Scot Nakagawa
This article originally appeared at Racefiles.wordpress.com.
’m often asked why I’ve focused so much more on anti-black racism than on Asians over the years. Some suggest I suffer from internalized racism.
That might well be true, since who doesn’t suffer from internalized racism? I mean, even white people internalize racism. The difference is that white people’s internalized racism is against people of color, and it’s backed up by those who control societal institutions and capital.
But some folk have more on their minds. They say that focusing on black and white reinforces a false racial binary that marginalizes the experiences of non-black people of color. No argument here. But I also think that trying to mix things up by putting non-black people of color in the middle is a problem because there’s no “middle.”
So there’s most of my answer. I’m sure I do suffer from internalized racism, but I don’t think that racism is defined only in terms of black and white. I also don’t think white supremacy is a simple vertical hierarchy with whites on top, black people on the bottom, and the rest of us in the middle.
So why do I expend so much effort on lifting up the oppression of black people? Because anti-black racism is the fulcrum of white supremacy.
A fulcrum is defined by Merriam-Webster as “the support about which a lever turns” or, alternatively, “one that supplies capability for action.” In other words, if you want to move something, you need a pry bar and some leverage, and what gives you leverage is the fulcrum – that thing you use so the pry bar works like a see-saw.
The racial arrangement in the U.S. is ever changing. There is no “bottom.” Different groups have more ability to affect others at different times because our roles are not fixed. But, while there’s no bottom, there is something like a binary in that white people exist on one side of these dynamics – the side with force and intention. The way they mostly assert that force and intention is through the fulcrum of anti-black racism.
Hang in there with me for a minute and consider this. Race slavery is the historical basis of our economy. Yes, there was/is a campaign of “Indian removal” in order to capture natural resources and that certainly is part of the story. But the structure of the economy is rooted in slavery.
Our Constitution was written by slave owners. They managed to muster some pretty nice language about equality, justice, and freedom for “men” because they considered Africans less than human. Our federal system is based on a compromise intended to accommodate slavery. Our concept of ownership rights, the structure of our federal elections system, the segregated state of our society,the glut of money in politics, our conservative political culture, our criminal codes and federal penitentiaries all evolved around or were/are facilitated by anti-black racism.
And this is not just about history. Fear of black people drives our national politics, from the fight over Jim Crow in the 50s and 60s, to Willie Horton and the Chicago Welfare Queen in the 80s, and the War on Drugs, starting in 1982 right up to the present. Since 2001, the U.S. has spent about 1.3 trillion dollars on war. Since 1982 we’ve spent over 1 trillion dollars on the drug war.
About 82% of drug busts are for possession, while about 18% are for trafficking. Sound like an irrational way to wage a war on drugs? Not if it’s a war on black people.
According to Human Rights Watch, black males are incarcerated at a rate more than six times that of white males resulting in one in 10 black males aged 25-29 being held in prison or jail in 2009. The same report states:
And why a war on people? The war on drugs is the cornerstone of the “tough on crime” messaging campaign that is key to the Republican Southern Strategy. It suggests that extending civil rights to African-Americans resulted in the crime wave of the 1970s, (and not the baby boom as is suggested by sociologists) in order to drive white Southerners into the Republican Party.
And that “tough on crime” thing, that’s not just against black people. It’s a propaganda war that is weakening civil rights and civil liberties for all of us.
There’s no hierarchy of oppressions where race is concerned, but anti-black racism is the fulcrum of white supremacy.
About the Author
racism is a system that was created. the people who did this know exactly what the outcome will be. anyway Asians, chinese, anything of that background was A Black person first. so there shouldn’t be any racism . we all came from BLACK .. people migrated and mated and thats why we look different.
i aplaud your article
and i as a black person won’t accept any racism against asians or other minoritys
we all are in this together
the attack on freedom of on man is an attack on the freedom of all men
thank you for a great article!
@ZenMamaPolitic ‘I LOVE YOU MAN’. Ha..Ha. Just Kidding. You are one of the most prolific and honest Asian men, whose work that I have ever encountered, and your views inspire me. Thank You so much for sharing. You are indeed refreshing. I love an educated man. Kewl.
It is time to clear up the manufactured multi-racial, bi-racial ‘people of many colors” confusion.
There are only two types of people in a white supremacy system:
whites and non-whites.
I would like to suggest a book, “Trojan Horse: Death of a Dark Nation” which clearly explains this
Call me cynical but if I’m not mistaken Nakagawa is a Japanese name. My family was in China when Japanese people invaded during WWII slaughtering over 20 million human beings during that time there. In a period of five years yourpeople slaughtered more human beings in China than the Europeans killed in a hundred years of slave the trade in Africa.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes
You want to start with Civil Rights why not look the mirror pal?
dont be an idiot. so what about the japanese who invaded china. CHINA invaded Tibet and you guys are s till doing it. Plus this guy was not even around during that time. holding someone responsible for something that happened in the past with different group of people is just IDIOTIC. I get a lot of racism from chinese people even if they were victims of japan and now i am living in japan and they are soooooo nice… like way nicer than folks i met in china. people do change and everyone is pointing the finger but every nation is guilty of hurting someone. I think it was very childish of you to point out his name. Either way he is talking about something real and ongoing in the usa and i appreciate him posting this article. PEACE
You made a very good point. People changes. But what make Chinese still hold onto that is because Japan deny this slaughter in the history. Germany admitted the Jew slaughter and deeply apologized to them but Japan did not do it. This history event is not even shown in their textbook (or only briefly).
yea japan may have slaugtered some of the chinese, but can you name 3 places that europeans have been and not killed, enslaved, or harmed the natives of the land in any way. please just be honest and try not to justify their actions in any way. i hear you and understand where your coming from but… nakagawa touched on some good points. the black race is the head of the snake of racism. and once the head is gone the snake is gone. any person of color can and will tell you (unless their going along to get along) how the white race affected the people. i am not a racist but im not deaf, dumb or blind either.
Are you not more concerned by the social acceptance of casual rascism toward the Asian races in particular the Chinese? In England and the USA I continously see racist jokes in sitcoms and dramas, relentless stereotyping and blatant undermining of their culture. It seems that now people recognise rascism towards people of African descent but are completely oblivious to this institutional rascism towards the Chinese. Obviously there are political reasons for this portrayal in the media but is this really accepable?
What about the lack of coverage on Anti-White Racism?
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/299918/censored-race-war-thomas-sowell#
WHAT? LOLOLOLol
what about it?
The problem is lumping every single person who shares an affinity into a group as if they share a similarity. This was done when the author said: “The difference is that white people’s internalized racism is against people of color…”
The only racism that exists today is white supremacy. There is most certainly racial prejudice and bigotry across the board racially and inner- racially. But the only racism there is, is what is practiced worldwide by the people who call themselves white. This racism is manifested in the POWER to impose your supposed supremacy on others. Insofar as blacks don’t have any power – even on the continent of Africa – it is almost impossible for them to be racist in the truest sense of the reality.
I beg to differ.Classic racism is all about white over black, lighter over darker, YES. But unfortunately some Blacks have internalize that that same mythology against themselves. Consider Sperman Cain, Condi Rice, ALLEN WEST!
Furthermore, (although I respect many things about Asian culture), I know nearly ALL of the Asian people I’ve eevr encountered were moore white consious and Black avoidant than some whites. Sad but true.
So true. The media has done an excellent job in portraying blacks as ruthless non-law abiding second class citizens to be feared by all. In order for a race to maintain an aura of superiority another must be consistantly portrayed as an imminate threat to all who may encounter them
Nakagawa’s assertion that there is no simple racial binary of white vs. black, with brown or “yellow” falling somewhere in between is correct. However, racism is racism, no matter whom it is against and that it should be fought on principle alone, whatever shape or form it takes. Nakagawa regards it to be an issue of whites in power, vs. all nonwhites collectively, which is to deny the prevalence of racism in all other ethnicities/cultures. Asians are racist against blacks, blacks against whites, light-skinned South Asians against darker skinned South Asians, Hispanics against other minorities, the Chinese hate the Japanese, etc. Decentralized racism has no middle ground. Racism seems to be ingrained in human nature.There is even suggestion of a racism gene.
White racial supremacist concepts today are very strongly supported by two pillars: biblical and scientific.
Scientific racism is based on a hierarchical system, which originated with the Systema Naturae established by the Swede, Carl Linnaeus, in 1735. He gave racism a scientific basis, by assigning specific characteristics and abilities to races (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism#Carl_Linnaeus). These ideas were further developed by racial anthropologists into polygenism–the idea that humans are descended from separate lineages (NOT just from “Adam and Eve”). When Darwin came along and proposed monogeny (that we are all descended from the same lineage), his ideas were reverted to polygenism, and developed into social Darwinism, which alongside religious ideas of Christianizing the pagans, was used to justify colonialism, racial hygiene, eugenics, imperialism, fascism, Nazism, etc. Under the auspices of such “scientific” thinking, there was most definitely a hierarchy with whites on top and blacks at the bottom. Asians for example, were somewhat better respected for having had “civilization” for thousands of years, compared to Africans, who were nothing but savages, and all that BS…
Biblical racism has its roots in the story of the sons of Noah: Japheth (who became the father of European tribes), Shem (who became father of Asians and Jews and Arabs, etc) and Ham (who became father of African peoples). Ham supposedly did something bad to Noah and was cursed, while Japheth was blessed and Shem was sort of “tolerated.” In Genesis 9:27, it states that “God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” Europeans used this as a scriptural basis to justify colonialism and slavery. It gave birth to ideas such as the Manifest Destiny of whites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny).
If not for the marriage of scientific racism and biblical racism, colonialism and slavery could not have been implemented and current day racial tensions in the US would not be what they are. And both scientific racism and biblical racism support a hierarchy or races.
Historically, how this has played out in the US is that Asians were given a form of tentative citizenship. They were tolerated as long as they paid in many cases four to six times as much taxes, as long as they kept quiet and didn’t testify in court about racial atrocities committed against them, and as long as they didn’t own any properties, and as long as they kept a low profile and their numbers and immigration were curbed. Specific anti-Chinese laws were enacted in the US to enforce all of the above. This has some manifest effects on relationships today. (See table http://www.zakkeith.com/articles,blogs,forums/US-interracial-demographics.gif). If anything, the table shows that Asians are at the bottom of the social hierarchy in aspects such as love and acceptance.
All this to say, there most definitely is racial heirarchy at play in racism, and that it’s not just about whites vs. all nonwhites collectively.
Thank you for this article.
I really admire the way you explain your analysis, reconciling several superficially conflicting claims into one coherent position. I agree with almost everything you’ve said, and I really appreciate how you link up complex ideas and history in simple, clear prose.
As a White, male, middle class, straight, Jewish, mostly-abled person, I’m sometimes confused by arguments between people about which category (or intersectional set) has it worst/is closest to the bottom. It’s hard for me to get my head into the space where that’s something to compete over. It often feels like an argument over whose smelly dead cat is a smellier, deader cat. I know part of my reaction, though, comes from my own privileged position, and I’m not arrogant enough to think that anyone’s waiting for me to come along and teach them how to talk about their experience of oppression. In future, I may suggest this article, which better job of offering useful insight than I ever could.
Hi Scott, residing in LA. I find myself the a very few vocal Asians that would stand along side members of the black community, in many ways the only one. I’ve actually been welcomed and attended my first breakfast w/ the original black panthers. You have been another man to follow in my fight against racism specifically towards blacks and latinos.
D Dang
Like I just posted … most Asian people find common ground with whites and avoid Black contact. It is rare to even hear an Asian individual TALK about race. Personally, the only people I avoid are the ones that racially AVOID.
Thank you for your well-spoken, extremely thoughtful post. I agree with much of it and consider it a sign — in these divisive times – that all is not lost. In my lifetime, I have rarely seen such outright hate against black people. And, yet, for the things that are on everyone’s mind: the economy, the deficit, the endless war, gangster financial institutions, black people are certainly not the perpetrators. It is obvious to anyone with eyes. But, in Teabag Country, we are the culprits for all of it. If I was a plutocrat, I wouldn’t be able to go a day without laughing behind the backs of my “followers.” They possess a supreme ignorance that is fond of itself and immune to logic and common sense. I know we are inching towards Taliban-like sensibilities in this country because of the right wing, but in matters of race, we are racing to that position. Women who live under strict Sharia may be killed for being victims of rape. That is where such racism wants to take us — ignoring those who actually cause our collective pain so we can ferociously persecute other victims of it. Posts like yours remind me that some people see that clearly.
My take: I think Nakagawa gave too little attention to anti-Indigenous genocide/settler colonialism and its fundamental role in the development of white nationhood. Yes, slavery is fundamental to the development of US capital, but mass scale slavery would not have been possible without land theft and extermination. The government’s attempts to destroy Indigenous communities, languages, culture, and the very existence of Indigenous peoples themselves cannot be explained away as the consequence of anti-Black racism.
If I could, I’d ask Nakagawa to think about this: why did the US gov’mint wage anti-Indigenous wars well into the twentieth century? The demonization of Blackness doesn’t quite explain that. And furthermore, how do the specific experiences of anti-Indigenous and anti-Black oppression maintain white patriarchal nationhood today (White Fatherland if you will)?
And yet still this: What have Asian Americans and all people of color lost in attempting to assimilate into white patriarchal nationhood? Other than challenging “tough on crime” rhetoric and attacks on civil liberties, Nakagawa doesn’t talk about the specific ways Asian Americans are harmed by anti-Black oppression. I can think of two harms off the top of my head: the “model minority” myth (white supremacy’s version of patriarchy’s “good girl/bad girl” dichotomy), and the invisibilization of Asian American poverty.
This is why I—as a queer working-class Black woman—fight capitalism and imperialism.
” the invisibilization of Asian American poverty”
Ms., this would be a topic if it weren’t true that Asian unemployment is the lowest by racial group in the nation; 5.1%, compared to the national average of 8.1%. And caste that against 7.2% whites and 14.1% on Blacks.
No wonder Asian poverty is not addressed. It’s hard to find.
Scot, I thoroughly enjoyed your article, and certainly understand your position. Keep teaching, writing and lighting the way. As the saying goes “Some of the people some of the time, all of the people, never.” As a civil rights activist, I walk your path. Blessings brother….
Very interesting opinion piece that a childhood friend, Linda Harris shared with me. It reflects a lot of why I often speak out against bigotry of any kind. This is a man who refuses to remain silent even when he has no dog in a fight.
While I appreciate this article. I disagree with the assessment of Whites at the top, blacks at the bottom and everyone else in between. I actually believe the ladder is a little bit different. Blacks actually arent at the bottom. That is a sad conclusion and a loss of facts
Who would you say is on the bottom? The only people treated worse were the Native Americans and thanks to economc, social, cultural, and physical genocide they have become so marginalized they unfortunately don’t even get discussed when it related to racism.
I think the point is that there isnt an oppression hierarchy.
Except that there is, and when you reside at the bottom, you’re consistently, intimately aware of it.
Why are you disagreeing with something he didn’t write?
He clearly said “I don’t think that racism is defined only in terms of black and white. I also don’t think white supremacy is a simple vertical hierarchy with whites on top, black people on the bottom, and the rest of us in the middle.”
There’s nothing to disagree with, you’re saying the same thing…
Kaiya is a very young person. It’s the young ones that did not live through racism in the 60s. They are late to the scene and lack the benefit of really KNOWING what racism is about. Today, it’s deflated … flattened out into semantic wresting matches. It’s REdefinition is meant to get racial, white radicals off the hook by pointing at someone else. BUT I’m here to tell you. Racism is seated in the idea that whiteNESS is more human than BlackNESS … That white NESS is more deserving of quality life than Black NESS. Do the social math and don’t get lost in their smoke and mirrors hun.
Excellent article. Thanks for writing it.
I am sick of the war on drugs too but isn’t it a person’s own fault if they are caught with illegal drugs? If a white guy is caught with cocaine it’s his fault but if a black guy is caught with cocaine, it’s the War on Drugs’ fault? That’s what it sounds like you’re saying.
Shouldn’t the fulcrum of attention be on why too many of our youths (and I mean all youths, not just one particular color or another) don’t graduate from high school, have children out of wedlock, and are not financially literate?
Show me a child born to a single parent who doesn’t have at least a high school diploma and I’ll show you a child who is already behind the 8 ball. Seems to me the best way to boost people up is to promote education and family structure rather than focusing on real or perceived injustices.
What part are you not getting about “equivalent rates”? It’s an old right wing argument — “they brought it on themselves.” But, like Malcolm X said, if the effect is real, how, then can the cause be unreal?” Out of wedlock pregnancy, promiscuity, black market economy dealings are SYMPTOMATIC of a very real and very systemized racism. Lack of opportunity begets creative ways to self-medicate, self-indulge and self-support. With far fewer job openings, poorer schools, an antagonistic justice system, etc, the ODDS are not in African Americans’ favor. That is a very real system. Sure, there will be successes, but when the system singles you out for punishment, success is harder to come by. And, still, the vast majority of African Americans remain hardworking, normal Americans who never get the advantages granted their paler, fellow peers. To ignore that is to endorse racism.
So how do you explain Asian-Americans’ relative success in America, especially regarding education and avoiding out of wedlock births?
Frankly, the hurdle of graduating high school and waiting until getting married to have children really isn’t that high and every community should demand that of their children growing up.
If people in general, and of all races, spent less time and energy characterizing themselves as victims and looking for people to blame, they very well could improve their lot in life.
The Model Minority argument. *yawn*
I bet you’re just the sort of person who would tell a majorly depressed person to stop being depressed and to think positively.
The problem with the so-called “war on drugs” in the disparity in the sentences handed down to perpetrators where all things are equal except ethnicity. The prevailing wisdom within the justice system seems to be that young Black and Hispanic men will eventually end up in jail anyway; So the sentences for first time Black and Hispanic youth often tend to be maximum sentences while their Caucasian counterparts often walk away with probation, misdemeanor charges or other forms of a slap on the wrists.
A drug conviction effectively ruins almost any chance a person has at that point of any real employment that doesn’t involve either minimum wage and/or a dead end job, so it creates a cycle.
Kids in their late teens and early 20′s are for the most part dumb as dirt, they’re still suffering through “The Myth of Invincibility” and they do stupid s&%t, and they should, because that’s how you learn and grow. The problem with the system is that Black and Hispanic youth engaging in the same behaviour as Caucasian youth, aren’t afforded the opportunity to be young, dumb and redeemable.
Here is one of a few journal articles that I used for a media studies class last year, should you care to read it, if you have a JSTOR account just plug “drug sentencing disparities” into the search field and trust me, there will be more than enough info.
http://time.dufe.edu.cn/jingjiwencong/waiwenziliao1/004109.web.pdf
I very much appreciate this way of framing power and history with regard to race in this country. As a half-Asian woman I have identified and worked in racial justice movements for a lot of my adult life. I’ve always felt uneasy the way the term “people of color” gets used sometimes, and worry that it can function as a way to NOT talk about black people and the specific ways in which racism has affected black communities. But I also often find myself getting really bungled up when engaging in a conversation about racism against this group, that group, the comparing of suffering, etc. and also being able to clearly articulate where I see my stake in it. But internally I have always known, and your idea of the fulcrum just put language to that internal understanding. Much gratitude.
Considering their social and economic advantage, t’is good to see a yellow man taking up the cause of a black man.
The author seems to be under the impression that only white people are capable of racism.
Also, he seems to think that all slavery in history was based on race. Not like Romans had white slaves, or early slave ships to Africa bought black slaves from the black leaders who initially imprisoned them. Oh, wait…
Also, what if a white guy wrote this article, only instead he addressed the animosity between Asian shop owners and the people of the black communities in which they operate?
Look, it’s 2012. Racism is at an all time low (when compared to the rest of human history,) yet we still have to endure these “big bad white man” articles. That, and “anti-black racism is the fulcrum of white supremacy” is one of the most racist things I’ve read in a long time.
Not all whites are racist, and not all racists are white.
I have to take issue with your point that Africans initiay ensaved and sold other Africans to the Europeans. That perspective glosses over the difference between African slavery and what black people experienced in America. African slavery was not chattel slavery. It was an institution used for prisoners of war and for debtors to work off debts. Nobody was defined as a lesser human being. John D. Hargreaves in his book, West Africa, The Former French States, observed that slaves were: “entitled to own property, to marry free persons and beget free offspring, to achieve their own freedom by various methods, in some societies to rise to positions of weath and great authority.”
Big difference between African slavery and American slavery, no?
Bill, you don’t know history well. Racism was not the structure for slavery BEFORE African slavery in the US. Slavery before the 17th century was a different system and not color based, no matter what ethnicity involved. There was no scientific system of racism before American. Check out some history on racism and slavery.
Bill, you are experiencing white guilt. Deal with it on your own time or read some Peggy Mcintosh or Tim Wise. If you are not white, you have some serious internalized racism issues. For that I suggest the Autobiography of Malcolm X.
Scot, as a Black, Okinawan, and White woman, I dearly appreciate this article. I’ve nothing else to say other than it bound up the journeys and struggles of all those I hold dearest to me in this life. I personally feel that anti-Black racism is not just the fulcrum of racism in this country but in most, where white supremacy has been sown by unlawful and neocolonial presence of Westerners.
And Bill, as far as your worn out adage of Asian store owners and Black customers, you embody the kind of thought this article is targeting. No matter how often you and yours bring up these kinds of superficial dichotomies in order to separate people of color, just know that there are Asian brothers out there like Scot who deeply care about anti-Black racism and despite those tensions will fight for Black people’s rights because we know that every single day we benefit from Black people having fought for ours.
Oh boy! as a “white” mother of a young adult “black male”, I can pretty well guess the above comment was written by a “white” person….and by that I do not mean the color of the skin so much as the “attitude” of the person writing it. Until such time as I can stop telling my children and step – children and grandchildren ” you cannot just be as-good-as” …..you have to be “better than”…..just to even the playing field”, we will all be affected by the issues so eloquently expressed in this article.
You cannot be racist towards white people. Racism is based on a system of oppression. You CAN be discriminatory, rude, inconsiderate, and/or prejudiced against white people but you CANNOT be racist toward them.
This is not difficult.
Great article. When I was college I was the only Asian man that went to meetings like Black Students United, and I definitely got asked the same questions.
However, I don’t like how you brushed over indigenous people’s history. I’d say the structure of the US economy is also based on the genocide of these peoples. Land is definitely part of the structure of an economy – It’s not like the plantations were on the ocean, they were on fertile land with good climates that were robbed from folks.
It’s easy to brush over indigenous people’s history, even with radical folks, because of the systemic erasure of these people in everyday life and in the history books. But I’d say we’re better than that. Adding the experiences of indigenous folks doesn’t cheapen the article at all – it makes the story more complete and can forge some black & red unity.
Amen!!!
I here you Bro, For Year I, A Black American Indian have been fighting for the rights of the Tibetan People beleive it or not America dosn’t have the market cornered on racial injustice although it is their bigest export via media
A dear friend asked my opinion on this article, and I thought that I would share my thoughts with a wider audience.
I rate the artice by the Japanese man a B. I think that the racism against Native Americans was equal or greater than that against us, utimately leading to near-extermination. Recall that the two essential economic factors of production are land and labor. Whites got the land from the Native Americans through genocide. They got the labor from us. That manifestations of racism are greater against us today is predictable: There are not enough Native Americans left to concern Europeans.
As to the site, I rate it a C- or D+. Good graphics with logically inconsistent content. Many articles about denial of rights to black folks with an equal number of articles promoting BO, who claims the legal right to imprison and murder people without charge or trial. My people, my people! We MUST remember Fanon: “It’s not so much the colour of your skin as the power that you serve and the millions you betray.” Is this not a concern?
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/may2012/030512_reeducation_camps.htm
Jimmy, I’m the editor here. Thanks for stopping by and commenting, but you’re wrong about one thing. We don’t promote Barack Obama. I’m afraid you haven’t looked around the site enough to see a wider variety of articles.
We represent the entire spectrum of left-leaning views. Here are a few articles critical of the President.
http://www.dominionofnewyork.com/2012/05/10/without-grassroots-organizing-obamas-endorsement-not-enough/#.T7E31J9a8i4
http://www.dominionofnewyork.com/2012/05/09/why-obama-hasnt-ended-the-drug-war/#.T7E3nZ9a8i4
http://www.dominionofnewyork.com/2012/03/08/extrajudicial-killings-what-would-holder-have-done-about-malcolm-x/#.T7E2_J9a8i4
http://www.dominionofnewyork.com/2011/09/19/obama-is-a-republican-in-democrats-clothing-oust-him-in-2012/#.T7E3O59a8i4
Thanks,
Kelly
My bad. I did not survey the whole site. I was unjustly influenced by the front page.
but… while Kelly is correct in the fact that there is content outside of the great Barack Obama (yes, I think he is awesomely great!!), JummyG brings up a good point because it is like any major newspaper, the headlines lead the way to what one perceives the rest will follow.
either way.. i’m good
LOL Look, I think the dumbest Negroes in the world are the ministers that urged their Black congregations to stay home on election day. They don’t get it! This election is fr more than a referendum on gay life. It is about the Return to pre-Civil Rights days. Anyone that can’t draw the dots between Shit Romney and the T.E.A. Party is a foolish individual. I’ve voted for one white, racist or the other all my life. That was the only choice. Obma is no worst than any of them. Why in the H would I, as a Black American, give my vote to a Romney that not only has no interest in Black America, but SAID as much in a leaked video?
I rate this response an F. Instead of referring to the man by his name (which was listed on the page in five separate places), the best you could do was “the Japanese man?” What the hell is wrong with you?
The author referred to himself by his ethnicity, and his ethnicity was more centra to the theme than his name. I meant no disrespect.
The author referred to himself by his ethnicity, and his ethnicity was more central to the theme than his name. I meant no disrespect.
jimmy G… thats not racism that was done to the native american… that was genocide. there is a difference between the 2. i rate you response a D+
Genocide is one manifestation of racism. Slavery is another. I cannot think of any attempted genocide that wasn’t based on a racist philosophy. Can you?
I have to disagree… ask yourself, what was the foundation of the death of Native Americans? What I’ve learned is that “they” were “savages”. I ask you, make a comment about any race like that, and you are… labeled a racist, rightfully so… They were human beings like all the rest, and identified by the way they looked, and killed as a result.
I am not rating either responses.. since you both have a right to your opinions.. which, probably rates my response a D- for lack of backbone
I rate all of you an F for playing the Oppression Olympics. Both groups have had a terrible last 400 years on this continent. Both groups are in very hard places right now. I actually don’t think you can quantitate pain, racism, oppression and who has it worse. But go on argue who has it worse so neither can have it better.
What are you saying? LOL Genocide is a TOOL used against Blacks and other people of color for the PURPOSE of racism and profit. There is no difference when it’s YOUR head getting hit with a two by four.
Well presented.
I think this was brilliant, not only because it stated the case well, but because it’s almost impossible for people to look beyond themselves and their “team” to see the bigger picture.
When slavery ended, it didn’t just end for blacks, but set it so that nobody could be taken a slave again. Same for Jim Crow, equal opportunity hiring, etc. Much of the war was on blacks, but when blacks won, they won it for everybody.
That is not to minimalize anyone else’s oppression. But this particular war really is center stage in this country.
There was an Asian man in the 80′s, in the era of Phil Donahue that they used to bring out to say that black people’s fight for equality was all wrong. He enjoyed benefit of “the good stereotype” that all Asians were hard working. I remember thinking, people of color have always worked hard here. They just didn’t get paid. I couldn’t understand why he didn’t realize this, but I think it was because his view was too myopic.
Great read. I would be interested in your reaction to this Boston Base Venture Capitalist who talks about racism: Racism today
Well stated and greatly appreciated. All people of color need to understand that racism impacts us all.
Wow…wow…wow… I really couldn’t have comprised this essay better myself, and/or explain racism in this country in a more efficient and well written manner… Cudos sir, cudos.
Good job stating the facts
good read, but i dont agree with his minimization of ndgns genocide. the genocide of ndgns peoples (and the continuing theft of land; every day that the us fails to honor treaties made in its name signifies an ongoing status to the original crimes. not a closed case, by any means) is the fulcrum upon which the economic structure balances. black enslaved labor was the historical counterweight that ensured that balance was kept in favor of white people.
Wow. That’s very insightful. I would love to hear more from you about this. Want to write a guest post about it?
I agree with a lot of this… atleast in terms of your argument regarding economic structure. That is a great way to describe the twin evils, if you will, of American economic structure.
However, I would argue that Nakagawa’s argument still stands. Blackness or the determination not to be black moves beyond the economic to touch legal, social, and political spaces. Other groups (Asian, Mexican, Arab) have in one point in time danced around legal arguments which amounted to suggesting that they were a “kind of white”….with the obvious being, they aint black and thus avoiding the clear repercussions of what that characterization means.
The nature of reservation and removal is to take away the voice/power/presence and make silent the community. Not the same with black people who by virtue of numbers, color and placement (as in not limited to assigned spaces or able to assimilate for a couple of generations) and labor must be managed, monitored, and controlled. Thus, you have a society which revolves more so around what to do with black people than what to do with native peoples.
When those persons no longer prove useful (labor— domestic, industrial, agricultural), they then become like native peoples. They must be removed and silenced. I would argue that mass incarceration does just that.
But Indigenous peoples (or “American” Indians) are not Mexicans, Asian, Arab or just an “other group” (although many Mexicans are nationalized peoples of indigenous descent who are migrating through their rightful traditional territories). The economically-driven displacement of Indigenous peoples and the expression of anti-Native racism was the first such kind of “anti-” racism exhibited throughout the Americas (including the Caribbean and the genocide of Tainos, Kalinagos, and other Indigenous populations). I think the problem is here in that as the author tries to insist that there is not a hierarchy of racial structure he reinforces just that by negating that the first enactment of racism on what some Indigenous peoples call “Turtle Island” came in the form of anti-Native racism.
He writes: “Race slavery is the historical basis of our economy. Yes, there was/is a campaign of “Indian removal” in order to capture natural resources and that certainly is part of the story. But the structure of the economy is rooted in slavery.” This makes the assumption that “capturing natural resources” is not an economic move – it naturalizes and minimizes the genocide launched against indigenous peoples. It makes it seem as though the aggressive westward expansion of the American dream was the inevitable by-product of European “settlement” (Happy Columbus Day to you, too). It further assumes that “Indian removal” did not require a complex set of social, legal, political, and economic genocidal tools that extended far beyond the economic realm as you, Ni, have suggested. Few people today consider what it means for indigenous peoples/”American” Indians when they purchase property – few people think of how they are implicated in the ongoing colonization of indigenous peoples through the theft of land, and the enactment of anti-Native racism in acts as simple as buying a house. They think even less of their complicity and willingness to ignore that the government continually fails to uphold treaty responsibilities with regards to “American” Indians. While I appreciate the work you’re trying to do here by identifying Anti-Black racism as the fulcrum of American society (which certainly draws important attention to the ongoing problems of binarizing race) I think it is troubling to assume that the first embedded language of racism was leveraged against definitions of blackness. At the core of the American political and economic structure the understandings of the “rights of man” as not extending to people racialized as black were conceived of in and through the writings of racist Europeans who continually positioned “Indians” as extensions of the land in need of management and control – from the initial points of “contact” and prior to the extension of the system of slavery to the “New Worlds.”
I think this is a very important discussion – to truly work in an anti-racist capacity I think we need try and have as wide-reaching understanding of the extensive operations and impacts of race as possible. A quick reading of some of the travel narratives and accounts of early European “explorers” (colonizers) would reveal how prior to the horrific extension of African slavery to the “Americas,” indigenous peoples were the first form of “slave labor” in the European effort to conquer the land and the people. We can’t decouple these deep ties which we share with one another in our work on anti-racism, nor can we deny the reality behind the reservation system and how and why it came to be. I think anti-Black racism has become the fulcrum of society because it’s been made to be so – at the misrecognition and even outright ignorance of the brutality of an ongoing anti-Native racism that circulates so seemingly invisible within American society.
I think one of the saddest things is that people forget that some of those indigenous were so called black people.. read ivan van sertima ” they came before colombus” also read some of the accounts of the explorers and they will tell you of the black indigenous people they saw over here. Its sad that we only think of blacks coming here as slaves. We never think that maybe those same blacks could have possibly been settlers.. prior to european colonization.
Well said! I’m the editor here. Would you like to write a longer piece about this?
Nehi/Jennifer A,
I hope you don’t mind, I’ve posted this article on facebook, and I’ve pointed particularly to you all’s challenge to Nakagawa’s argument. I think what you are saying is very important. Let me be clear in noting that there is no attempt to diminish, though I still think the core of his statement remains true.
I do not disagree that removal is tied directly with slavery. The fact of the matter is that removal in the southern states (particularly the deep south), for example, allowed for the seizure of lands which would eventually become the basis for the rise of King Cotton. So believe me when I say, I’m not too keen they took native land either. Nor am I unaware how the two – as I said before- are twin evils (as you noted, Happy Columbus Day or since I just referred to douglass’ speech in another comment, “what to the slave is the 4th of July”)
However, this addresses only part of his argument. The broader discussion is one in which binaries become the defining element in political, social, cultural American structure. I referred to other people of color, because over time they were forced to deal with this binary in order to navigate citizenship in the United States, including immigrant whites who become “full white”, if you will, over time…..
Which leads me to indigenous people. Native peoples occupy a vague and different space. Neither one of us were citizens of the U.S. We because we were slaves, and you because indigenous people were viewed as independent/wards of the state. Indigenous people are NATIONS, by which law (however questionable or thrown out the window) requires a different approach of engagement. Not so with black people.
I’d also point out, that at some point in time it was believed that native people could be assimilated. The systematic rape of culture and identity (kidnapping of children, forced “schooling”, cutting hair, prohibiting use of language) was meant to assimilate Native peoples into whiteness or once again “a kind of” whiteness. Black people could never be assimilated. Thus, we are left once again with the binary. One could become white or sub-white.
Finally, a note on hierarchy, and then I’ll quit. I don’t believe that saying binary exists is to create an oppression scale. I think, what he’s attempting to say, is that because the American structure floats in and around this binary that the “fulcrum” or perhaps, the lever that one uses can have broader application in one way or the other. So, let’s take Brown v. Board. It is generally assumed that this law ended segregation in black communities. But what others failed to see is that it gave the Mexican legal fight against segregation a push in the southwest (esp. Texas) by moving them away from the “kind of white” argument (and thus there should be no segregation), to an outright attack against racial discrimination.
Ive had my say, promise to the moderator, no more posts.
Ni, it’s too bad we can’t carry on this discussion because I think it’s very useful in the context of the piece. I appreciate what you say except I do bristle at the point that “it was believed that native people could be assimilated.” I think this buys too much into the rhetoric of what the state *says* and highlights the contradictions between what it says and what it does, with respect to the things you identify (such as kidnapping of children). My inclination is to point to the date as to when Native peoples (irrespective of the assimilationist rhetoric) where given “citizenship” or the right to vote and to what extent assimilating to whiteness conceals the realities of the situation – sure, the state claimed Native peoples could assimilate but even with all the colonial education in the world, your skin color still tied you to a particular racial category, that like with Black people meant you weren’t really “admitted” into a Euro-white controlled society in any tangible way.
I think that points to the disjuncture between assimilationist rhetoric with respect to indigenous peoples and the realities. Instead of looking at assimilation exclusively as permission into a “kind of whiteness,” it seems to me more realistic to speak of it as an alternative technique for “managing” and controlling indigenous peoples instead of positing it as this sort of measure of an almost-humanness afforded to Native but not to Blacks – doesn’t that again call us to this sort of “who’s at the bottom” debate? I hope that’s not how you interpret my points – my point is that to discuss the enslavement of African peoples as the fulcrum of race in American society iis to the continue the invisibilization of ongoing Native enslavement. If anti-Black racism is the fulcrum that anti-Native racism is the invisibilized base that the fulcrum sits upon.
Scot, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!
We (African Americans) know we can’t fight the war against Racism without the help of others. There is a quote which says “Illegal drugs have flown through International airspace and never discovered until landing in the street dealers pockets”… Unfortunately I cant remember who said this.
Very well written piece and I hope to read more from you soon!
Very well stated. With the Asian and Black community united. we can make a better world for all other races…because White Supremacy is all for white people. Coloreds is anyone who is not white….which include Asians. Thank you sir. This was very refreshing
May the Most bless this asian man, because at least he see the truth and is a fighter against racism towards the black race, and he knows where the roots of this racism comes from, as a asian man, for him to speak up about it I am happy, for so many asians know the racism against blacks and never say anything against because due to being money hunger, there have capitalize themselves over racism towards the black community, and there know this, the korean beauty shops, make a killing selling hair, but koreans never give nothing back towards our communities, and there think we stupid to this fact, I could go on,about the racism in america, and how other cultures have profit over our pain and suffering, but thank goodness this asian guy did write truths..
In the modern era, most believe Asian Americans are highly invested in the concept of white privilege and are not really considered “oppressed, non-white minorities.” This was not always so, as anyone of 2nd or 3rd generation Japanese or Chinese descent in California can tell you.
On the other hand, your case against the structure of US history being one of “anti-black racism” is to cheapen the efforts of those who fought against slavery (mostly in the North) to change the laws and shed their blood to live up to those words and ideals in the constitution. A lot of the racist ideals of the recent past are due to the politics of compromise with a political structure in the South that was highly invested in the legacy social structure that survived after the Civil War.
I think its important to note the historical inaccuracy of your comment. It in no way cheapens the “efforts” of the north, because the North was complicit in the profits from slavery. Manufacturing, shipping and ship building, insurance, etc. (all of which funded wage labor in the north) was built on serving the economy of the south. The issue in the North had to do with fear of wage labor vs. slavery (immigrant whites loss of employment) and also the nature of the slavocracy’s political power which acted to control slaves while hampering white liberties and putting the life and livlihood of northern whites in danger. Slavery seeped everywhere and undermined white northerners sense of their own freedom.
I would also remove the “moral” notion of the North vs. the South not just based on the facts of the economy, but based on the reality of free black experiences in the North. Black codes (pre-segregation) begins in the North and transfers south to eventually become Jim Crow segregation. In fact, one of the worse race riots (Draft Riots) took place in New York during the Civil War when white workers turned on free blacks attacking, killing, and even burning down an orphanage with the children still in the building — all of which was due to a response of being drafted into the Union Army.
Moralizing the North as the “hero” hides its role in slavery and slavery’s economic structure, and as Frederick Douglass might say, amounts to mere “bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy—a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages.”
In respons to LG…. I would have to agree with Ni in regards to your statement that this cheapens the efforts of the North. The main reason the North even fought the Civil War was to save the Union. Not to save the slaves. I could go on about the complexities of my statement, but U will find much more information if U just look up the current 13th amendment and the original 13th amendment.U sound like a pretty intelligent person, so U should be able to put the pieces together from there. I will say this… The Federal Reserve would not have been possible without removal of the original 13th amendment.
All I can say is … Well stated !! And Thank You!
I, too, appreciate this article. Asians have been a part of the African American struggle for fairness, equality, and justice in America almost from the beginning of the movement. I studied African American studies along side Asians who now use the Afrocentric paradigm to investigate the Asian experience in America.
Your Point are Strong and Good. I think youare wise and not asleep. Racism Of any kind Must be uprooted from the root and exposed to the light of truth.
That comment was for Scot Nakagawa, Anti Racism.
Very well-written argument. As a Black man, sometimes I get uncomfortable when the racism discussion only focuses on Blacks and Whites. But this article reassures me that the “fulcrum” (thanks for the new Word of the Day) of the broader racism discussion rests right there.
I hope that this article is read with an open mind and received in the right context. Not to throw stones but to grime the discussion in the appropriate light.