Unethical Use of Blackface: Beyond the Slippery Slope of Intent

The history of blackface is deeply rooted in a sordid and highly unethical past in the United States, unlike the need for camouflage in military operations. While the armed forces use various shades of loam and green for tactical purposes, the use of blackface is a manifestation of racial insults and stereotypes.

Blackface in the United States

The practice of blackface involves using dark makeup to appear as a black person, a term that has a long and shameful history. Initially intended to entertain with outrageous stereotypes, its use by the military is fundamentally different and should not be conflated with the need for effective Camouflage.

The United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and specifically the SEALs were officially banned from using blackface for camouflage purposes in 2015. This ban was due to the harm caused by reifying racial stereotypes.

Camouflage Intent vs. Racial Insult

Major Mike explains the complexity of intent in ethical discussions:

“When you’re talking about ‘ethics’ always a very slippery slope, you really are getting into a matter of the intent of whoever is exhibiting whatever behavior you don’t like. If I use only the black crayon to camo up one could make a colorable argument that it’s not my intention to insult anyone or any race but rather to make it more difficult for the enemy to see me in the dark.”

However, this argument ignores the subtleties and complexities of color matching in camouflage attire, which should involve an array of greens and browns. Helmets, face paints, and clothing are used to blend into the environment. Coloring skin black is not a standard camouflage method and can easily communicate racial intentions. Moreover, the spider web camo technique mentioned is a creative approach to blending in, which has nothing to do with blackface.

Quora's Ethical Response

While Quora allowed users to report ridiculously stupid and insincere questions in the past, the site now primarily relies on user feedback and community guidelines to maintain quality. However, this does not mean that such reporting options are unnecessary. There are countless examples of questions that miss the mark entirely, often glaringly obvious to anyone with basic knowledge or intelligence.

While discussing blackface in a military context, it is clear that the intent must align with ethical standards. Using blackface as camouflage is a different matter entirely. The use of blackface as a statement or costume, no matter the excuse, is fundamentally unethical and harmful. It perpetuates racial stereotypes and insensitivities, and any justification based on intention or necessity falls flat when examined critically.

Toward a More Ethical Dialogue

As individuals and communities, we must continue to engage in open and honest dialogue about the use of blackface. This should be done with a deep understanding of its historical and present-day impacts. The erosion of ethical standards can lead to significant harm, both socially and culturally. It is imperative to ensure that our actions align with our core values and ethical principles.

Through education, awareness, and responsible practices, we can work towards a more inclusive and ethical society. The continued use of blackface in any form, whether as camouflage or a costume, stands in stark opposition to these goals.

Conclusion

The controversy over the use of blackface in the military serves as a profound reminder of the perpetuation of racial stereotypes. While military operations involve strategic camouflage, the use of blackface does not belong in this context. Instead, it serves to insult and harm. It is crucial for everyone, including those in the military, to recognize and address these issues to foster a more ethical and respectful environment.

References

United States Special Operations Command (2015). Policy on Camouflage Operations. Retrieved from [URL]

Quora (2021). Community Guidelines and Reporting System. Retrieved from [URL]