel that Mark Charles focused his direction too
much on the past. When he talked about five hundred years of dehumanization I felt that he
was leaving out an important detail. The detail I am referring to is environment. White people
throughout history, up until Lincolns and Martin Luther Kings time were raised in a completely
different environment and culture than people of today. White people of the past were born into
families with slaves and the concept of prospering in life. Having slaves was generally not seen
as an issue before Lincoln voiced his opinion on it. This is how things were back in the day. To
expect white people in the past to care about African Americans rights would be unrealistic
because this is completely different from how most people were raised. Environment and culture
play a massive role into who people will become and how people will act. Even the concepts of
imperialism had justification, even if it was a twisted form. While it is certainly not okay to harm
other people and be selfish now, at the time, this was the United States regime. The United States
had a profound sense of Nationalism and it would do whatever it took to succeed. Because
people were raised to love their country and want it to prosper, they did not think much of the
United States wrongfully taking over other innocent countries and states. People of the time saw
no value in people of color and it would be very strange if they did because this is not how they
were raised. While I agree that the United States was very racist and did many very unfair and
selfish things throughout history, I feel that Mark Charles took history out of context and brought
into a very specific direction, without looking at the bigger picture. To completely ignore the
culture and society of the past, is taking history in a selfish direction. This direction is one that
only shows what it wants to show. It only explains the bad things and supplies evidence only to
the bad things. A good argument should look at the entire scene and acknowledge all of the
viewpoints and refute them in a respectful manner. I felt that Mark Charles neglected other
points of view and that severely hurt the impact of his speech.
Overall, while I felt that Mark Charles made some excellent points and had some good
evidence to his claims, he was still ineffective in my opinion. I see where he was coming from,
however he ignored the bigger picture and focused too much on racism. He took a speech that
could have centered on the large conflicts that United States is facing, such as economic
inequality, and he misdirected it into a massive discussion on racism. I can see why he felt that
the United States was racist and unfair, however I feel that he left out many important factors and
only acknowledged his views, which ruined the impact of his speech. I think he could have been
onto something very powerful, however he needed to look into everything and refute other
peoples viewpoints with his in a respectful manner. If he did this, I feel I would agree with his
speech a lot more, as would other students.