In the days following our AfroSpear Black blogger group's successful organizing in the Jena Six Justice March, one of the things that angers me about the otherwise excellent press coverage is the constant use of the words "race," "racial" and "racist" in these articles. Although many highly respected minority thinkers strongly disagree with me, including Professor Ridwan Laher and the renowned Black blogger Field Negro, still I insist that although the sociological "race" concept can stay, still the word "race" itself must be conclusively abandoned.
I believe that the phrase "Black race" is nearly synonymous with the phrase "Black people." The greatest difference is that white supremacist groups prefer the word "race" because of its discredited biological connotations while the phrase "Black People" evokes Black self-determination. The phrase "Black People" is used to signify a political group.
Here's what the white supremacist "Nationalist Party USA" says about "race:"
The Nationalist Party embraces the differences in Cultures and races, and allows for each group to embrace their own heritage -- while recognizing the right to live separately, if we choose; and to preserve our unique Culture and heritage. Nationalist Party USA
Clearly their belief in different races rationalizes, in their minds, their belief in and advocacy for segregation. And why not? Do we segregate dogs and cats at the dog pound? As soon as you concede that we are from different "races" you have conceded a fundamental point in their argument that we should live separately (and unequally).
Here's another quote from the same white supremacist website:
"Michael Levin's long-awaited book on race has finally arrived, every bit as powerful and insightful as his admirers had hoped it would be. Why Race Matters does exactly what the title promises -- it removes all illusions about the insignificance of race, and explains what racial differences mean for a multi-racial society. It is a thorough, overwhelmingly convincing treatment of America's most serious and least understood problem. Like the work of Arthur Jensen and Philippe Rushton, it destroys the egalitarian myth, but Prof. Levin parts company with other academics in his willingness to tell us what biology means for policy. Facts imply conclusions, and this book draws them.
"The question is not why anyone would believe the races are unequal, but why anyone would believe them equal."As Prof. Levin points out, a book like Why Race Matters should not have to be written. The only sensible conclusion to be drawn from simple observation is that races differ: "To put the matter bluntly, the question is not why anyone would believe the races are unequal in intelligence, but why anyone would believe them equal." For centuries, people as different as Arabs and Englishmen have judged Africans to be unintelligent, lascivious, jolly, and keen on rhythm. Today, in whatever corner of the globe one looks, blacks behave in certain consistent ways." Nationalist Party USA
So, there you have it! White supremacists agree with Blacks who insist that we must keep using the word "race"! White supremacists believe it is essential that we maintain our belief in "race," and they want to continue using that very word, precisely because science will never offer them any empirically-based substitute. The belief in the biological concept of "race" is the seemingly immortal brother of long-since discredited "phrenology."
The phrase "Black race" has historically been used by white supremacist groups in their battle to isolate and marginalize Black people. In fact, Barack Obama's effort to win the presidency is hobbled by whites' and Blacks' continued acceptance of the proposition that he is from a different "race" from whites. Whites have never elected a president whom they believe to be from a different "race." Those who are willing to consider voting for Barack Obama are only willing to do so because they have realized that he is NOT from a different "race," he merely has a different skin-color.
However, the mainstream media and white supremacist groups will continually use the words "race" and "racial" and "racist" over the next 14 months to create a sense of fundamental biological difference between Barack and America that actually has no basis in biology. Yet, this is very effective propaganda, because Americans don't like to elect people who are perceived as "different." They want to elect people who they believe are like them.
Every time Black people and white people use the word "race" instead of the term "the Black people" they give credence to the proposition that race is biological as well as political and cultural.
I know from my personal blogging experience that if there is anything about which many white people and Black people are in agreement, it's that the word "race" is essential to how we see ourselves and our definition of our relationship to one another. And that's precisely why we have to abandon the word "race." The word (not the concept of a sociologically distinct people) is the linguistic clothing of slavery, but we are Blacks are still wearing it centuries after it was forced upon us by our slavemasters.
I know that there are a lot of good and great leaders (like Field Negro) who disagree with me about this, perhaps because they cannot separate the word "race" from the sociological concept of "race." And so they cannot see how we can abandon the one without abandoning the other. But, it's really simple. Just stop using the word "race" and, as for the concept, describe what you mean with particularity instead of using once overarching words (like "race" and "racist") as a linguistic crutch.
As I've said before, there is no pot of gold in the treasure map where the word "race" marks the spot. There is no magic to that four letter word, and the belief that our world will change radically for the worse if we abandon the word while keeping the concept is a superstitious belief. Keep the sociological concept, but loose the word!
I can accept that many people don't agree with me. I just remind myself that most humans once agreed that the world was flat, while many white scientists once agreed that white people's head shape (phrenology) was indicative of intelligence while Black people's head shape was not. I trust that the inevitable march of science will compel us to abandon the word "race" as we abandoned the word "phrenology."
So, when I challenge canons, I couldn't care less that they are canons. I only care whether they are true or not. If they are true, then they can stand on their own two feet, without having to remind anyone who long and how hard we have held these particular words in great esteem. If they are false, like the belief that the world is flat, then no amount of precedent can change the fact that the belief stands as barrier to increased knowledge.
The most blatant area in which I challenge received wisdom is my insistence that we must end the 43-consecutive term white male monopoly of the American presidency in 2008. If anything is received wisdom in the United States, this is it, and it has to go. I am so determined about this that I believe I will not return to the United States (from Brazil) until the 43-consecutive term white male monopoly of the presidency has come to an end.
Now, I need to apologize to professor Ridwan about something: It's not the concept of "race" as a sociological matter that I believe needs to be abandoned, and so I am not urging the abandonment of "the canon" in its entirely. I am merely urging the abandonment of a word "race" and its derivatives, in favor of empirical description of what we see in our world.
What I see is skin-color-based historical and systemic oppression, subjugation and marginalization of people on the societal level, as well a learned color-aroused emotion, ideation and behavior disorder in individuals, a mental illness that is "nurtured" in the American environment (as well as in too many other places).
In this area, as in all of science, careful description rather than broad generalization is our friend. It leads to greater agreement. When we conclusively abandon the word "race" then the age of science will have begun in this crucial area of intellectual endeavor.
Race depends on what you make of the word. So when you say we should use the term Black People, what does that mean? Ice T is lighter skinned than some arabs and most Indians. yet is he a Black person and an Indian is what? These are just words. People are going to use/misuse however they want it to. People still confuse bigotry with racism and are confused when Spike Lee was on the mark when he talks about black people in America not being racist (which is not the same as being prejudiced).
As long as you educate people, that race is nothing but a historically used distinction, then it's not big deal. Race based markers are important in research areas like diabetes. It doesn't mean we are separate sub species or even distinct.
I don't think you'll have much agreement on capitalizing "black." But I, for one, totally agree with your thesis here.
As a 60-year-old, I grew up in a bipolar society: black/white. Amerindians and "orientals" as side dishes. The human mind deals easily with bipartite divisions: hot/cold, large/small, black/white. Knowing how insidious and self-sustaining were the social effects of this last category, I rejoice in living in New York City now and seeing the easy, visual corrolary of that division being totally blasted. One passes so many people in the street who are hard to categorize, often darker than West Africans themselves: are these people Mexican? East Indian? Pacific Islander? Guatemalan? Some mixture? (East Indians, they tell me, are anthropologically Caucasian.)
Recent immigration has muddied racists' ideological waters beyond reclamation.
I say hallelujah!
People ... are not colors.
Having more melanin in your skin than somebody else does, makes you neither better than nor worse than him.
It's high time that we strive, together, to push this issue away from us, as the "issue" it does not deserve to be.
We are ... people. Period.
People judge others all the time. People hate other people for a variety of reasons besides race. There are white people that love Oprah but hate George Bush. Straights hate gays and vice versa. Republicans hate everyone. When black people think that everything negative that happens to them is based race they do themselves a disservice. Life is hard and unfair. White people get rude waiters too. If you've got a chip on your shoulder, people are going to treat you like someone who has a chip on their shoulder whatever your race.
We've all heard amazing stories of blacks growing up in the worst circumstances and then somehow becoming very successful in this country. What made that possible? We also hear some blacks complaining that this is a racist country and it's the fault of white folks. For them, reparations wouldn't make any difference in the quality of their lives. Most people admire those that accomplish something in their lives and don't really care to listen to those that complain and don't do anything for themselves.
I'm really pleased with the content of Francis L. Holland's blog.
Brazil is a fine place. I'm thinking of moving there myself. I can't see why you'd use that as an angle of attack.
The "question of race" as it exists today would be better termed the "question of hating people you don't even know".
Why not just treat ethnographic topics like pigment, nasal geometry, or musculature as questions of "family resemblance"?
If we need to use general terms to describe people, we should just agree on words that refer to geographical areas of people such as Irish people or historical culturals such as Jewish people or Aborigine people.
As time goes on the gene pool will become even more blended probably creating less varied looking humans. The majority will probably be brown skinned, brown eyed with wavy hair, not a bad dancer who can only jump so-so, and loves the blues. Everybody loves the blues!
Best of Life,
John
All human beings have the same ancestry: from one woman out of the depths of Africa. Therefore, ALL Americans ARE African Americans! Bill o'Reilly, DUBYA,David Duke....EVERY LAST ONE!!! Go now and abuse people about their " Race" whatever that is??
That is "the word".
The rich need the poor's babies to
send to their FOR-PROFIT WARS.
You don't see any republican kids lining up to volunteer.
It's about economic class, haves & have-nots, and balatant BIGOTRY on more levels than race.
Biologically, "race" is truly meaningless. I encourage everyone to check out the American Anthropological Association (the OTHER AAA! :) ) and read their statement on "race."
So for example tigers are of the Genus Panthera
The Bengal Tiger is Panthera tigris tigris and the Siberian Tiger Panthera tigris altaica
This is how you distinguish speciation between the types of Tigers.
Also our correct Trinomial Name is Homo Sapien Sapien we are modern humans and a subspecies of Homo Sapien
And personally, I find this capitalization game pathetic in the extreme.
I was no slave owner, my father his father before him, going all the way back to German owned now slaves. I owe the Black man nothing. As he owes me nothing. The open racism of it though. To claim to be a bringer of Gods word and then to pander racism...unbelievable.
I like Bill Cosby on the subject, "You weren't a slave and you don't know anyone who was, stop blaming the White man for the Black mans problems."
In my opinion, we don't owe anyone anything, other than the same choices, opportunities, benefits and protections that we, ourselves, have. To paraphrase John Locke, "we have the right to do anything, as long as it doesn't infringe on the right of anyone else to have the same."
Good to see you here.
You know that I understand where you're coming from about race, even if we disagree.
As FN so aptly put it:
I'm just going to ride this Black thing out.
Peace, and keep up the good fight.
Thanks for stopping in!
And thanks for spelling "Black" with a capital "B"!