Thoughts on paternalism and conscious effort to avoid it
Dabbs discusses the role of paternalism in issues of social justice. When asked if she thought, in retrospect, that she and her husband were paternalistic in their views towards African Americans, Dabbs offers a thoughtful discussion of the nuances of paternalism and its implications. Because of the views with which both were raised, Dabbs suggests that avoiding paternalistic attitudes was something they had to remain conscious of and work to avoid. She describes paternalism as a form of intolerance, discusses paternalism as both a racial and socioeconomic attitude, and she ruminates about the distinction between compassion and condescension.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Edith Mitchell Dabbs, October 4, 1975. Interview G-0022. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- ELIZABETH JACOWAY BURNS:
-
You think that your attitude was what today we would call
paternalistic?
- EDITH MITCHELL DABBS:
-
Well, that is a thing that James and I have both watched ourselves and
watched ourselves every step of the way. Because having grown up in a
paternalistic atmosphere, having always seen only that sort of thinking,
it would be very natural for us to be paternalistic. We were
certain that we were to some degree paternalistic
now at what point had we been and how much so? And really improving? If
so, why not faster? We felt that it was a bad thing in this day. Now,
maybe in slavery times it was so much better than your attitudes could
have been that there was a place for paternalism for that transition
period, maybe. But this was much too late for paternalism and it is not
useful, it is not a good thing to be and can be a bad thing. So how
could we rid ourselves of what we had grown up with, just born into us
practically, you know and conditioned into us. We always wondered, James
always said, "I keep asking myself if I am in any way
prejudiced. I don't want to have a bit in the world, but do I
have it? Did that thing I said or this thing I did actually reflect deep
seated ideas? Is prejudice still there?" It is a thing that you
dont' get rid of in a hurry. It can be totally unintentional.
It is a habit, an attitude like of that of a certain amount of very
limited condescencion, it's a habit and most habits are
unconscious. That's why they are so hard to break. You
can't get hold of them to do anything with them. So, you
aren't aware of it. Miss Reid used to laugh at
it—she was a delightful person. She said about tolerance that
she hated to see people who were so intolerant of each other of
different customs or of different cultures, or a different life style,
she just hated to see those things. She had spent a life time trying to
be more and more tolerant. She wanted to be totally tolerant and she
said, "You know, I think I am. I think I have finally made
it." Or at least she said to me, "I got to the place
where I said to myself, 'I finally made it," and I
was convinced that I had made it and was tolerant now. I was the shining
ideal and vision that I had wanted to be. I could put up with any kind
of person, any kind of idea, I didn't let anybody shock me,
even these wild young people, even the reactionary people. Nobody
shocked me anymore and I am totally tolerant. Then, I suddenly realized
that I am absolutely intolerant of intolerance."
- ELIZABETH JACOWAY BURNS:
-
That's Miss Reid talking?
- EDITH MITCHELL DABBS:
-
Yes, Miss Reid.
[Laughter]
So, you see, condescension, that paternalism is like
intolerance. It gets down and then you don't know that you
have it. You are afraid to say that you haven't got a bit of
it anymore. I suppose actually so long as you make allowances for people
for the reasons that they are different— in this case, the
reason is that they are black—if you make allowances for them
and don't demand that they measure up and be all of whatever
it is, the whole thing, then you are being paternalistic. And that is
not what you always meant by it at all. So, it is very hard to say that
you are not. I'm sure that sometimes I do make allowances, I
'll say, "Well, those people never had a chance in
their lives …" You are inclined to make allowances
for them. You feel like it is a generous, right thing to do, to make
allowances for them. Don't demand more than they can deliver.
But why can't they deliver, why don't they
deliver? Maybe you have got to make the distinction between they
"can't" or they
"don't" and they don't because
you don't let them or something doesn't let them.
But now, if we do honestly believe they could, maybe that's
the test. I don't know and I don't know how to say
when and at what point you no longer have any paternalistic attitudes. I
don't mean to have them, but then on the other hand if I look
at myself, I realize that there are times when I wonder if I make
allowances to many times.
- ELIZABETH JACOWAY BURNS:
-
People would be surprised though, I think, to hear you admit that you are
conscious of these attitudes.
- EDITH MITCHELL DABBS:
-
They might be. I feel that I have gotten over condescension and more
paternalism than most of the people I know. I think that I am as nearly
free of it as anybody I really know personally and I can understand and
judge that. But at the same time, I don't know whether that
is true, whether you would call that totally free or not. Because there
are people I know that I feel I
shouldn't blame … now wait a minute, I say that
about white people, too. If they have never had the advantages of any
education whatever, or other advantages that would enable them to do the
kind of job that I feel the situation ought to have, then even if they
are white, I would make allowances for them because they
didn't have those advantages. So, maybe that's not
… unless that's being paternalistic, too, that is
paternalism. It is not white-black paternalism, but it is being
paternalistic, I guess.
- ELIZABETH JACOWAY BURNS:
-
What is the difference between being charitable and compassionate or
being condescending? And if you can walk that line …
- EDITH MITCHELL DABBS:
-
Yes, I think that is maybe what I am trying to get at. I don't
know just where the line is and I don't know whether you ever
do know for sure. You've got to be fair with people. God
tempers the wind to the shorn lamb and you've got to temper
your judgements to the possibilities of people's capabilities
and not feel that everybody is responsible for the same beginning
potentiality. Because maybe they didn't start off evenly
handicapped. Maybe some of them had to make it up faster than others.
You make allowances for children, in school, you expect one of your
children to go after things differently from another, someone in your
own family, sisters and brothers. You will say, "Well, he is
different from the others, he sees it this way."
- ELIZABETH JACOWAY BURNS:
-
But that, of course, always leaves you in a position of dominance, if you
are the one who is saying, "Well, I will make allowances for
this person."
- EDITH MITCHELL DABBS:
-
Yes, now that could be called paternalism. That's looking down
from your height of superiority. But I don't think that I do
that at any point because somebody is black. I feel that I have gotten
past that, long ago. If that is … if I
am seeing the line where it really is between compassion and
understanding and paternalism, then I am not paternalistic.