You are on page 1of 238

NOTES

This is an awfully large file. It is organized into two parts. Race args, i.e. Wilderson and at: those arguments. The Afro-Optimism, racial identity politics focus ad, and at: wilderson sections should e integrated into a !ac loc" to answer all parts of the #. $ap, %at $rit, and &lac" White &inary # are not meant to e read on the aff '. Wilderon ut rather on the neg '. Race teams who run Wilderson. We highly suggest not running Wilderson v. policy affs at the camp tournament. This file is by no means comprehensive and youll have a hard time winning links to all the aff impacts.

!"E ! #S

W$%&E SON

'N" W$%&E SON


"ivil Society is founded upon a (aster)Slave relationship that e*ploits and alienates the +lack +ody and causes gratuitous violence

Wilderson ,-'- ()ran" &., *rofessor of +rama , -$ Ir'ine- .Red, White, and &lac": $inema and
the /tructure of -./. Antagonisms0 pg. 1-22 3/456
The polemic animating this research stems from (26 my reading of 7ati'e and &lac" American metacommentaries on Indian and &lac" su 8ect positions written o'er the past twenty-three years and ( 6 a sense of how much that wor" appears out of 8oint with intellectual protocols and political ethics which underwrite political pra9is and socially engaged popular cinema in this epoch of multiculturalism and glo alization. The sense of a andonment I e9perience when I read the metacommentaries on Red positionality ( y theorists such as %eslie /il"o, Ward $hurchill, Taiaia"e Alfred, :ine +eloria ;r., and <aunani-#ay Tras"6 and the metacommentaries on &lac" positionality ( y theorists such as +a'id =arriott, /aidiya <artman, Ronald ;udy, <ortense /pillers, Orlando *atterson, and Achille = em e6 against the deluge of multicultural positi'ity is o'erwhelming. One suddenly realizes that, though the semantic field on which su 8ecti'ity is

&lac"ness and an unflinching articulation of Redness are more unimagina le and illegi le within this e9panded semantic field than they were during the height of the f I>s repressi'e $ounterintelligence *rogram (coIntelpro6. On the semantic field on which the new protocols are possi le,
imagined has e9panded phenomenally through the protocols of multiculturalism and glo alization theory, Indigenism can indeed ecome partially legi le through a programmatics of structural ad8ustment (as fits our glo alized era6. In other words, for the Indians> su 8ect position to e legi le, their positi'e registers of lost or threatened cultural identity must e foregrounded, when in point of fact the antagonistic register of dispossession that Indians .possess0 is a position in relation to a socius structured y genocide. As $hurchill points out, e'eryone from Armenians to ;ews ha'e een su 8ected to genocide, ut the Indigenous position is one for which genocide is a constituti'e element, not merely an historical e'ent, without which Indians would not, parado9ically, .e9ist.0 1

Regarding the &lac" position, some might as" why, after claims successfully made on the state y the $i'il Rights =o'ement, do I insist on positing an operational analytic for cinema, film studies, and political theory that appears to e a dichotomous and essentialist pairing of =asters and /la'es? In other words, why should we thin" of today>s &lac"s in the -nited /tates as /la'es and e'eryone else (with the e9ception of Indians6 as =asters? One could answer these @uestions y demonstrating how nothing remotely approaching claims successfully made on the state has come to pass. In other words, the election of a &lac" president aside, police rutality, mass incarceration, segregated and su standard schools and housing, astronomical rates of hI' infection, and the threat of eing turned away en masse at the polls still constitute the li'ed e9perience of &lac" life. &ut such empirically ased re8oinders would lead us in the wrong directionA we would
find oursel'es on .solid0 ground, which would only mystify, rather than clarify, the @uestion. We would e forced to appeal to .facts,0 the .historical record,0 and empirical mar"ers of stasis and change, all of which could e turned on their head with more of the same. -nderlying such a downward spiral into sociology, political science, history, and pu lic policy

the grammar of suffering "nown as e9ploitation and alienation, the assumpti'e logic where y su 8ecti'e dispossession is arri'ed at in the calculations etween those who sell la or power and those who ac@uire it. The &lac" @ua the wor"er. Orlando *atterson has already dispelled this faulty ontological grammar in /la'ery and
de ates would e the 'ery ru ric that I am calling into @uestion: /ocial +eath, where he demonstrates how and why wor", or forced la or, is not a constituent element of sla'ery. Once the .solid0 plan" of .wor"0 is remo'ed from sla'ery, then the conceptually coherent notion of .claims against the state0Bthe proposition that the state and ci'il society are elastic enough to e'en contemplate the possi ility of an emancipatory

The imaginary of the state and ci'il society is parasitic on the =iddle *assage. *ut another way, 7o sla'e, no world. And, in addition, as *atterson argues, no sla'e is in the world. If, as an ontological position, that is, as a grammar of suffering, the /la'e is not a la orer ut an anti-<uman, a position against which <umanity esta lishes, maintains, and renews its coherence, its corporeal integrityA if the /la'e is, to
pro8ect for the &lac" positionBdisintegrates into thin air.

orrow from *atterson, generally dishonored, perpetually open to gratuitous 'iolence, and 'oid of "inship structure, that is, ha'ing no relations that need e recognized, a eing outside of relationality, then our analysis cannot e approached through the ru ric of gains or re'ersals in struggles with the state and ci'il society, not unless and until the interlocutor first e9plains how the /la'e is of the world. The onus is not on one who posits the =asterC/la'e dichotomy
ut on the one who argues there is a distinction etween /la'eness and &lac"ness. <ow, when, and where did such a split occur? The woman at the gates of $olum ia -ni'ersity awaits an answer.

White supremacy is a global modality of genocidal violence .Slaverys operational logic continues today. eformist measures simply provide fuel for Whiteness

odrigue/ '' (+ylan, *h+ in Dthnic /tudies *rogram of the -ni'ersity of $alifornia &er"eley and Associate *rofessor of Dthnic /tudies at -ni'ersity of $alifornia Ri'erside, .The &lac" *residential 7on/la'e: 4enocide and the *resent Tense of Racial /la'ery0, *olitical *ower and /ocial Theory :ol. !!, pp. EFGE6
To crystallize what I hope to e the potentially useful implications of this pro'ocation toward a retelling of the sla'erya olition story: if we follow the narrati'e and theoretical tra8ectories initiated here, it should ta"e little stretch of the

the singular institutionalization of racist and peculiarly anti lac" socialCstate 'iolence in our li'ing era - the -/ imprisonment regime and its con8oined policing and criminalization apparatuses - ela orates the social logics of genocidal racial sla'ery within the American nation- uilding pro8ect, especially in the age of O ama. The formation and astronomical growth of the prison
historical imagination, nor a radical distension of analytical framing, to suggest that industrial comple9 has ecome a commonly identified institutional mar"er of massi'ely scaled racist state mo ilization, and the

fundamental 'iolence of this apparatus is in the prisonHs translation of the 2Eth AmendmentHs racist animus. &y IreformingI sla'ery and anti-sla'e 'iolence, and directly
transcri ing oth into criminal 8ustice rituals, proceedings, and punishments, the 2Eth Amendment permanently inscri es

The state remains a Isla'e stateI to the e9tent that it erects an array of institutional apparatuses that are specifically concei'ed to reproduce or enhance the stateHs capacity to IcreateI (i.e., criminalize and con'ict6 prison chattel and politically legitimate the processes of ensla'ementCimprisonment therein. The crucial starting point for our
sla'ery on Ipost-emancipationI -/ statecraft. narrati'e purposes is that the emergence of the criminalization and carceral apparatus o'er the last forty years has not, and in the foreseea le future will not uild its institutional protocols around the imprisonment of an economically producti'e or profitma"ing prison la or force (4ilmore, 21116.2J /o, if not for use as la or under the 2Eth AmendmentHs

what is the animating structural-historical logic ehind the formation of an imprisonment regime unprecedented in human history in scale and comple9ity, and which loc"s up well o'er a million &lac" people, significantly ad'ancing num ers of InonwhiteI %atinos as, and in which the white population is 'astly underrepresented in terms of
8uridical mandate of Iin'oluntary ser'itude,I oth num ers imprisoned and li"elihood to e prosecuted (and thus incarcerated6 for similar alleged criminal offenses?2K

the contemporary -/ prison regime must e centrally understood as constituting an epoch-defining statecraft of race: a
In e9cess of its political economic, geographic, and 8uridical registers, historically specific conceptualization, planning, and institutional mo ilization of state institutional capacities and state-

to reproduce andCor reassem le the social relations of power, dominance, and 'iolence that constitute the ontology (epistemic and conceptual framings6 of racial meaning itself (da /il'a, !LLKA 4old erg, 211E6. In this case, the racial ontology of the postsla'ery and post-ci'il
influenced cultural structures rights prison is anchored in the crisis of social meaning wrought on white ci'il society y the 2Eth AmendmentHs apparent 8uridical elimination of the &lac" chattel sla'e eing. Across historical periods, the social inha itation of

the white

ci'il su 8ect - - its self-recognition, institutionally affirmed (racial6 so'ereignty, and e'eryday social intercourse with other racial eings - is made legi le through its positioning as the administrati'e authority and consenting audience for the nation- and ci'ilization- uilding processes of multiple racial genocides. It is the are fact of the white su 8ectHs access and entitlement to the generalized position of administering and consenting to racial genocide that matters most centrally here. Importantly, this white ci'il su 8ect thri'es on the assumption that sChe is not, and will ne'er e the target of racial genocide.2F (Williams, !L2L6 .Those things o tained and secured through genocidal processes land, political and military hegemonyCdominance, e9propriated la or - are in this sense secondary to the raw relation of 'iolence that the white su 8ect inha its in relation to the racial o 8ects (including people, ecologies, cultural forms, sacred materials, and other modalities of life and eing6 su 8ected to the irrepara le 'iolations of genocidal processes. It is this raw relation, in which white social e9istence materially and narrati'ely consolidates itself within
the normalized systemic logics of racial genocides, that forms the condition of possi ility for the -/ social formation, from Ia olitionI onward. To push the argument further: the distended systems of racial genocides are not the massi'ely deadly means toward some other (rational6 historical ends, ut are ends within themsel'es. <ere we can decisi'ely depart from the hegemonic 8uridical framings of IgenocideI as dictated y the -nited 7ations, and e9amine instead the logics of genocide that dynamically structure the different historical-social forms that ha'e emerged from the classically identifia le genocidal systems of racial colonial con@uest, indigenous physical and cultural e9termination, and racial chattel sla'ery. To recall Tras" and =ara le, the historical logics of genocide permeate institutional assem lages that 'ariously operationalize the historical forces of planned o solescence, social neutralization, and Iceasing to e9ist.I

$entering a conception of racial genocide as a dynamic set of sociohistorical logics (rather than as contained, isolata le historical episodes6 allows the sla'ery-to-prison continuity to e more clearly mar"ed: the continuity is not one that hinges on the creation of late-!Lth and
early-list century Isla'e la or,I ut rather on a re-institutionalization of anti-sla'e social 'iolence. Within this historical schema, the post-21KLs prison regime institutionalizes the raw relation of 'iolence essential to white social eing while

This is where we can also narrate the contemporary racial criminalization, policing, and incarcerating apparatuses as eing historically tethered to the genocidal logics of the post-a olition, postmediating it so it appears as non-genocidal, non-'iolent, peace"eeping, and 8ustice-forming. emancipation, and post-ci'il rights sla'e state. While it is necessary to continuously clarify and de ate whether and how this statecraft of racial imprisonment is 'erifia ly genocidal, there seems to e little reason to @uestion that it is, at least, protogenocidal - displaying oth the capacity and inclination for genocidal outcomes in its systemic logic and historical tra8ectory. This conte9tualization leads toward a somewhat different analytical framing of the Ideadly sym iosisI that sociologist %oiHc Wac@uant has outlined in his account of anti lac" carceral-spatial systems. While it would e smallminded to suggest that the emergence of the late-!Lth century prison regime is an historical ine'ita ility, we should at least understand that the

structural ottom line of &lac" imprisonment o'er the last four

decades - wherein the @uantitati'e fact of a &lac" prisonC8ail ma8ority has ecome ta"en-for-granted as a social fact - is a contemporary institutional manifestation of a genocidal racial su structure that has een reformed, and not fundamentally displaced, y the 8uridical and cultural implications of sla'eryHs a olition. I ha'e argued elsewhere for a conception of the -/ prison not as a
selfcontained institution or isolated place, ut rather as a material prototype of organized punishment and (social, ci'il, and iological6 death (Rodriguez, !LLJ6. To understand the -/ prison as a regime is to focus conceptually, theoretically, and politically on the prison as a plia le module or mo ilized 'essel through which technologies of racial dominFance institutionalize their specific, localized practices of legitimated (state6 'iolence. Dmerging as the organic institutional continuity of racial sla'eryHs genocidal 'iolence, the -/ prison regime represents a form of human domination that e9tends eyond and outside the formal institutional and geographic domains of Ithe prison (the 8ail, etc.6.I In this sense, the prison is the institutional signification of a larger regime of proto-genocidal 'iolence that is politically legitimized y the state, generally 'alorized y the cultural common sense, and dynamically mo ilized and institutionally consolidated across different historical moments: it is a form of social power that is indispensa le to the contemporary (and postemancipation6 social order and its changing structures of racial dominance, in a manner that ela orates the social logics of genocidal racial sla'ery. The

inding presence of sla'ery within post-emancipation -/ state formation is precisely why the li eral multiculturalist narration of the O ama ascendancy finds itself compelled to posit an official rupture from the spectral and material presence of

ensla'ed racial lac"ness. It is this sym


continuities of anti lac" genocide .

olic rupturing - the presentation of a president who consummates the li eral dreams of &lac" citizenship. &lac" freedom, &lac" non-resentment, and &lac" patriotic su 8ecti'ity - that constructs the &lac" non-sla'e presidency as the flesh-and- lood se'erance of the -/ racialCracist state from its entanglement in the

Against this multiculturalist narrati'e, our attention should e principally fi9ated on the ottom-line &lac"ness of the prisonHs genocidal logic, not the fungi le &lac"ness of the presidency. $O7$%-/IO7: )RO= I*O/T-$I:I% RI4<T/I TO W<ITD
RD$O7/TR-$TIO7 The O ama ascendancy is the signature moment of the post-21JLs White Reconstruction, a period that has een characterized y the reformist ela oration of historically racist systems of social power to accommodate the political imperati'es of American apartheidHs downfall and the emergence of hegemonic (li eral-to-conser'ati'e6 multiculturalisms. &yfocusing on how such reforms

ha'e neither eliminated nor fundamentally alle'iated the social emergencies consistently produced y the historical logics of racial genocide, the notion of White Reconstruction departs from =ara leHs notion of the 211Ls as the Itwilight of the
/econd ReconstructionI (=ara le. !LLK. p. !2J621 and points toward another way of framing and narrating the period that has een more commonly referenced as the Ipost-ci'il rightsI era. Rather than ta"ing its primary point of historical departure to e the cresting of the $i'il Rights =o'ement and its legacy of delimited (though no less significant6 politicalcultural achie'ements. White Reconstruction focuses on how this era is denned y an acute and sometimes aggressi'e

the recent half-century has encompassed a generalized reconstruction of IclassicallyI white supremacist apparatuses of state-sanctioned and culturally legitimated racial 'iolence .
rein'ention and reorganization of the structural-institutional formations of racial dominance. +efined schematically, This general reconstruction has (26 strategically and une'enly dislodged 'arious formal and de facto institutional white monopolies and di'ersified their personnel at 'arious le'els of access, from the entry-le'el to the administrati'e and e9ecuti'e le'els (e.g., the sometimes aggressi'e di'ersity recruitment campaigns of research uni'ersities, ur an police, and the military6A while simultaneously (!6 re'amping, complicating, and enhancing the social relations of dominance, hierarchy, and 'iolence mo ilized y such institutions - relations that roadly reflect the long historical, su structural role of race in the production of the -/ national formation and socioeconomic order. In this sense, the notion of White

historical logics of racial genocide may not only sur'i'e the apparent disruption of classical white monopolies on the administrati'e and institutional apparatuses that ha'e long mo ilized these 'iolent social logics, ut may indeed flourish through these reformist measures, as such logics are re-adapted into the protocols and discourses of these newly Idi'ersifiedI racist and white supremacist apparatuses (e.g.. the apparatuses of the research uni'ersity, police, and military ha'e e9panded their capacities to
Reconstruction rings central attention to how the produce local and glo al relations of racial dominance, at the same time that they ha'e constituted some of the central sites for di'ersity recruitment and struggles o'er e@ual access6. It is, at the 'ery least, a remar"a le and dreadful moment in the historical time of White Reconstruction that a &lac" president has won office in an electoral landslide while well o'er a million &lac" people are incarcerated with the o'erwhelming consent of whiteCmulticulturalist ci'il society.

The alternative is to affirm an unflinching paradigmatic analysis of the structures of anti0blackness. (odern revolutionary politics fail because they ignore the sub1ectivity of the black body Wilderson ,-'- 2)ran" &., *rofessor of +rama , -$ Ir'ine- .Red, White, and &lac": $inema and the /tructure of -./. Antagonisms0- pg. K-F- 3/456 The aim of this oo" is to em ar" on a paradigmatic analysis of how dispossession is imagined at the intersection of (a6 the most unflinching meditations (metacommentaries6 on political economy and li idinal economy, (e.g., =ar9ism, as in the wor" of Antonio 7egri, and psychoanalysis, as in the wor" of #a8a /il'erman6, ( 6 the discourse of political common sense, and (c6 the narrati'e and formal strategies of socially or politically engaged films. In other words, a paradigmatic analysis as"s, What are the constituent elements of, and the
assumpti'e logic regarding, dispossession which underwrite theoretical claims a out political and li idinal economyA and

how are those elements and assumptions manifest in oth political common sense and in political cinema ? $harles /. =aier argues that a metacommentary on political economy can e thought of as an .interrogation of economic doctrines to

. in sum, 3it5 regards economic ideas and eha'ior not as framewor"s for analysis, ut as eliefs and actions that must themsel'es e e9plained.0K ;ared /e9ton descri es li idinal economy as .the economy, or distri ution and arrangement, of desire and identification (their condensation and displacement6, and the comple9 relationship etween se9uality and the unconscious.0 7eedless to say li idinal
disclose their sociological and political premises. . . economy functions 'ariously across scales and is as .o 8ecti'e0 as political economy. It is lin"ed not only to forms of attraction affection and alliance ut also to aggression destruction and the 'iolence of lethal consumption. /e9ton emphasizes that it is .the whole structure of psychic and emotional life0 something more than ut inclusi'e of or tra'ersed y what Antonio 4ramsci and other =ar9ists call a .structure of feeling0 it is .a dispensation of energies concerns points of attention an9ieties pleasures appetites re'ulsions and pho ias capa le of oth great mo ility and tenacious fi9ation.0 This oo" interrogates the assumpti'e logic of metacommentaries on political and li idinal economy and their articulations in film through a su 8ect whose structure of dispossession (the constituent elements of his or her loss and suffering6 they cannot theorize the &lac", a su 8ect who is always already positioned as /la'e. The implications of my interrogation reach far eyond film studies, for these metacommentaries not only ha'e the status of paradigmatic analyses, ut their reasoning and assumptions permeate the pri'ate and @uotidian of political common sense and uttress organizing and

In leftist metacommentaries on ontology (and in the political common sense and the radical cinema in fee, howe'er unintentionally, to such metacommentaries6, su 8ects> paradigmatic location, the structure of their relationality, is organized around their capacities: powers su 8ects ha'e or lac", the constituent elements of su 8ects> structural position with which they are im ued or lac" prior to the su 8ects> performance. ;ust as prior to a game of chess, the oard and the pieces on it li'e in a networ" of
acti'ism on the left. antagonisms. The spatial and temporal capacities of the @ueen (where she is located and where she can mo'e, as well as how she can mo'e6 articulate an irreconcila le asymmetry of power etween her and a roo" or a pawn for e9ample. :est the roo" with the powers of the @ueen ( efore the game egins, of course6 and it is not the outcome of the game that is in 8eopardy so much as the integrity of the paradigm itselfBit is no longer chess ut something else. And it goes without saying that no piece may lea'e the oard if it is to stand in any relation whatsoe'er to its contemporaries (asymmetry

*ower relations are e9tant in the sinews of capacity. )or =ar9ists, the re'olutionary o 8ecti'e is not to play the game ut to destroy it, to end e9ploitation and alienation. They see the capacity to accumulate surplus 'alue em odied in one piece, the capitalist, and the em odiment of dispossession as eing manifest in the wor"er. &ut the wor"er>s essential incapacity (powers which cannot accrue to the wor"er,
aside6A this would e tantamount to lea'ing the world, to death. suffering as e9ploitation and alienation6 is the essence of capacity, life itself, when loo"ed at through the eyes of the /la'e.

%$N3 . #ENE $"


E*panding the inclusionary circle of civil society can never include +lackness because it is founded in contradistinction to it . their humanism is birthed from the murder of the slave. Wilderson '- 2)ran"4 )ran" &., *rofessor of +rama , -$ Ir'ine- .Red, White, and &lac": $inema and the /tructure of -./. Antagonisms0 pg. !2-!E- 3/455
Again, what is important for us to glean from these historians is that the pre$olum ian period, the %ate =iddle Ages, re'eals no archi'e of de ate on these three @uestions as they might e related to that massi'e group of &lac"-s"inned people south of the /ahara. Dltis suggests that there was indeed massi'e de ate which ultimately led to &ritain ta"ing the lead in the a olition of sla'ery, ut he reminds us that that de ate did not ha'e its roots in the late =iddle Ages, the post$olum ian period of the 2MLLs or the :irginia $olony period of the 2JLLs. It was, he asserts, an outgrowth of the mid- to late-2Fth century emancipatory thrustBintra-<uman disputes such as the )rench and American Re'olutionsBthat swept through Durope. &ut Dltis does not ta"e his analysis further than this. Therefore, it is important that we not e swayed y

the discourse that ela orates the 8ustification for freeing the sla'e is not the product of the <uman eing>s ha'ing suddenly and miraculously recognized the sla'e. Rather, as /aidiya <artman argues, emancipatory discourses present themsel'es to us as further e'idence of the /la'e>s fungi ility: .3T5he figurati'e capacities of lac"ness ena le white flights of fancy while increasing the li"elihood of the capti'e>s disappearanceN0 (/cenesN!!6. )irst, the @uestions
his optimism of the Dnlightenment and its su se@uent a olitionist discourses. It is highly concei'a le that of <umanism were ela orated in contradistinction to the human 'oid, to the African-@uachattel (the 2!LLs to the end of the 2Kth century6. Then, as the presence of &lac" chattel in the midst of e9ploited and un-e9ploited <umans (wor"ers and

e9ploited <umans (in the throes of class conflict with un-e9ploited the image of the sla'e as an ena ling 'ehicle that animated the e'ol'ing discourses of their emancipation , 8ust as un-e9ploited <umans had seized the flesh of the /la'e to increase their profits. Without this gratuitous 'iolence, a 'iolence that mar"s e'eryone e9perientially until the late =iddle Ages when it starts to mar" the &lac" ontologically, the so-called great emancipatory discourses of modernityBmar9ism, feminism, postcolonialism, se9ual li eration, and the ecology mo'ementB political discourses predicated on grammars of suffering and whose constituent elements are e9ploitation and alienation, might not ha'e de'eloped.'i $hattel sla'ery did not simply reterritorialize the ontology of the African. It also created the <uman out of culturally disparate entities from Durope to the Dast. I am not suggesting that across the glo e <umanism de'eloped in the same way regardless of region or cultureA what I am saying is that the late =iddle Ages ga'e rise to an ontological categoryBan ensem le of common e9istential concernsBwhich made and continues to ma"e possi le oth war and peace, conflict and resolution, etween the disparate mem ers of the human
osses, respecti'ely6 ecame a fact of the world, <umans6 seized race, east and west. /enator Thomas <art &enton intuited this notion of the e9istential commons when he wrote that though the .Oellow race0 and its culture had een .torpid and stationary for thousands of yearsN 3Whites and Asians5 must tal" together, and trade together, and marry together. $ommerce is a great ci'ilizerBsocial intercourse as greatBand marriage greater0 (The $ongressional 4lo e. =ay !F, 2FGJ6. +a'id Dltis points out that as late as the 2Kth century, .3p5risoners ta"en in the course of Duropean military actionNcould e9pect death if they were leaders, or anishment if they were deemed followers, ut ne'er ensla'ementN+etention followed y prisoner e9changes or ransoming was common0 (2G2E6. .&y the se'enteenth century, ensla'ement of fellow Duropeans was eyond the limits0 (2G!E6 of <umanism>s e9istential commons, e'en in times of war. /la'e status .was reser'ed for non-$hristians. D'en the latter group howe'erNhad some prospect of release in e9change for $hristians held y rulers of Algiers, Tunis, and other =editerranean =uslim powers0 (emphasis mine 2G2E6. &ut though the practice of ensla'ing the 'an@uished was eyond the limit of intra-West wars and only practiced pro'isionally in Dast-West conflicts, the aseness of the option was not de ated when it came to the African. The race of <umanism (White, Asian, /outh Asian, and Ara 6 could not ha'e produced itself without the simultaneous production of that wal"ing destruction which ecame "nown as the &lac". *ut another way,

through chattel sla'ery the world ga'e irth and coherence to oth its 8oys of

domesticity and to its struggles of political discontentA and with these 8oys and struggles, the <uman was orn, ut not efore it murdered the &lac", forging a sym iosis etween the political ontology of <umanity and the social death of &lac"s. In his essay .To P$orro orate Our
$laims>: *u lic *ositioning and the /la'ery =etaphor in Re'olutionary America,0 *eter +orsey (in his concurrence with cultural historians ). 7wa ueze O"oye and *atricia &radley6 suggests that, in mid- to late-2Fth century America, &lac"ness was such a fungi le commodity that it was traded as freely etween the e9ploited (wor"ers who did not .own0 sla'es6 as it was etween the une9ploited (planters who did6. This was due to the effecti'e uses to which Whites could put the /la'e as oth flesh and metaphor. )or the Re'olutionaries, .sla'ery represented a Pnightmare> that white Americans were trying to a'oid0 (EM16. +orsey>s claim is pro'ocati'e, ut not unsupported: he maintains that had &lac"s-as-/la'es not een in the White field of 'ision on a daily asis that it would ha'e een 'irtually impossi le for Whites to transform themsel'es from colonial su 8ects into Re'olutionaries: Dspecially prominent in the rhetoric and reality of the 3Re'olutionary5 era, the concepts of freedom and sla'ery were applied to a wide 'ariety of e'ents and 'alues and were constantly eing defined and redefinedN3D5arly understandings of American freedom were in many ways dependent on the e9istence of chattel sla'eryN3We should5 see sla'ery in re'olutionary discourse, not merely as a hyper olic rhetorical de'ice ut as a crucial and fluid 3fungi le5 concept that had a ma8or impact on the way early Americans thought a out their political futureNThe sla'ery metaphor desta ilized pre'iously accepted categories of thought a out politics, race, and the early repu lic. (EMM6 Though the idea of .ta9ation without representation0 may ha'e spo"en concretely to the idiom of power that mar"ed the &ritishCAmerican relation as eing structurally unethical, it did not pro'ide metaphors powerful and fungi le enough for Whites to meditate and mo'e on when resisting the structure of their own su ordination at the hands of .unchec"ed political power0 (EMG6. The most salient feature of +orsey>s findings is not his understanding of the way &lac"ness, as a crucial and fungi le conceptual possession of ci'il society, impacts and desta ilizes pre'iously

e'en when &lac"ness is deployed to stretch the elasticity of ci'il society to the point of ci'il war, that e9pansion is ne'er elastic enough to em race the 'ery &lac" who catalyzed the e9pansion. In fact, +orsey, uilding on *atricia &radley>s historical research, asserts that 8ust the opposite is true. The more the political imagination of ci'il society is ena led y the fungi ility of the sla'e metaphor, the less legi le the condition of the sla'e ecomes: .)ocusing primarily on colonial newspapersN
accepted categories of intra-White thought, ut rather his contri ution to the e'idence that, &radley finds that the sla'ery metaphor Pser'ed to distance the patriot agenda from the antisla'ery mo'ement.> If anything, &radley states, widespread use of the metaphor Pga'e first e'idence that the issue of real sla'ery was not to ha'e a part in the re'olutionary messages>0 (EM16. And +a'id Dltis elie'es that this philosophical incongruity etween the image of the /la'e and freedom for the /la'e egins in Durope and pre-dates the American Re'olution y at least one hundred years: The 3Duropean5 countries least li"ely to ensla'e their own had the harshest and most sophisticated system of e9ploiting ensla'ed non-Duropeans. O'erall, the Dnglish and +utch conception of the role of the indi'idual in metropolitan society ensured the accelerated de'elopment of African chattel sla'ery in the AmericasN ecause their own su 8ects could not ecome chattel sla'es or e'en con'icts for lifeNThere may e something to e said for e9panding a 'ariation of Ddmund =organ>s argument to co'er the whole of the &ritish Atlantic, in the sense that the cele ration of

The circulation of &lac"ness as metaphor and image at the most politically 'olatile and progressi'e moments in history (e.g. the )rench, Dnglish, and American Re'olutions6, produces dreams of li eration which are more inessential to and more parasitic on the &lac", and more emphatic in their guarantee of &lac" suffering, than any dream of human li eration in any era heretofore. &lac" /la'ery is foundational to modern <umanism>s ontics ecause .freedom0 is the hu of <umanism>s infinite conceptual tra8ectories. &ut these tra8ectories only appear to e infinite. They are finite in the sense that they are predicated on the idea of freedom fromN some contingency that can e named, or at least conceptualized. The contingent rider could e freedom from patriarchy, freedom from economic e9ploitation, freedom from political tyranny (for e9ample, ta9ation without representation6, freedom from heteronormati'ity, and so on. What I am suggesting is that first, political discourse recognizes freedom as a structuring ontologic and then it wor"s to disa'ow this recognition y imagining freedom not through political ontologyBwhere it rightfully eganB ut through political e9perience (and practice6A whereupon it immediately loses its ontological foundations. Why would anyone do this? Why would anyone start off with, @uite literally,
&ritish li ertiesBmore specifically, li erties of DnglishmenBdepended on African sla'ery. (Dmphasis mine 2G!E6 an earth-shattering ontologic and, in the process of meditating on it and acting through it, reduce it to an earth reforming e9perience? Why do <umans ta"e such pride in self-ad8ustment, in diminishing, rather than intensifying, the pro8ect of

I contend, in allowing the notion of freedom to attain the ethical purity of its ontological status, one would ha'e to lose one>s <uman coordinates and ecome &lac". Which is to say one would ha'e to die. )or the &lac", freedom is an ontological, rather than e9periential, @uestion. There is no philosophically credi le way to attach an e9periential, a contingent, rider onto the notion of freedom when one considers the &lac"Bsuch as freedom from gender or economic oppression. The "ind of contingent riders rightfully placed on the non-&lac" when thin"ing freedom. Rather, the riders that one could place on &lac" freedom would e hyper olicB though no less trueBand ultimately untena le: i.e., freedom from the world, freedom from humanity, freedom from e'eryone (including one>s
li eration (how did we get from >JF to the present6? &ecause, &lac" self6. 4i'en the reigning episteme, what are the chances of ela orating a comprehensi'e, much less translata le and

4ratuitous freedom has ne'er een a tra8ectory of <umanist thought, which is why the infinite tra8ectories of freedom that emanate from <umanism>s hu are anything ut infiniteBfor they ha'e no line of flight leading to the /la'e. The affirmatives call for institutional action upholds current antagonisms of anti0blackness
communica le, political pro8ect out of the necessity of freedom as an a solute?

Wilderson ,-'- ()ran" &., *rofessor of +rama , -$ Ir'ine- .Red, White, and &lac": $inema and
the /tructure of -./. Antagonisms0 pg. 2-M- 3/456
W<D7 I WA/ a young student at $olum ia -ni'ersity in 7ew Oor" there was a &lac" woman who used to stand outside the gate and yell at Whites, %atinos, and Dast and /outh Asian students, staff, and faculty as they entered the uni'ersity. /he accused them of ha'ing stolen her sofa and of selling her into sla'ery. /he always win"ed at the &lac"s, though we didn>t win" ac". /ome of us thought her out ursts igoted and out of step with the urgeoning ethos of multiculturalism and .rain ow coalitions.0 &ut others did not win" ac" ecause we were too fearful of the possi ility that her isolation would ecome our isolation, and we had come to $olum ia for the precise, though largely assumed and unspo"en, purpose of foreclosing on that peril. &esides, people said she was crazy. %ater, when I attended the -ni'ersity of $alifornia at &er"eley, I saw a 7ati'e American man sitting on the sidewal" of Telegraph A'enue. On the ground in front of him was an upside-down hat and a sign informing pedestrians that here they could settle the .%and %ease Accounts0 that they had neglected to settle all of their li'es. <e, too, was .crazy.0 %ea'ing aside for the moment their state of mind, it would seem that the structure, that is to say the re ar, or etter still the grammar of their demandsBand, y e9tension, the grammar of

*erhaps it is the only ethical grammar a'aila le to modern politics and modernity writ large, for it draws our attention not to how space and time are used and a used y enfranchised and 'iolently powerful interests, ut to the 'iolence that underwrites the modern world>s capacity to thin", act, and e9ist spatially and temporally. The 'iolence that ro ed her of her ody and him of his land pro'ided the stage on which other 'iolent and consensual dramas could e enacted. Thus,
their sufferingBwas indeed an ethical grammar. they would ha'e to e crazy, crazy enough to call not merely the actions of the world ut the world itself to account, and to account for them no lessQ The woman at $olum ia was not demanding to e a participant in an unethical networ" of distri ution: she was not demanding a place within capital, a piece of the pie (the demand for her sofa notwithstanding6. Rather, she was articulating a triangulation etween two things. On the one hand was the loss of her ody, the 'ery dereliction of her corporeal integrity, what <ortense /pillers charts as the transition from eing a eing to ecoming a . eing for the captor,02 the drama of 'alue (the stage on which surplus 'alue is e9tracted from la or power through commodity production and sale6. On the other was the corporeal integrity that, once ripped from her ody, fortified and e9tended the corporeal integrity of e'eryone else on the street. /he ga'e irth to the commodity and to the <uman, yet she had neither su 8ecti'ity nor a sofa to show for it. In her eyes, the worldBnot its myriad discriminatory practices, ut the world itselfBwas unethical. And yet, the world passes y her without the slightest inclination to stop and disa use her of her claim. Instead, it calls her .crazy.0 And to what does the world attri ute the 7ati'e American man>s insanity? .<e>s crazy if he thin"s he>s getting any money out of us0? /urely, that doesn>t ma"e him crazy. Rather it is simply an indication that he does not ha'e a ig enough gun. What are we to ma"e of a world that responds to the most lucid enunciation of ethics with 'iolence? What are the foundational @uestions of the ethico-political? Why are these @uestions so scandalous that they are rarely posed politically, intellectually, and cinematicallyBunless they are posed o li@uely and unconsciously, as if y accident?

4i'e Turtle Island ac" to the ./a'age.0 4i'e life itself ac" to the /la'e. Two

and the structure of -./. (and perhaps glo al6 antagonisms would e dismantled. An .ethical modernity0 would no longer sound li"e an o9ymoron. )rom there we could usy oursel'es with important conflicts that ha'e een promoted to the le'el of antagonisms, such as class struggle, gender conflict, and immigrants> rights. One
simple sentences, fourteen simple words, cannot ut wonder why @uestions that go to the heart of the ethico-political, @uestions of political ontology, are so unspea"a le in intellectual meditations, political roadsides, and e'en socially and politically engaged feature films . $learly they can e spo"en, e'en a child could spea" those lines, so they would pose no pro lem for a scholar, an acti'ist, or a filmma"er. And yet, what is also clearBif the filmographies of socially and politically engaged directors, the archi'e of progressi'e scholars, and the plethora of left-wing roadsides are anything to go yBis that what can so easily e spo"en is now (MLL years and ML million /ettlersC=asters on6 so u i@uitously unspo"en that these two simple sentences, these

/oon it will e forty years since radical politics, left-leaning scholarship, and socially engaged feature films egan to spea" the unspea"a le.! In the 21JLs and early 21KLs the @uestions as"ed y radical politics and scholarship were not /hould the -nited /tates e o'erthrown? or e'en Would it e o'erthrown? ut when and howBand, for some, what would come in its wa"e. Those steadfast in their con'iction that there remained a discerna le @uantum of ethics in the -nited /tates writ large (and here I am spea"ing of e'eryone from =artin %uther #ing ;r. prior
fourteen words not only render their spea"er .crazy0 ut ecome themsel'es impossi le to imagine. to his 21JF shift, to the Tom <ayden wing of /tudents for +emocratic /ociety, to the ;ulian &ond and =arion &arry y #ennedy +emocrats6 were accounta le, in their rhetorical machinations, to the paradigmatic zeitgeist of the &lac" *anthers, the American Indian =o'ement, and the Weather -nderground. Radicals and progressi'es could deride, re8ect, or chastise armed struggle mercilessly and ca'alierly with respect to tactics and the possi ility of .success,0 ut they could not dismiss re'olution-as-ethic ecause they could not ma"e a con'incing caseB y way of a paradigmatic analysisBthat the -nited /tates was an ethical formation and still hope to maintain credi ility as radicals and progressi'es. D'en &o y #ennedy (as a -./. attorney general6 mused that the law and its enforcers had no ethical standing in the presence of &lac"s.E One could (and many did6 ac"nowledge America>s strength and power. This seldom rose to the le'el of an ethical assessment, howe'er, remaining instead an assessment of the . alance of forces.0 The political discourse of &lac"s, and to a lesser e9tent Indians, circulated too widely to wed the -nited /tates and ethics credi ly. The raw force of $OI7TD%*RO put an end to this tra8ectory toward a possi le hegemony of ethical faction of the /tudent 7on'iolent $oordinating $ommittee, to &o accounta ility. $onse@uently, the power of &lac"ness and Redness to pose the @uestionBand the power to pose the @uestion is the greatest power of allBretreated as did White radicals and progressi'es who .retired0 from the struggle. The @uestion lies uried in the gra'es of young &lac" *anthers, AI= warriors, and &lac" %i eration Army soldiers, or in prison cells where so many of them ha'e een rotting (some in solitary confinement6 for ten, twenty, or thirty years, and at the gates of the academy where the .crazies0 shout at passers y . 4one are not only the young and 'i rant 'oices that effected a seismic shift on the political landscape, ut also the intellectual protocols of in@uiry, and with them a spate of feature

Is it still possi le for a dream of unfettered ethics, a dream of the /ettlement and the /la'e estate>sG destruction, to manifest itself at the ethical core of cinematic discourse ettG when
films that ecame authorized, if not y an una ashed re'olutionary polemic, then certainly y a re'olutionary zeitgeist. this dream is no longer a constituent element of political discourse in the streets or of intellectual discourse in the academy? The answer is .no0 in the sense that, as history has shown, what cannot e articulated as political discourse in

ut .yes0 in the sense that in e'en the most taciturn historical moments, such as ours, the grammar of &lac" and Red suffering rea"s in on this foreclosure, al eit li"e the somatic compliance of hysterical symptomsBit registers in oth cinema and scholarship as a symptom of awareness of the structural antagonisms. The election of *resident &arac" O ama does not mitigate the claim that this is a
the streets is dou ly foreclosed on in screenplays and in scholarly prose, taciturn historical moment. 7eoli eralism with a &lac" face is neither the inde9 of a re'olutionary ad'ance nor the end of

If anything, the election of O ama ena les a plethora of shaming discourses in response to re'olutionary politics and .legitimates0 widespread disa'owal of any notion that the -nited /tates itself, and not merely its policies and practices, is unethical. &etween 21JK and 21FL, we could thin" cinematically and intellectually of
anti-&lac"ness as a constituent element of -./. antagonisms. &lac"ness and Redness as ha'ing the coherence of full- lown discourses. )rom 21FL to the present, howe'er, &lac"ness and Redness manifest only in the re ar of cinematic and intellectual (political6 discourse, that is, as unspo"en grammars. This grammar can e discerned in the cinematic strategies (lighting, camera angles, image composition, and acoustic design6, e'en when the script la ors for the spectator to imagine social turmoil through the ru ric of conflict (i.e., a ru ric of pro lems that can e posed and conceptually sol'ed6 as opposed to the ru ric of antagonism (an irreconcila le struggle etween entities, or positions, the resolution of which is not dialectical ut entails the o literation of one of the positions6. In other words, e'en when films narrate a story in which &lac"s or Indians are eleaguered with pro lems that the script insists are conceptually coherent (usually ha'ing to do with po'erty or the a sence of .family 'alues06, the nonnarrati'e, or cinematic, strategies of the film often disrupt this coherence y posing the irreconcila le @uestions of Red and &lac" political ontologyBor nonontology. The grammar of antagonism rea"s in on the mendacity of conflict. /emiotics and linguistics teach us that when we spea", our grammar goes unspo"en. Our grammar is assumed. It is the structure through

%i"ewise, the grammar of political ethicsB the grammar of assumptions regarding the ontology of sufferingBwhich underwrites film theory and political discourse (in this oo", discourse ela orated in direct relation to radical action6 , and which underwrites cinematic speech (in this oo", Red, White, and &lac" films from the mid-21JLs to the present6 is also unspo"en. This notwithstanding, film theory, political discourse, and cinema assume an ontological grammar, a structure of suffering. And this structure of suffering crowds out others, regardless of the sentiment of the film or the spirit of unity mo ilized y the political discourse in @uestion. To put a finer point on it, structures of ontological suffering stand in antagonistic, rather then conflictual, relation to one another (despite the
which the la or of speech is possi le.M fact that antagonists themsel'es may not e aware of the ontological position from which they spea"6. Though this is perhaps the most contro'ersial and out-of-step claim of this oo", it is, nonetheless, the foundation of the close reading of feature films and political theory that follows.

%$N3 . 3 !66
Western concepts of power and identity are inherently white and racist00 turns the root cause arguments "handler 7 intellectual and scholar wor"ing roadly in philosophical pro lematics, especially as they concern the
history of the human sciences, as well as the concepts of historicity and historical memory in general. After completing his undergraduate study at the -ni'ersity of $alifornia at +a'is, he recei'ed his *h.+. in social and cultural Anthropology from the -ni'ersity of $hicago (7ahum +., IOf D9or itance: The *ro lem of the 7egro as a *ro lem for Thought,I !LL1, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageCchandlerRe9or itance.negro.pdf6CCA=

The study of the 7egro or African American, or the African +iaspora, must egin with the pro lems announced for thought within its own historicity. This would e the fundamental
epistemological earing of +u &ois>s felicitous deS nition of the S eld of African American studies as the .study of the 7egro pro lems,0 as in the title of his 2F1K programmatic essay. That is, it

cannot and should not presuppose the o 8ect of its concern, the o 8ect gi'en to it, as a simple transcendental entity, whether hypostatized as an o 8ect of a discipline of "nowledge (such as society or culture6 or as a discrete social entity (such as a racial or ethnic or cultural group or a .national identity0 or some deri'ati'e thereof6.JE Rather
than attempt to name the African American as acceding to some status of the pure, .something li"e0 a .racial0 group or a .cultural0 group or an .ethnic0 group or a sta le su -.national0 identity, it

demands that we rethin" the premises of all concepts of historicity and sociality y which such entities are demarcated. Relation must e thought under the (non6heading of passage, . etween,0 the agonistic mo'ement of the apeiron. )urther, rather than attempt to name African Americans as relati'ely unpertur ed or undetermined y the great systems of modernity (and the impulse here remains strong to defend those
understood as African American from the great denigrations of social science as pathological figures, and in a certain sense this practice cannot and should not e 'oided6,JG this

situation re@uires that we rethin" the idea of system such that structurality appears under the heading of dissemination . This must e a thought of the nonlinear concatenation of the mo'ements of force. That is, we must rethin" pro lems of power and authority anew. At that 8uncture, then, we can egin to reinscri e the de'olution of system under the
figure of the so-called minor term, .7egro0 for e9ample, as a "ind of hyper olic proposition.JM Along this trac", for instance, +u &ois>s ela oration of the collo@uial term of the .color line0 can e understood as a "ind of theoretical practice, whether or not it is named as such y him. Reinscri ing his thought in such a manner might ma"e it possi le to resituate

this reinscription might radicalize the thought that not only is system only possi le in and through its limit, ut the limit, the outside, would appear within system. To thin" the possi
the way we narrate the history of capital or the de'olution of modern systems of authority. Accordingly, the pure analogy.

ility of system would re@uire, in a certain way, that one thin" oth sides of the limit as other than the hypostatization of a possi le present, otherwise than as .structure0 or .idea0 suscepti le to S guration as a future present, other than a logic of

/omething li"e the figure of the dou le in the situation of the African American would or could maintain another "ind of attention, if not something wholly new, in thin"ing of the pro lem of relation, system, totality, structure, or idea . /ystem, for e9ample, might e understood to S nd its pertinence (which may also e a nonpertinence 6 only at the le'el of su 8ect and su 8ecti'ation in and through the mo'ement of dispersal and dissemination (in which spacing or another temporality sets afoot something otherwise and perhaps new6 that is at sta"e in something li"e a 7egro or African American as the heading of a general pro lem.

%$N3 . "O%O

+%$N&NESS

The ignorance of ontological blackness stems from the system of whiteness4 that obscures embodiment and makes anti0blackness invisible 8ancy 9: (4eorge, Associate *rofessor of *hilosophy at +u@uesne -ni'ersity and $oordinator of the
$ritical Race Theory /pea"er /eries, .Whiteness and the Return of the &lac" &ody0, The ;ournal of /peculati'e *hilosophy 21.G (!LLM6 !2M-!G2 3/456
I write out of a personal e9istential conte9t. This conte9t is a profound source of "nowledge connected to my IracedI ody.

In philosophy, the only thing that we em odied self is rac"eted and deemed irrele'ant to theory, superfluous and cum ersome in oneHs search for truth. It is est, or so we are told, to reason from nowhere. <ence, the white philosopherCauthor presumes to spea" for all of IusI without the slightest mention of his or her IracedI identity. /elf-consciously writing as a white male philosopher, $rispin /artwell o ser'es: %eft to my own de'ices, I disappear as an author. That is the IwhitenessI of my authorship. This whiteness of authorship is, for us, a form of authorityA to spea" (apparently6 from nowhere, for e'eryone, is empowering, though one wields
<ence, I write from a place of li'ed em odied e9perience, a site of e9posure. are taught to Ie9poseI is a wea" argument, a fallacy, or someoneHs IinferiorI reasoning power. The power here only y ecoming lost to oneself. &ut such an authorship and authority is also pleasura le: it yields the pleasure of self-forgetting or 3Dnd *age !2M5 apparent transcendence of the mundane and the particular, and the pleasure of power e9pressed in the IcomprehensionI of a range of materials. (211F, J6 To

theorize the &lac" ody one must Iturn to the 3&lac"5 ody as the radi9 for interpreting racial e9perienceI (;ohnson 3211E, JLL56.2 It is important to note that this particular strategy also functions as a lens through which to theorize and criti@ue whitenessA for the &lac" odyHs IracialI e9perience is fundamentally lin"ed to the
oppressi'e modalities of the IracedI white ody. <owe'er, there is no denying that my own IracialI e9periences or the social performances of whiteness can ecome o 8ects of critical reflection. In this paper, my o 8ecti'e is to descri e and

the &lac" odyHs su 8ecti'ity, its li'ed reality, is reduced to instantiations of the white imaginary, resulting in what I refer to as Ithe phenomenological return of the &lac" ody.I! These
theorize situations where instantiations are em edded within and e'ol'e out of the comple9 social and historical interstices of whitesH efforts at selfconstruction through comple9 acts of erasure 'is-T-'is &lac" people. These acts of self-construction, howe'er, are mythsCideological constructions predicated upon maintaining white power. As ;ames /nead has noted, I=ythification is the replacement of history with a surrogate ideology of 3white5 ele'ation or 3&lac"5 demotion along a scale of human 'alueI (/nead 211G, G6. <ow I understand and theorize the ody relates to the fact that the odyBin this case, the &lac"

The odyHs meaningBwhether phenotypically white or lac"Bits ontology, its modalities of aesthetic performance , its comportment, its IraciatedI reproduction, is in constant contestation. The hermeneutics of the ody, how it is understood, how it is Iseen,I its Itruth,I is partly the result of a profound historical, ideological construction. IThe odyI is positioned y historical practices and discourses. The ody is codified as this or that in terms of meanings that are sanctioned, scripted, and constituted through processes of negotiation that are em edded within and ser'e 'arious ideological interests that are grounded within further power-laden social processes. The historical
odyBis capa le of undergoing a sociohistorical process of Iphenomenological returnI 'is-T-'is white em odiment. plasticity of the ody, the fact that it is a site of contested meanings, spea"s to the historicity of its I eingI as li'ed and meant within the interstices of social semiotics. <ence: a6 the ody is less of a thingC eing than a shiftingCchanging historical meaning that is su 8ect to cultural configurationCreconfiguration. The point here is to interrogate the I&lac"

the odyHs meaning is fundamentally sym olic (=c+owell !LL2, EL26, and its meaning is congealed through sym olic repetition and iteration that emits certain signs and presupposes certain normsA and, c6 the
odyI as a Ifi9ed and material truthI that pree9ists Iits relations with the world and with othersIE A 6 ody is a attlefield, one that is fought o'er again and again across particular historical moments and within particular social spaces. IIn other words, the concept of the ody pro'ides only the illusion of self-e'idence, facticity, HtherenessH for something 3Dnd *age !2J5 fundamentally ephemeral, imaginary, something made in the image of particular social groupsI (EL26. On this score,

it is not only the I&lac" odyI that defies the ontic fi9ity pro8ected upon it

through the white gaze, and, hence, through the episteme of whiteness, ut the white ody is also fundamentally sym olic, re@uiring demystification of its status as norm, the paragon of eauty, order, innocence, purity, restraint, and no ility. In other words, gi'en the
three suppositions a o'e, oth the I&lac" odyI and the Iwhite odyI lend themsel'es to processes of interpreti'e fracture and to strategies of interrogating and remo'ing the 'eneer of their alleged o 8ecti'ity. To ha'e oneHs dar" ody in'aded y the white gaze and then to ha'e that ody returned as distorted is a powerful e9perience of 'iolation. The e9perience presupposes an anti-&lac" li'ed conte9t, a conte9t within which whiteness gets reproduced and the white ody as norm is reinscri ed.The late writer, actor, and acti'ist Ossie +a'is recalls that at the age of si9 or se'en two white police officers told him to get into their car. They too" him down to the precinct. They "ept him there for an hour, laughing at him and e'entually pouring cane syrup o'er his head. This only created the opportunity for more laughter, as they loo"ed upon the IsillyI little &lac" oy. If he was a le to articulate his feelings at that moment, thin" of how the young +a'is was returned to himself: II am an o 8ect of white laughter, a uffoon.I The young +a'is no dou t appeared to the white police officers in ways that they had appro'ed. They set the stage, created a site of &lac" uffoonery, and en8oyed their sadistic pleasure without lin"ing an eye. /artwell notes that Ithe 3white5 oppressor see"s to constrain the oppressed 3&lac"s5 to certain appro'ed modes of 'isi ility (those set out in the template of stereotype6 and then gazes o sessi'ely on the spectacle he has createdI (211F, 226. +a'is notes that he Iwent along with the game of lac" emasculation, it seemed to come naturallyI (=ara le !LLL, 16. After that, Ithe ritual was completeI (16. <e was then sent home with some peanut rittle to eat. +a'is "new at that early age, e'en without the words to articulate what he felt, that he had een 'iolated. <e refers to the entire ritual as the process of Iniggerization.I <e notes: The culture had already told me what this was and what my reaction to this should e: not to e surprisedA to e9pect itA to accommodate itA to li'e with it. I didnHt "now how deeply I was scarred or affected y that, ut it was a part of who I was. (16 +a'is, in other words, was made to feel that he had to accept who he was, that IniggerizedI little &lac" oy, an insignificant plaything within a system of ontological racial differences. This,

the tric" of white ideologyA it is to gi'e the appearance of fi9ity, where the Iloo" of the white su 8ect interpellates the lac" su 8ect as inferior, which, in turn, ars the lac" su 8ect from seeing himCherself without the internalization of the white gazeI (Weheliye !LLM, G!6. On this score, it is white odies that are deemed agential. They configure Ipassi'eI 3Dnd *age !2K5 &lac" odies according to their will. &ut it is no mysteryA for Ithe 7egro is
howe'er, is interpreted in the terms of the white man. White-man psychology is applied and it is no wonder that the result often shows the 7egro in a ludicrous lightI (&raithwaite 211!, EJ6. While wal"ing across the street, I ha'e endured the sounds of car doors loc"ing as whites secure themsel'es from the Ioutside world,I a trope rendering my &lac" ody ostracized, different, un elonging. This outside world constitutes a space, a field, where certain &lac" odies are relegated. They are re8ected, ecause they are deemed suspicious, 'ile infestations of the (white6 social ody. The loc"s on the doors resound: $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"Q Of course, the clic"ing sounds are always already accompanied y ner'ous gestures, and eyes that want to loo", ut are hesitant to do so. The cumulati'e impact of the sounds is deafening, maddening in their distorted repetition. The clic"s egin to function as coded sounds, reminding me that I am dangerousA the sounds create oundaries, separating the white ci'ilized from the dar" sa'age, e'en as I comport myself to the contrary. The clic"ing sounds mar" me, they inscri e me, they materialize my presence in ways that elie my intentions. -na le to stop the clic"ing, una le to esta lish a form of recognition that creates a space of trust and liminality, there are times when one wants to ecome their fantasy, to ecome their &lac" monster, their ogeyman, to pull open the car door: I/urprise. OouH'e 8ust een car8ac"ed y a ghost, a fantasy of your own creation. 7ow, get the fuc" out of the car.I I ha'e endured white women clutching their purses or wal"ing across the street as they catch a glimpse of my approaching &lac" ody. It is during such moments that my ody is gi'en ac" to me in a ludicrous light, where I li'e the meaning of my ody as confiscated. +a'is too had the meaning of his young &lac" ody stolen. The surpluses eing gained y the whites in each case are not economic. Rather, it is through e9istential e9ploitation that the surpluses e9tracted can e said to e ontologicalBIsem lances of determined presence, of full positi'ity, to pro'ide a sense of secure eingI (<enry 211K, EE6. When I was a out se'enteen or eighteen, my white math teacher initiated such an in'asion, pulling it off with complete calm and presuma ly self-transparency. 4i'en the historical construction of whiteness as the norm, his own IracedI su 8ect position was rendered in'isi le. After all, he li'ed in the real world, the world of the serious man, where 'alues are elie'ed anterior to their e9istential founding. As I recall, we were discussing my plans for the future. I told him that I wanted to e a pilot. I was earnest a out this choice, spending a great deal of time reading a out the re@uirements in'ol'ed in ecoming a pilot, how one would ha'e to accumulate a certain num er of flying hours. I also read a out the dynamics of lift and drag that affect a plane in flight. After no dou t ta"ing note of my firm commitment, he loo"ed at me and implied that I should e realistic (a code word for realize that I am &lac"6 a out my goals. <e said that I should ecome a carpenter or a ric"layer. I was e9posing myself, telling a trusted teacher what I wanted to e, and he returned me to myself as something 3Dnd *age !2F5 that I did not recognize. I had no intentions of eing a carpenter or a ric"layer (or a 8anitor or ele'ator operator for that matter6. The situation, though, is more comple9. It is not that he simply returned me to myself as a carpenter or a ric"layer when all along I had this image of myself as a pilot. Rather, he returned me to myself as a fi9ed entity, a IniggerizedI &lac" ody whose epidermal logic had already foreclosed the possi ility of eing anything other than what was efitting its lowly station. <e was the 'oice of a larger anti-&lac" racist

society that Iwhispers mi9ed messages in our earsI (=ara le !LLL, 16, the ears of &lac" people who struggle to thin" of themsel'es as a possi ility. <e mentioned that there were only a few &lac" pilots and that I should e more realistic. (One can only imagine what his response would ha'e een had I said that I wanted to e a philosopher, particularly gi'en the statistic that &lac" philosophers constitute a out 2.2U of philosophers in the -nited /tates6. #eep in mind that this e'ent did not occur in the 21ELs or 21GLs, ut around 21K1. The message was clear. &ecause I was &lac", I had to settle for an occupation suita le for my &lac" ody,G unli"e the white ody that would no dou t ha'e een encouraged to ecome a pilot. As with +a'is, ha'ing oneHs &lac" ody returned as a source of impossi ility, one egins to thin", to feel, to emote: IAm I a nigger?I The internalization of the white gaze creates a dou leness within the psyche of the &lac", leading to a destructi'e process of superfluous self-sur'eillance and self-interrogation. This was indeed a time when I felt ontologically loc"ed into my ody. =y ody was indeli ly mar"ed with this stain of dar"ness. After all, he was the white mind, the mathematical mind, calculating my future y factoring in my &lac"ness. <e did not IseeI me, though. %i"e DllisonHs

I occupied that parado9ical status of I'isi le in'isi ility.I Within this dyadic space, my &lac" ody phenomenologically returned to me as inferior. To descri e the
in'isi le man, phenomenological return of the &lac" ody is to disclose how it is returned as an appearance to consciousness, my consciousness. The (negati'ely6 IracedI manner in which my ody underwent a phenomenological return, howe'er, presupposes a thic" social reality that has always already een structured y the ideology and history of whiteness. =ore

when my ody is returned to me, the white ody has already een constituted o'er centuries as the norm, oth in Duropean and Anglo-American culture, and at se'eral discursi'e le'els from science to philosophy to religion. In the case of my math teacher, his whiteness was in'isi le to him as my &lac"ness was hyper-'isi le to oth of us. Of course, his in'isi ility to his own normati'e here is a function of my hyper-'isi ility. It is important to "eep in mind that white
specifically, Americans, more generally, define themsel'es around the Igra'itational pull,I as it were, of the &lac".M The not of white America is the &lac" of white America. This not is essential, as is the in'isi ility of the negati'e relation through which whites are constituted. All of em odied eings ha'e their own Ihere.I =y white math teacherHs racist social performances (for e9ample, his Iad'iceI to me6, within the conte9t of a 3Dnd *age !215 white racist historical imaginary and asymmetric power relations, suspends and effecti'ely dis@ualifies my em odied here. What was the message communicated? D9pressing my desire to e, to ta"e ad'antage of the opportunities for which &lac" odies had died in order to secure, my am ition Iwas flung ac" in my face li"e a slapI ()anon 21JK, 22G6. )anon writes: The white world, the only honora le one, arred me from all participation. A man was e9pected to eha'e li"e a man. I was e9pected to eha'e li"e a lac" manBor at least li"e a nigger. I shouted a greeting to the world and the world slashed away my 8oy. I was told to stay within ounds, to go ac" where I elonged. (22GV2M6 According to philosopher &ettina &ergo, drawing from the thought of Dmmanuel %e'inas, Iperception and discourseBwhat we see and the sym ols and meanings of our social imaginariesBpro'e ine9trica ly the one from the otherI (!LLM, 2E26. <ence, the white math teacherHs perception, what he Isaw,I was ine9trica ly lin"ed to social meanings and semiotic constructions and constrictions that opened up a Ifield of

There is nothing passi'e a out the white gaze. There are racist sociohistorical and epistemic conditions of emergence that construct not only the &lac" ody, ut the white ody as well. /o, what is IseenI when the white gaze IseesI Imy odyI and it ecomes something alien to me?
appearancesI regarding my dar" ody.

"rushing difference in favor of fluidity isnt the answer . instead4 celebrating difference is key to attack and resolve anti0blackness "handler 7 intellectual and scholar wor"ing roadly in philosophical pro lematics, especially as they concern the
history of the human sciences, as well as the concepts of historicity and historical memory in general. After completing his undergraduate study at the -ni'ersity of $alifornia at +a'is, he recei'ed his *h.+. in social and cultural Anthropology from the -ni'ersity of $hicago (7ahum +., IOf D9or itance: The *ro lem of the 7egro as a *ro lem for Thought,I !LL1, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageCchandlerRe9or itance.negro.pdf6CCA= Thus, if one>s practice would operate on the order of fundamental thought and e general in its practical theoretical implication, it is necessary in articulating oneself in the historical space in which discourses of the 7egro emerge and resound to produce a dou le and redou led discourse. The

enunciation of Africanist Sgures in discourses of the 7egro emerges in a hierarchically ordered Seld in which the @uestion of the status of the socalled 7egro is @uite indissolu ly lin"ed to a presupposition of the homogeneity and purity of the so-called Duropean or its deri'ati'es. Their discourse is

historically coe9tensi'e and interwo'en with the inception of what philosopher #e'in Thomas =iles once proposed in a felicitous phrase during an interlocution on the @uestion, one might call the .pro8ect0

of (white6 purity in the modern era.1 This situation, or more precisely pro lematization, yields for African American thin"ers what I call the pro lem of purity, or the pro lem of pure eing . To inha it such a discursi'e formation, perhaps in a structurally contestatory fashion, one cannot, under the premise of the ultimate incoherence of such a presupposition or proclamation of purity, of the (im6possi ility of the pure, simply declare in turn the status (as prior, for e9ample6 of a neutral space or position.2L One must displace or attempt to displace the distinction in @uestion. This necessity is perhaps all the more astringent when the distinction in @uestion is a claim for a pure origin, a pure identity, an ultimate ground of identiScation. /uch a displacement can e made general or decisi'e only through the mo'ement of the producti'e elaboration of differenceBas articulationB perhaps e'en according to necessity as the performati'e announcement of a differential Sgure. /uch a production ma"es possi le a delimitation of the claim of purity and prepares the ground for an ela oration of its la ility. In the historical situation of the African or 7egro American, as has een said in many
ways, ut to ta"e W. D. &. +u &ois>s formulation from the .)orethought0 of the /ouls of &lac" )ol": Dssays and /"etches, one has to esta lish, despite all its parado9es and ris"s, in the domains of sociality and political inha itation, for e9ample, the character of an origin of .world.022

"hallenging +lack oppression through !fricanist approaches is key . denying distinctions maintains the status ;uo "handler 7 intellectual and scholar wor"ing roadly in philosophical pro lematics, especially as they concern the
history of the human sciences, as well as the concepts of historicity and historical memory in general. After completing his undergraduate study at the -ni'ersity of $alifornia at +a'is, he recei'ed his *h.+. in social and cultural Anthropology from the -ni'ersity of $hicago (7ahum +., IOf D9or itance: The *ro lem of the 7egro as a *ro lem for Thought,I !LL1, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageCchandlerRe9or itance.negro.pdf6CCA=

The economy at wor" in Africanist pro lematics , as they articulate the W pro lem of principle or ground, especially as the interwo'en @uestions of W tradition or forms of social e9istence and practices of distinction according W to a mar" or concept of race, can e stated @uite simply. In the face of a distinction, a 8udgment of 'alue, a recognition of a difference in any sense W whatsoe'er, e'en or especially if the mar" is understood to indicate or name W an a sence or a putati'e .nothing,0 one cannot ring that distinction or W mar" into @uestion y the postulation of a simple denial of the integrity or W ground of the distinction and difference that has een proclaimedA that is, y W counterposing either the fullness of a directly oppositional claim, or a measure of neutrality, to the distinction in @uestion. 7ot only does the apparent W direct denial of a distinction, or an apparent refusal of ac"nowledgment W thereof, do so in the 'ery statement or practice of such a gesture, ut the W force of that implicit and uried recognition will function all the more W powerfully in deSning the terrain and organizing the Seld in which the critical discourse operates, limiting and specifying its criti@ue, ecause such W a denial has in fact not o'erturned e9isting hierarchies (conceptual and political6 of power and authority. It will, in an essential sense, lea'e the status W @uo intact.F

%$N3 . TE

The fear of terrorism is an e*portation of paranoia based out of hegemonic whiteness. This framing is not benign4 and 1ustifies the annihilation of marked raciali/ed bodies. odrigue/ 9-< (+ylan, *h+ in Dthnic /tudies *rogram of the -ni'ersity of $alifornia &er"eley and
Associate *rofessor of Dthnic /tudies at -ni'ersity of $alifornia Ri'erside, .American 4lo ality And the -/ *rison regime: /tate :iolence And White /upremacy from A u 4hrai to /toc"ton to agong diwa0, Ateneo de =anila -ni'ersity, !LLK, #riti"a #ultura 1 (!LLK6: L!!-LGF- 3/456
To consider the -/ prison as a glo al practice of dominance, we might egin with the now-indeli le photo e9hi ition of capti'e rown men manipulated, e9pired, and rendered are in the tom s of the u/-commandeered A u 4hrai prison: here, I am concerned less with the idiosyncrasies of the carceral spectacle (who did what, administrati'e responsi ilities, tedium of military corruption and incompetence, etc.6 than I am with its inscription of the

As the odies of tortured prisoners in this eyond and outside the formal national domain of the -nited /tates, ha'e ecome the hyper-'isi le and accessi le raw material for a glo al criti@ue of the -/ stateBwith A u 4hrai often ser'ing as the signifier for a generalized mo ilization of sentiment against the American occupationBthe intimate and pro9imate odies of those locally and intimately imprisoned within the localities of the -nited /tates constantly threaten to disappear from the political and moral registers of -/ ci'il society, its resident u/ esta lishment left, and perhaps most if
where in which the worst of u/ prisonCstate 'iolence incurs. somewhere else, that is, not all elements of the glo al esta lishment left, which includes 74Os, political parties, and sectarian organizations. I

a new theoretical framing is re@uired to critically address (and correct6 the artificial delineation of the statecraft of A u 4hrai prison, and other -/ formed andCor mediated carceral sites across the glo al landscape, as somehow uni@ue and e9ceptional to places outside the -/ proper. In other words, a genealogy and social theory of -/ state 'iolence specific to the regime of the prison needs to e delicately situated within the ensem le of institutional relations, political intercourses, and historical con8unctures that precede, produce, and sustain places li"e the A u 4hrai prison, and can therefore only e ade@uately articulated as a genealogy and theory of the allegedly .domestic0 -/ prison regime>s .glo ality0 (I will clarify my use of this concept in the ne9t part of this introduction6. )urther, in offering this initial attempt at such a framing, I am suggesting a genealogy of -/ state 'iolence that can more sufficiently conceptualize the logical continuities and material articulations etween a6 the ongoing pro8ects of domestic warfare organic to the white supremacist -/ racial state, and 6 the array of .glo al0 (or e9tra-domestic6 technologies of 'iolence that form the premises of possi ility for those social formations and hegemonies integral to the contemporary moment of -/ glo al dominance. In this sense, I am amplifying the capacity of the -/ prison to inaugurate technologies of power that e9ceed its nominal relegation to the domain of the criminal- 8uridical. $onsider imprisonment, then, as a
contend in this essay that practice of social ordering and geopolitical power, rather than as a self-contained or foreclosed 8urisprudential practice: therein, it is possi le to reconceptualize the significance of the A u 4hrai spectacle as only one signification of a regime of dominance that is neither (simply6 local nor (erratically6 e9ceptional, ut is simultaneously mo ilized, proliferating, and glo al. The o'erarching concern animating this essay re'ol'es around the peculiarity of -/ glo al dominance in the

gi'en the geopolitical dispersals, and dislocations, as well as the differently formed social relations generated y -/ hegemonies across sites and historical conte9ts, what modalities of .rule0 and statecraft gi'e form and coherence to the (sapatialtemporal6 transitions, (institutional-discursi'e6 rearticulations, and (apparent6 no'elties of .War on Terror0 neoli eralism? *ut differently, what technologies and institutionalities
historical present: that is,

thread etween forms of state and state-sanctioned dominance that are nominally autonomous of the -/ state, ut are no less implicated in the glo al reach of -/ state formation?

%$N3 . =E#E(ON8
=egemony is a process of raciali/ed manifest destiny that seeks out minority populations in order to coerce them into a system of white0 supremacist policing. odrigue/ 9-< (+ylan, *h+ in Dthnic /tudies *rogram of the -ni'ersity of $alifornia &er"eley and
Associate *rofessor of Dthnic /tudies at -ni'ersity of $alifornia Ri'erside, .American 4lo ality And the -/ *rison regime: /tate :iolence And White /upremacy from A u 4hrai to /toc"ton to agong diwa0, Ateneo de =anila -ni'ersity, !LLK, #riti"a #ultura 1 (!LLK6 ,3/456
In fact,

the notion of American glo ality I ha'e egun discussing here already e9ceeds negri and <ardt>s formulation to the e9tent that it is a glo al racial formation, and more pointedly a glo al mo ilization of a white supremacist social formation (read: a united /tates of America
formed y the social-economic geographies of racial chattel sla'ery and their recodification through the post-2Eth

-/ prison regime>s production of human immo ilization and death composes some of the fundamental modalities of American national coherence. It inscri es two forms of domination that tend to slip from the attention of political theorists, including 7egri and <ardt: first , the prison regime strategically institutionalizes the iopolitical structures of white racialCnationalist ascendancyBit @uite concretely pro'ides a definition for white American personhood, citizenship, freedom, and racialized patriotism. /econd, the prison regime reflects the moral, spiritual, and cultural inscription of =anifest +estiny (and its descendant material cultural and state- uilding articulations of racist and white supremacist con@uest, genocide, and population control6 across different historical moments. to in'o"e and critically rearticulate negri and <ardt>s formulation, the focal @uestion ecomes: <ow does the right of the u/-as-glo al police to "ill, detain, o literate ecome 'oiced, 8uridically coded, and culturally recoded? the structure of presumptionBand therefore relati'e political silenceBenmeshing the prison>s centrality to the logic of American glo ality is precisely e'idence of the fundamental power of the u/ prison regime within the larger schema of American hegemony. In this sense the u/ prison regime is ultimately really not an
Amendment inno'ation of other technologies of criminalization and imprisonment6. The .institution.0 rather it is a formulation of world order (hence, a dynamic and perpetual la or of institutionalization rather than a definiti'e modernist institution6 in which massi'ely scaled, endlessly strategized technologies of human immo ilization address (while ne'er fully resol'ing6 the socio-political crises of glo alization. The -/ prison regime defines a glo al logic of social organization that constitutes, mo ilizes, and prototypes across 'arious localities. What would it mean, then, to consider state-crafted, white supremacist modalities of imprisonment as the perpetual end rather than the self-contained means of American glo ality? I am suggesting a conception of the prison regime that focuses on what cultural and political theorist Allen )eldman calls a .formation of 'iolence,0 which anchors the contemporary articulation of white supremacy as a glo al technology of coercion and hegemony. )eldman writes, the growing autonomy of 'iolence as a self-legitimating sphere of social discourse and transaction points to the ina ility of any sphere of social

:iolence itself oth reflects and accelerates the e9perience of society as an incomplete pro8ect, as something to e made. As a formation of 'iolence that selfperpetuates a peculiar social pro8ect through the discursi'e structures of warfare, the -/ prison regime composes an acute formation of racial and white supremacist 'iolence, and
practice to totalize society. thus houses the capacity for mo ilization of an epochal (and peculiar6 white supremacist glo al logic. This contention should not e confused with the sometimes parochial (if not politically chau'inistic6 proposition that American state and state-sanctioned regimes of odily 'iolence and human immo ilization are somehow self-contained .domestic0 productions that are e9ceptional to the united /tates of America, and that other .glo al0 sites simply .import,0 imitate, or

-/ prison regime e9ceeds as it enmeshes the ensem le of social relations that cohere u/ ci'il society, and is
reenact these institutionalizations of power. In fact, I am suggesting the opposite: the

fundamental to the geographic transformations, institutional 'icissitudes, and militarizedCeconomic mo ilizations of .glo alization0 generally. to assert this, howe'er, is to also
argue that the constituting 'iolence of the -/ prison regime has remained somewhat undertheorized and o 8ectified in the o'erlapping realms of pu lic discourse, acti'ist mo ilization, and (grassroots as well as professional6 scholarly pra9is.

it is not possi le to conceptualize and critically address the emergence and glo al proliferation of the (u/Cglo al6 prison industrial comple9 outside a fundamental understanding of what are literally its technical and technological premises: namely, its comple9 organization and creati'e production of racist and white supremacist odily 'iolence. It is only in this conte9t, I would say, that we can e9amine the pro lem of how .the *rison0 is a
<ere I am arguing that modality (and not 8ust a reified product or outcome6 of American statecraft in the current political moment. It is only a theoretical foregrounding of the white supremacist state and social formation of the united /tates that will allow us to understand the u/ prison regime as an American glo ality that materializes as it prototypes state 'iolence and for that matter, .state power0 itself through a specific institutional site.

%$N3 . !>O"

=ETO $"

)ocus on international conflicts only ignores the li'ing apocalypse for people of color under the domestic warfare of white supremacy odrigue/ -? 2+ylan, *h+ in Dthnic /tudies *rogram of the -ni'ersity of $alifornia &er"eley and
Associate *rofessor of Dthnic /tudies at -ni'ersity of $alifornia Ri'erside, .A&O%ITIO7 7OWQ TD7 ODAR/ O) /TRATD4O A7+ /TR-44%D A4AI7/T T<D *RI/O7 I7+-/TRIA% $O=*%DX0, A# *ress !LLF, 3/456

We are collecti'ely witnessing, sur'i'ing, and wor"ing in a time of unprecedented stateorganized human capture and state-produced physicalCsocialCpsychic alienation, from the !.M million imprisoned y the domestic and glo al -/ prison industrial comple9 to the profound forms of informal apartheid and proto-apartheid that are eing instantiated in cities, su ur s, and rural areas all o'er the country. This condition presents a profound crisisBand political possi ilityBfor people struggling against the white supremacist state, which continues to institutionalize the social li@uidation and physical e'isceration of &lac", rown, and a original peoples near y and far away. If we are to approach racism, neoli eralism, militarismCmilitarization, and -/ state hegemony and domination in a legitimately .glo al0 way, it is nothing short of unconsciona le to e9pend significant political energy protesting American wars elsewhere (e.g. Ira@, Afghanistan, etc.6 when there are o'erlapping, and no less profoundly oppressi'e, declarations of and mo ilizations for war in our 'ery own, most intimate and near y geographies of .home.0
This time of crisis and emergency necessitates a critical e9amination of the political and institutional logics that structure so much of the -/ progressi'e left, and particularly the .esta lishment0 left that is tethered (for etter and worse6 to the non-profit industrial comple9 (7*I$6. I ha'e defined the 7*I$ elsewhere as the set of sym iotic relationships that lin" political and financial technologies of state and owning class social control with sur'eillance o'er pu lic political discourse, including and especially emergent progressi'e and leftist social mo'ements. This definition is most focused on the industrialized incorporation, accelerated since the 21KLs, of pro-state li eral and progressi'e campaigns and mo'ements into a spectrum of go'ernment-proctored non-profit organizations. It is in the conte9t of the formation of the 7*I$ as a political power structure that I wish to address, with a less-than-su tle sense of alarm, a peculiar and distur ing politics of assumption that often structures, disciplines, and acti'ely shapes the wor" of e'en the most progressi'e mo'ements and organizations within the -/ esta lishment left (of which I too am a part, for etter and worse6: that is, the left>s willingness to fundamentally tolerateBand accompanying unwillingness to a olishBthe institutionalized dehumanization of the contemporary policing and imprisonment apparatus in its most localized, unremar"a le, and hence .normal0 manifestations within the domestic .homeland0 of the <omeland /ecurity state . &ehind

the din of progressi'e and li eral reformist struggles o'er pu lic policy, ci'il li erties, and law, and eneath the infre@uent mo ilizations of acti'ity to defend against the ne9t onslaught of racist, classist, ageist, and misogynist criminalization, there is an unspo"en politics of assumption that ta"es for granted the mystified permanence of domestic warfare as a constant production of targeted and massi'e suffering, guided y the logic of &lac", rown, and indigenous su 8ection to the e9pediencies and essential 'iolence of the American (glo al6 nation- uilding pro8ect. To put it differently: despite the unprecedented forms of imprisonment, social and political repression, and 'iolent policing that compose the mosaic of our historical time, the esta lishment left (within and perhaps eyond the -/6 does not care to en'ision, much less politically prioritize, the a olition of -/ domestic warfare and its structuring white supremacist social logic as its most urgent tas" of the present and future. Our non-profit left, in particular, seems content to engage in desperate (and usually well-intentioned6 attempts to manage the casualties of domestic warfare, foregoing the urgency of an a olitionist pra9is that openly, critically, and radically addresses the

moral, cultural, and political premises of these wars. 7ot long from now, generations will emerge from
the organic accumulation of rage, suffering, social alienation, and (we hope6 politically principled re ellion against this li'ing apocalypse and pose to us some rudimentary @uestions of radical accounta ility: <ow were we a le to accommodate, and e'en culturally and politically normalize the strategic, e9plicit, and openly racist technologies of state 'iolence that effecti'ely socially neutralized and fre@uently li@uidated entire near y populations of our people, gi'en that ours are the 'ery same populations that ha'e historically struggled to sur'i'e and o'erthrow such .classical0 structures of dominance as colonialism, frontier con@uest, racial sla'ery, and other genocides? In a somewhat more intimate sense, how could we li'e with oursel'es in this domestic state of emergency, and why did we seem to generally forfeit the creati'e possi ilities of radically challenging, dislodging, and transforming the ideological and institutional premises of this condition of domestic warfare in fa'or of short-term, .winna le0 policy reforms? ()or e9ample, why did we choose to formulate and tolerate a .progressi'e0 political language that reinforced dominant racist notions of .criminality0 in the process of trying to discredit the legal asis of .Three /tri"es0 laws?6 What

were the fundamental concerns of our progressi'e organizations and mo'ements during this time, and were they willing to comprehend and gal'anize an effecti'e, or e'en 'ia le opposition to the white supremacist state>s terms of engagement (that is, warfare6? This radical accounta ility reflects a 'ariation on anticolonial li eration theorist )rantz )anon>s memora le statement to his own peers, comrades, and nemeses: Dach generation must disco'er its mission, fulfill it or etray it, in relati'e opacity. In the underde'eloped countries preceding generations ha'e simultaneously
resisted the insidious agenda of colonialism and pa'ed the way for the emergence of the current struggles. 7ow that we are in the heat of com at, we must shed the ha it of decrying the efforts of our forefathers or feigning incomprehension at their silence or passi'eness. %est we fall 'ictim to a certain political nostalgia that is often induced y such illuminating )anonist e9hortations, we ought to clarify the premises of the social .mission0 that our generation of -/ ased progressi'e organizing has underta"en. In the 'icinity of the constantly retrenching social welfare apparatuses of the -/ state, much of the most urgent and immediate wor" of community- ased organizing has re'ol'ed around ser'ice pro'ision. Importantly, this pragmatic focus also uilds a certain progressi'e ethic of 'oluntarism that constructs the model acti'ist as a 'ariation on older li eral notions of the .good citizen.0 )ollowing )anon, the @uestion is whether and how this mission ought to e fulfilled or etrayed. I elie'e that to respond to this political pro lem re@uires an analysis and conceptualization of .the state0 that is far more comple9 and la orious than we usually allow in our ordinary rush of o ligations to uild campaigns, organize communities, and write grant proposals.

In fact, I thin" one pragmatic step toward an a olitionist politics in'ol'es the de'elopment of grassroots pedagogies (such as reading groups, in-home wor"shops, inter-organization and inter-mo'ement critical dialogues6 that will compel us to teach oursel'es a out the different ways that the state wor"s in the conte9t of domestic warfare, so that we no longer treat it simplistically. We re@uire, in other words, a scholarly acti'ist framewor" to understand that the state can and must e radically confronted on multiple fronts y an a olitionist politics. In so many ways, the -/ progressi'eCleft esta lishment is filling the 'oid created y what Ruthie 4ilmore has called the 'iolent Ia andonmentsI of the state, which forfeits and implodes its own social welfare capacities (which were already insufficient at est6 while transforming and (producti'ely6 e9ploding its domestic warma"ing functionalities (guided y a I frightening willingness to engage in
human sacrificeI6. Oet, at the same time that the state has een openly gal'anizing itself to declare and wage 'iolent

struggle against strategically targeted local populations, the esta lishment left remains relati'ely unwilling and therefore institutionally una le to address the @uestions of social sur'i'al, grassroots mo ilization, radical social 8ustice, and social transformation on the concrete and e'eryday terms of the 'ery domestic war(s6 that the state has so openly and repeatedly declared as the premises of its own coherence We can roadly understand that Ithe stateI is in many ways a conceptual term that refers to a mind- oggling array of geographic, political, and institutional relations of power and domination. It is, in that sense, a
term of a straction : certainly the state is Ireal,I ut it is so massi'e and institutionally stretched that it simply cannot e understood and IseenI in its totality. The way we come to comprehend the stateHs realness-or differently put, the way the

materially identifia le to ordinary people-is through its own self narrations and institutional mo ilizations. $onsider the narrati'e and
state ma"es itself comprehensi le, intelligi le, and

institutional dimensions of the Iwar on drugs,I for e9ample. 7ew O or" $ity mayor Ddward #och, in a gesture of masculine challenge to the Reagan- era )eds, offers a prime e9ample of such a narration in a 21FJ op-ed piece pu lished on the widely-read pages of The 7ew Oor" Times: I propose the following steps as a coordinated )ederal response to 3the war on drugs5 : -se the full resources of the military for drug interdiction. The *osse $omitatus doctrine, which restricts participation of the military in ci'ilian law enforcement, must e modified so that the military can e used for narcotics control . . . Dnact a )ederal death penalty for drug wholesalers. %ife sentences, harsh fines, forfeitures of assets, illions spent on education and therapy all ha'e failed to deter the drug wholesaler. The death penalty would. $apital punishment is an e9traordinary remedy, ut we are facing an e9traordinary peril . . . +esignate -nited /tates narcotics prisons. The &ureau of *risons should designate separate facilities for drug offenders. /egregating such prisoners from others, prefera ly i n remote locations such a s the Ou"on or desert areas, might moti'ate drug offenders to a andon their trade. Dnhance the )ederal agencies com ating the drug pro lem. The Attorney 4eneral should greatly increase the num er of drug enforcement agents in 7ew Oor" and other cities. <e should direct the )ederal &ureau of In'estigation to de'ote su stantial manpower against the cocaine trade and should see to it that the Immigration and 7aturalization /er'ice is capa le of detecting and deporting aliens con'icted of drug crimes in far etter num ers than it now does. Dnact the state and local narcotics control assistance act of 21FJ. This ill pro'ides YKML million annually for fi'e years to assist state and local 8urisdictions increase their capacities for enforcement, corrections, education and prosecution. These proposals offer no certainty for success in the fight against drugs, of course. If we are to succeed, howe'er, it is essential that we persuade the )ederal 4o'ernment to recognize its responsi ility to lead the way. Ddward #ochHs manifesto reflects an important dimension of the roader institutional, cultural, and political acti'ities that uild the state as a mechanism of selflegitimating 'iolence: the state (here momentarily manifest in the person of the 7ew Oor" $ity =ayor6 constantly tells stories a out itself, facilitated y a politically willing and accomplice corporate media. This

storytelling-which through repetition and saturation assem les the popular Icommon senseI of domestic warfare-is insepara le from the on-the-ground shifting, rearranging, and recommitting of resources and institutional power that we witness in the e'eryday mo ilizations of a state waging intense, localized, militarized struggle against its declared internal enemies.
$onsider, for e9ample, how pronouncements li"e those of #och, Reagan, and &ratton seem to always e accompanied y the operational inno'ation of different 'arieties of co'ert ops, ur an guerilla war, and counterintelligence warfare that specifically emerge through the stateHs declared domestic wars on crimeCdrugsCgangsCetc. <ence, it is no coincidence that =ayor #ochHs editorial ma"es the stunning appeal to withdraw (ImodifyI6 the *osse $omitatus principle, to allow the )ederal go'ernmentHs formal mo ilization of its glo al war apparatus for attle in the homeland neigh orhoods of the war

we can egin to see how the ramped-up policing and massi'e imprisonment of &lac" and %atino youth in #ochHs 21FLs 7ew Oor" were ena led and normalized y his and othersH attempts to story tell the legal empowerment and cultural 'alorization of the police, such that the nuts-and- olts operation of the prison industrial comple9 was lu ricated y the multiple moral para les of domestic warfare. This process of producing the state as an acti'e, tangi le, and identifia le structure of power and dominance,
on drugs. To reference our e9ample e'en more closely, through the wor" of self-narration and concrete mo ilizations of institutional capacity, is what some scholars call Istatecraft.I 4enerally, the state materializes and ecomes comprehensi le to us through these definiti'e moments of crafting: that is, we come to identify the state as a series of acti'e political and institutional pro8ects. /o, if the stateHs selfnarration inundates us with depictions of its policing and 8uridical arms as the righteously puniti'e and 8ustifia ly 'iolent front lines of an o'erlapping series of comprehensi'e, militarized, and culturally 'alorized domestic wars-for my generation, the Iwar on drugs,I the generation prior, the Iwar on crime,I and the current generation, localized Iwars on gangsI and their planetary rearticulation in the Iwar on terrorI-then it is the material processes of war, from the writing of pu lic policy to the hyper-weaponization of the police, that commonly represents the e9istence of the state as we come to normally I"nowI it. 4i'en

that domestic warfare composes oth the common narrati'e language and concrete material production of the state, the @uestion remains as to why the esta lishment left has not confronted this statecraft with the degree of a solute emergency that the condition implies (warQ6. *erhaps it is ecause we are underestimating the s"ill and reach of the state as a pedagogical (teaching6 apparatus, replete with room for contradiction and relati'ely sanctioned spaces for I dissentI and counter-state organizing. Italian political prisoner Antonio 4ramsci Hs thoughts on the formation of the
contemporary pedagogical state are instructi'e here: The /tate does ha'e and re@uest consent, ut it also IeducatesI this consent, y means of the political and syndical associationsA these, howe'er, are pri'ate organisms, left to the pri'ate initiati'e of the ruling class. Although 4ramsci was writing these words in the early 21LLs, he had already identified the institutional sym iosis that would e'entually produce the non-profit industrial comple9 .

The historical record of

the last three decades shows that li eral foundations such as the )ord, =ellon, Roc"efeller, /oros and other financial entities h a'e ecome politically central to Ithe pri'ate initiati'e of the ruling classI and ha'e in fact funded a reath-ta"ing num er of organizations, grassroots campaigns, and progressi'e political interests. The @uestions I wish to insert here, howe'er, are whether
the financially ena ling gestures of foundations also 26 e9ert a politically disciplinary or repressi'e force on contemporary

nurturing an ideological and structural allegiance to the state that preempts a more creati'e, radical, a olitionist politics . /e'eral social mo'ement scholars ha'e argued that the Ichanneling mechanismsI of the non-profit industrial comple9 Imay now far outweigh the effect of direct social control y states in e9plaining the . . . orthodo9 tactics, and moderate goals of much collecti'e action in modern America.I The non-profit apparatus and its sym iotic relationship to the state amount to a sophisticated technology of
social mo'ements and community ased organizations, while !6 political repression and social control, accompanying and facilitating the ideological and institutional mo ilizations of a

A'owedly progressi'e, radical, leftist, and e'en some misnamed Ire'olutionaryI groups find it opportune to assimilate into this state-sanctioned organizational paradigm, as it simultaneously allows them to esta lish a relati'ely sta le financial and operational infrastructure while a'oiding the transience, messiness, and possi le legal complication of wor"ing under decentralized, informal, or e'en IundergroundI auspices. Thus, the aforementioned authors suggest that the emergence of the state-proctored
domestic war waging state. non-profit industry Isuggests a historical mo'ement away from direct, cruder forms 3of state repression5 , toward more su tle forms of state social control of social mo'ements.I The

regularity with which progressi'e organizations immediately forfeit the crucial political and conceptual possi ilities of a olishing domestic warfare is a direct reflection of the e9tent to which domestic war has een fashioned into the e'eryday, Inormal I reality of the state. &y e9tension, the non-profit
industrial comple9, which is fundamentally guided y the logic of eing state-sanctioned (and often state-funded6, also

the operati'e assumptions of domestic warfare are ta"en for granted ecause they form and inform the popular consensus. Dffecti'ely contradicting,
reflects this common reality: decentering, and transforming the popular consensus (for e9ample, desta ilizing asserti'e assumptions common to progressi'e mo'ements and organizations such as Iwe ha'e to controlCget rid of gangs,I Iwe need prisons,I or Iwe want etter policeI6 is, in this conte9t, dangerously difficult wor". Although, the truth of the matter is that the esta lishment -/ left, in ways oth spo"en and presumed, may actually agree with the political, moral, and ideological premises of domestic

%eaders as well as ran"-and-file mem ers in a'owedly progressi'e organizations can and must reflect on how they might actually e supporting and reproducing e9isting forms of racism, white supremacy, state 'iolence, and domestic warfare in the process of throwing their resources ehind what they percei'e as Iwinna le 'ictories,I in the le9icon of 'enera le community organizer /aul Alins"y. Our historical moment suggests the need for a principled political rupturing of e9isting techni@ues and strategies that fetishize and fi9ate on the negotiation, massaging, and management of the worst outcomes of domestic warfare. One political mo'e long o'erdue is toward grassroots pedagogies of radical dis-identification with the state, in the tra8ectory of an anti-nationalism or antipatriotism, that reorients a progressi'e identification with the creati'e possi ilities of insurgency (this is to consider I insurgencyI as a politics that pushes eyond the defensi'e maneu'ering of IresistanceI6. Reading a few a few lines down from our first in'o"ing of )anonHs call to collecti'e, li eratory action is clarifying here: I)or us who are determined to rea" the ac" of colonialism, our historic mission is to authorize e'ery re'olt, e'ery desperate act, and e'ery attac" a orted or drowned in lood.I
warfare.

%$N3 . E@A!%$T8
The call for e;uality will always fail. "ivil society produces a perfected form of slavery4 that masks violence through reform

6arley -: (Anthony *aul, *rofessor of %aw at &oston $ollege, .*erfecting /la'ery0, 2C!KC!LLM,
http:CClawdigitalcommons. c.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi?articleZ2L!F[conte9tZlsfp, 3/456

The white race deems itself to e the dominant race in this country. And so it is, in prestige, in achie'ements, in education, in wealth, and in power. /o, I dou t not, it will continue to e for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage, and holds fast to the principles of constitutional li erty. *eople will e a le to li erate themsel'es only after the legal superstructure itself has egun to wither away. And when we egin to o'ercome and to do without these 38uridical5 concepts in reality, rather than
merely in declarations, that will e the surest sign that the narrow horizon of ourgeois law is finally opening up efore us.

/la'ery is with us still. We are haunted y sla'ery. We are animated y sla'ery. Whiteo'er- lac" is sla'ery and segregation and neosegregation and e'ery situation in which the distri ution of material or spiritual goods follows the colorline. The mo'ement from sla'ery to segregation to neosegregation to whate'er form of white-o'er- lac" it is that may come with post-modernity or after is not toward freedom. The mo'ement from sla'ery to segregation to neosegregation is the mo'ement of sla'ery perfecting itself .
White-o'er- lac" is neosegregation. White-o'er- lac" is segregation. White-o'er- lac" is sla'ery. All of it is white-o'er-

The story of progress up from sla'ery is a lie, the longest lie. The story of progress up from sla'ery is told 8uridically in the form of the rule of law. /la'ery is the rule of law. And sla'ery is death. The sla'e perfects itself as a sla'e when it ows down efore its master of its own free will. That is the moment in which the sla'e accomplishes the impossi le reconciliation of its freedom with its unfreedom y willing itself unfree. When e9actly does this perfection of sla'ery ta"e place? The sla'e ows down efore its master when it prays for legal relief, when it prays for e@ual rights, and while it culti'ates the field of law hoping for an answer. The sla'e>s free choice, the sla'e>s leap of faith, can only e ta"en under conditions of legal e@uality. Only after emancipation and legal e@uality, only after rights, can the sla'e
perfect itself as a sla'e. &ourgeois legality is the condition wherein e@uals are said to enter the commons of reason or the "ingdom of ends or the 7ew Dngland town meeting of the soul to discuss uni'ersaliza le principles, to discuss e@uality and freedom. =uch is made of these meetings, these struggles for law, these festi'als of the uni'ersal .

lac", only white-o'er- lac", and that continually .

$ommons, "ingdom, town meeting, there are many mansions in the house of law, ut the law does not forget its father, as =aria 4rahn-)arley o ser'es: .The law of sla'ery has not een forgotten y the law of segregationA the law of segregation has not een forgotten y the law of neosegregation. The law guarding the gates of sla'ery, segregation, and neosegregation has not forgotten its originA it remem ers its father and its grandfather efore that. It "nows what master it ser'esA it "nows what color to count.0 room,K e'ery great house, e'ery plantation, all of it, e'erything. Re@uests for e@uality and freedom will always fail. Why? &ecause the fact of need itself means that the re@uest will fail. The re@uest for e@uality and freedom, for rights, will fail whether the re@uest is granted or denied. The re@uest is produced through an in8ury.F The initial in8ury is the mar"ing of odies for lessBless respect, less land, less freedom, less education, less. The mar" must e made on the flesh ecause that is where we start from. $hildhood is where we egin and, under conditions of hierarchy, that childhood is already mar"ed. The mar" organizes, orients, and differentiates our otherwise common flesh. The mar" is race, the mar" is gender, the mar" is class, the mar" is. The mar" is all there is to the reality of

those essencesBrace, gender, class, and so onBthat are said to precede e9istence. The mar" is a system.1 *roperty and law follow the mar". And so it goes. There is a pleasure in hierarchy. We egin with an education in our hierarchies. We egin with childhood and
childhood egins with education. To e e9act, education egins our childhood. We are called y race, y gender, y class, and so on. Our education culti'ates our desire in the direction of our hierarchies. If we are successful, we ac@uire an orientation that ena les us to locate oursel'es and our odies vis--vis all the other odies that inha it our institutional

We follow the call and mo'e in the generally e9pected way. White-o'er lac" is an orientation, a pleasure, a desire that ena les us to find our place, and therefore our way, in our institutional spaces. This is why no one e'er need as" for e@uality and freedom. This is why the fact of need means that the re@uest will fail . The re@uest for rightsBfor e@ualityBwill always fail ecause there are always am iguities. To e mar"ed for less, to e mar"ed as less than zero, to e mar"ed as a negati'e attractor, is to e in the situation of the sla'e. The sla'e is not called. The sla'e is not free. The sla'e is called to follow the calling that is not a calling. The sla'e is trained to e an o 8ectA the sla'e is trained, in other words, to not e. The sla'e is death.
spaces. +eath is the end of am iguity. To e in the situation of the sla'e is to ha'e all the am iguities organized against you. &ut there are always am iguities, one is always free. <ow, then, are the am iguities organized? <ow is freedom ended? The sla'e must choose the end of am iguity, the end of freedom, o 8ecthood. The sla'e must freely choose death. This the sla'e can only do under conditions of freedom that present it with a choice. The perfect sla'e gi'es up the ghost and commends its e'erlasting spirit to its master. The sla'e>s final and perfect prayer is a legal prayer for e@ual rights. The

te9ts of law, li"e the manifest content of a dream, perhaps of wol'es, may tell a certain story or an uncertain story. The certainty or uncertainty of the story is of a solutely no conse@uence. The story, the law, the wol'es> ta le manners, do not matter. The story, the law,
the story of law, the dream of wol'es, howe'er, represents a disguised or latent wish that does matter. The wish is a matter

The dream of e@uality, of rights, is the disguised wish for hierarchy. The prayer for e@ual rights is the disguised desire for sla'ery. /la'ery is death. The prayer for e@ual rights, then, is the disguise of the deathwish. The prayer for e@ual
of life or death. We are strangers to oursel'es. rights is the sla'e>s perfect moment. The sla'e>s perfect prayer, the prayer of the perfect sla'e, is always answered. The sla'e, howe'er, "nows not what it does when it prays for rights, for the sla'e is estranged from itself. Of its own inner stri'ings it "nows not. The sla'e stri'es to e property, ut since property cannot own property the sla'e cannot own its inner stri'ings. The sla'e stri'es to produce the final commodityB law. In other words, the sla'e produces itself as a sla'e through law. The sla'e produces itself as a sla'e (as a commodity6 through its own prayer for e@ual rights. And that prayer

The sla'e ows down before the law and then there is law. There is no law before the slave bows down . The sla'e>s fidelity ecomes the law, and the law is perfected through the sla'e>s struggle for the uni'ersal, through the sla'e>s struggle for e@uality of right. The sla'e prays for e@uality of right. Rights cannot e e@ual. Its perfect prayer is answeredA the law>s am iguities open, li"e the gates of hea'en, 8ust a o'e its head. And all of the white-o'erlac" accumulated within the endless am iguities of law rains down. Whiteo'er lac" is sla'ery
is all there is to law. The sla'e ows down efore the law and prays for e@ual rights. and sla'ery is death. +eath is the end of fore'er. The end of fore'er is perfection and perfection, for us, seems di'ine, eyond the 'eil, eyond deathA hence, the end of fore'er. There is a pleasure in this death. It is the pleasure of hierarchy.

If there is hierarchy, white-o'er- lac", for e9ample, there is an e9perience of pleasure in it. &odies are mar"ed white-o'er- lac". This is a pleasure and a desire. *roperty is mar"ed white-o'er- lac". This too is a pleasure and a desire. %aw, following the system of mar"s and the system of property, is white-o'er- lac", and a pleasure and a desire.
There are always am iguities. The am iguities are 'essels of our desires. Our pleasures and desires follow the colorline. In a colorlined order, all institutions are ordered y the colorline. A white-o'er- lac" orientation is re@uired to na'igate the institutions that order life. In other words, a white-o'er- lac" orientation is re@uired to follow the colorline, and one must follow the colorline or lose one>s way. The am iguities, then, are always white-o'er- lac". White-o'er- lac" is the 7orth /tar. D'ery correct legal answer is white-o'er- lac". There is a pleasure and a desire in mo'ing to the correct answer. The pleasure and desire of mo'ing to the .correct0 answer is e9perienced as the su lime pleasure of the legal method, as the so'ereignty of death. The commodity reaches its apogee in the lac".22 There is no lac", sa'e for white-o'er- lac".

White-o'er- lac" is sla'ery. /la'ery is death. +eath is the end of it all. +eath is the complete end. +eath, then, is perfection, the end of all things. The sla'e perfects itself as a sla'e when it prays for sla'ery. The sla'e, eing perfect in that moment of prayer, is one with that efore which it ows down in prayer. The sla'e prays to itself for itself to e transformed into itself and so its perfect prayer is always already granted. The sla'e prays for e@ual rights. Rights cannot e e@ual. If the sla'e were not hated, lessened, then it would ne'er e9perience itself as lessthan. Without the e9perience of eing less-than, the idea of e@ual-to could not arise. To e a sla'e is to ecome what one ecomes through the e9perience of less-than. The less-than e9perience may e e9pressed as white-o'er- lac". White-o'er- lac" is an identity and an orientation. White-o'er- lac" is a form of training. Our institutions, under the colorline, are forms of white-o'er- lac". D'ery institution is a form of training. Our

institutions, under the colorline, are forms of training in white-o'er- lac". The sum of our institutions is the sum of our training. The fact of white-o'er- lac" means that white-o'er- lac" has ecome the form of our institutions and the orientation re@uired to mo'e through them. White-o'er- lac" as fact means that am iguities are resol'ed into white-o'er- lac". The fact that the sla'e is hated means that hating the sla'e has ecome a ha it and a pleasure and a desire and a system of training (a system of pro'iding pleasure and culti'ating desire6.

%$N3 . $(($# !T$ON


$mmigration policies perpetuate an ethic of anti0blackness that only allows persons in based on their productivity0 this creates a raciali/ed hierarchy of immigrants based on fungiblity +ashi -B (:ilna, *rofessor of /ociology at Rutgers -ni'ersity, .4lo alized anti- lac"ness:
Transnationalizing Western immigration law, policy, and practice0, Dthnic and Racial /tudies :ol. !K 7o. G ;uly !LLG, http:CC'ilnatreitler.comCpage!CassetsC4lo alizedU!LAnti lac"ness.pdf, 3/456
/assen (211F6 argued that policy regime6

a new Pde facto transnationalization of immigration policy,> (i.e., a glo al has emerged ecause supranational forces (e.g., 7A)TA, or the Duropean -nion6 shape immigration policy. I argue that a transnationalization of immigration policy may also deri'e from a con'ergence of state policies with common goals. I argue also that immigration policy has een transnational at least since the se'enteenth century where it concerns lac"s, and is e'ident e'en in periods when some of these nations had no lac" population (immigrant or nati'e- orn6 of
signiScant size. Although I echo /assen>s call to e aware of the glo al repercussions of inter-national action, together,

Western efforts to e9clude the phenotypically lac" amount to the construction of a glo al loc"ade to lac" migration and mo ility in a form of transnationalization that signiScantly predates the forces of which /assen spea"s. I agree that scholars may emphasize
singular cases and localized social constructions to the degree that we see the trees (here, the social-constructing of racial categories in local settings6, ut miss the forest (processes reinforcing transnational racialized and world systematic

This article ser'es to re-insert P lac"> as a rele'ant category in the discourse on glo alized, racialized immigration, and to reSgure anti- lac" racism as a glo al immigration phenomenon. +espite differences among these nations> histories, a transnationalization of anti- lac" sentiment in immigration law and policy in the Anglophone West egan during the trade in ensla'ed Africans and continues today. The sentiment of glo al antilac"ness is mar"ed throughout with am i'alence. &efore and during the world wars, Western nations
hierarchies6. were am i'alent a out the merits of using lac" la ourers, soldiers and seamen in fortifying their economies and polities,

yet at no time were they considered persons that merited inclusion in the democratic re'olution that was ta"ing place at the time ()eagin !LLL6. Western nations were uniSed in their approach to Paccepting> the fruits of wor" and war: lac" persons should only e temporarily used for their contri ution, and once their usefulness was spent, they should return from whence they came. In the post-war period, co-dependency and colla oration in a transnational
anti- lac"ness ecame more e'ident, e'en as we see the eginnings of Prace-neutral> laws with more o 'ious racializing outcomes.

Where glo al anti- lac"ness operates without the use of o'ertly racist language, Western nations> lawma"ers can claim to ha'e transcended racism while still managing to maintain racial hierarchies V a macro-le'el 'ersion of the Pnew> Pcolor lind> racism
(&onilla-/il'a !LL2, !LLEA Winant !LL26. The contradictions of these efforts are pronounced in the most recent period,

a rights discourse, coupled with illi eral law and policy, continue to shape a racialized hierarchy of immigrants that may e seen as a (perhaps unintended ut6 enormously conse@uential anchoring of lac" persons to the ottom of the racial and Pworld systemic> hierarchies.
where

%$N3 . &E+!TE
The debate space itself is organi/ed around the governing rules of whiteness. Anless we devise a radically new stance to engage4 ongoing violence become inevitable.

Wynter84 (Sylvia, Wynter was invited by the Department of Literature at the University of California at San
Diego to be a visiting professor for 19 !" #$ She then be%ame %hairperson of &fri%an and &fro"&meri%an Studies, and professor of Spanish in the Department of Spanish and 'ortuguese at Stanford University in 19 $ She is now 'rofessor (meritus at Stanford University, )*+he Ceremony ,ust -e .ound/ &fter 0umanism* -oundary 11, 12/3 4 13/1, &%%essed via 5S+67" 8S9:;

The social eha'iors that were to 'erify this topos of iconicity which yo"ed the Indo-Duropean mode of eing to human eing in general, and the new middle class model of identity to the e9emplary 7orm of this new Iempirico-transcendental dou let,I man ()oucault, 21FG6 (imaginedCe9perienced as if a Inatural eingI6, would e carried out y the complementary non-discursi'e practices of a new wa'e of great internments of nati'e la ors in new plantations orders (nati'e wage la or6, and y the massacres of the colonial eraBleading logically to their /umma in the AuchwitzC&elsen and in the 4ulagC$am odia archipelagoes. Through all this, different forms of segregating the -ltimate $haos that was the &lac"Bfrom the apartheid of the /outh to the lynchings in oth 7orth and /outh, to their depri'ation of the 'ote, and confinement in an inferior secondary educational sphere, to the logic of the 8o lessCghettoCdrugsCcrimeCprison archipelagoes of todayBensured that, as -spens"i8 et al note, the Iacti'e creationI of the type of $haos, which the dominant model needs for the replication of its own system, would continue. It thus a'erted any effort to find the ceremonies which could wed the structural oppositions, li erating the &lac" from his $haos function, since this function was the "ey to the dynamics of its own order of eing. As %as $asas had argued against /epul'edaBwhen refuting
the latterHs humanist theory that human sacrifice carried out y the 7ew World peoples was proof of the fact of their %ac" of 7atural Reason and, therefore, that it was 8ust to ma"e war against them to protect the innocents who were sacrificed and to ta"e o'er their territoryBIto sacrifice innocents for the good of the commonwealth is not opposed to natural reason, is not something a omina le and contrary to nature, ut is an error that has its origin in natural reason itself.II It is an error, then, not in the spea"ingC eha'ing su 8ects, ut in the ratiomorphic apparatus generic to the human, the cogniti'e mechanism that is the Imost recent superstructure in a continuum of cogniti'e processes as old as life on this planet,I and, as such, Ithe least tested and refined against the real worldI (RiedlC#aspar, 21FG6. And it is only with science, as Riedl and #aspar (@uoting Roman /e9l6 o ser'e, that there is e'er any true I'ictory o'er the ratiomorphic apparatusIB such as that of 4alileoHs and his telescope o'er the a ducti'e logic of the ifCthen se@uence of inference dictated ehind the ac"s of their consciousness to the Aristotelian doctors of philosophy as the spea"ing su 8ects of the $hristian-medie'al system ensem le. II. Re-enacting <eresy: The 7ew /tudies and the /tudia as a /cience of <uman /ystems The main proposal here is that the calls made in the 21JLs and 21KLs for new areasCprograms of studies, was, although nonconsciously so at the time, calls which re-enacted in the conte9t of our times a parallel counter-e9ertion, a parallel ;esterHs heresy to that of the /tudiaHs. &ut ecause of our non-consciousness of the real dimensions of what we were a out,

we

as"ed at first only to e incorporated into the normati'e order of the present organization of "nowledge as add-ons, so to spea". We ecame entrapped, as a result, in &antustan encla'es la elled IethnicI and IgenderI andCor Iminority studies.I These encla'es then functioned, as +a'id &radley notes, inter aCia, to e9empt Dnglish +epartments from ha'ing to
alter their e9isting definition of American literature. D'en more, these encla'es functioned to e9empt the callers for the new studies from ta"ing cognizance of the anomaly that confronted us, with respect to a definition of American literature which lawli"ely functioned

to e9clude not only &lac"s,

ut all the other groups whose Idi'erse modalities of

the recognition of anomalies is the first step which leads to changes in the paradigms of the natural sciences.EF And in the same conte9t the linguistic scholar Whatmough has argued that human
protestI (+etienne, 21K16 in the 21JLs and 21KLs had fueled the call for new studies. Thomas #uhn points out that

o ser'ers are parts of the cosmos which they o ser'e, that since all the "nowledge that orders our
eha'ior is gained from these human o ser'ers, such "nowledge must either e solipsistic or reduce man to a part of his en'ironment. This "nowledge is, therefore, not to e trusted unless the o ser'er in his role as "nower finds the means to con'ert himself into an Ie9ternal o ser'er.I Among the means which he proposes is the ta"ing of the Iall per'ading

regularities appear Iall along the road through the heirarchy of language, from e'eryday chit chat through law, and religions, liturgy and homily, poetry, \literature,H science and philosophy to logic and
regularity noted in language,I rather than the spea"ing su 8ect, as the o 8ect of in'estigation. And these mathematics.IE1 These regularities, he goes on, will ena le the "nower to ma"e use of what he calls the mathemati"e techne, which ena les herChim to treat languages li"e chemistry, for e9ample, according to their grammars of regularities, as if man, i.e. the spea"ingCthin"ingCrepresenting su 8ect, Idid not e9ist at all.I One pro lem remained, howe'er: that of the perception of these regularities. )or, ecause the regularities are, so to spea", I uilt inI to the discourses, the users of these discourses cannot normally isolate the e9istence of these regularities (Whatmough, 21JK6. And, as )oucault reminds

this pro lem is applica le not only for the oundary maintaining Itrue discourseI of the positi'ism inherited from the nineteenth-century episteme, ut also for the eschatology of positi'ismHs counter-discourse, =ar9ism, oth generated from the same ground ()oucault, 21KE6 of a materialist metaphysics, and each dialectically the condition of the post-atomic
us, dysfunctional so'ereignty of the Igrammar of regularitiesI of the other. The anthropologist, %egesse, has pointed to the e9tent to which we

are trapped in the ordering Icategories and prescriptionsI of our epistemic orders. <e notes, howe'er, that the liminal groups of any order are the ones most a le to Ifree usI from these prescriptions, since it is they who e9istentially e9perience the Iin8ustice inherent in structureI (%egesse, 21KE6, that is, in the 'ery ordering of the order
which dictates the Igrammar of regularitiesI through which the systemic su 8ects percei'e their mode of reality as

The normati'e categories of any orderBfor e9ample the aristocratic category of Duropean feudalismBare normati'e precisely ecause the structure of their li'ed e9perience is isomorphic with the representation that the order gi'es itself of itself. The liminal categories li"e those of the ourgeoisie in the feudal order of things, on the other hand, e9perience a structural contradiction etween their li'ed e9perience and the grammar of representations which generate the mode of reality y prescri ing the parameters of collecti'e eha'iors that dynamically ring that IrealityI into eing. The liminal frame of reference, therefore, unli"e the normati'e, can pro'ide what -spesn"i8 et al call the Iouter 'iew,I from which perspecti'e the grammars of regularities of oundary and structure-maintaining discourses are percei'a le, and WhatmoughHs Ie9ternal o ser'erHs positionI made possi le. What the calls for 7ew /tudies at first o'erloo"ed, howe'er, was precisely the regularities which emerged into 'iew in the wa"e of the Idi'erse modalities of protestI whose non-coordinated yet spontaneous eruption now rought into
isomorphic with reality in general. unconcealednessBnot only the lawli"e rule-go'erned nature of the e9clusion of the di'erse protesting groupsCcategories as group-su 8ects from any access to the means of representation, ut also the regularities of the e9clusion of their frames of reference and historicalCcultural past from the normati'e curriculum, an e9clusion so consistent as to e clearly also rule-go'erned. This consistency was reinforced y the emergence of the e@uation etween the groupCcategories e9cluded from the means of representation and the ratios of their degrees of socio-economic empowermentCdisempowerment in the world outside. The dynamic presence of rule-go'erned correlations which determined rules of inCe9clusion, was, howe'er, only percei'a le y the non-orchestrated calls for 7ew /tudies, calls li"e Ithe di'erse modalities of protestI in the 4ree" city states analysed y +etienne, which, y reaching parallel dietary and other rules, not only called the ontology of the religio-political order of the city-state into @uestion, ut made percei'a le, through what they protested against, the founding OrderC$haos oppositional categories which underpinned the oundaryCstructure maintaining dynamics of the

These regularities pointed to a fundamental @uestion which, at the time, remained unas"ed. It had to do with the anomalous implication that they were determined y rules which transcended the conscious intention of the academics who enacted the decision-ma"ing processes as to what to inCe9clude, 8ust as the rules of inference of
polis (+etienne, 21K16. 4alileoHs doctors of philosophy were dictated y the ratiomorphic apparatus or rational world 'iew ased on the a priori of an order of 'alue etween the imperfect terrestrial and the crystalline perfection of the lunar realm: the OrderC$haos opposition of the autopoetic dynamics of the $hristian medie'al-system ensem le.

What, in this case, then,

determined the rules which determined the decisionma"ing processes


scholars, wor"ing with integrity and according to the criteria of o 8ecti'e standards, inCe9cluded? what should and should not e defined as American )iction, and the

y which indi'idual

What determined mode of measure of the Io 8ecti'eI standards of indi'idual scholars? The @uestion was not to e as"ed, howe'er, until the after side of the e9perience of disillusion which the callers all underwent and which +a'id &radley traces in his article, I&lac" and American in 21F!.I )or it was to e a recognition, made y us all on the other side of that e9perience, of the e9istence of o 8ecti'e limits to the incorporation of &lac"s into the normati'e order of eingC"nowing of the present order, that would lead to our further recognition of the need for an epistemological rea". &radley was one of a group of &lac"s for whom Affirmati'e Action, y countering the Iin uilt distri ution iasI of the dynamics of the order, had wor"ed. The interference of Affirmati'e Action with the normati'e functioning of the order with respect to the distri utionBat the group category le'elBof une@ual ratios of access to educational empowerment, had ena led &radley, together with a group of young &lac"s li"e himself, to reach the rule-go'erned nature of the proscription which confined &lac"s-as-a-group to a secondary educational or it, relati'e to their White peers-as-a-group. &radley at the time, o ser'ing his
fatherHs great 8oy, had determined to do e'erything to pro'e his fatherHs and his own pri'ate hope true. <is fatherHs hope was that at long last &lac"s were to e allowed to rea" out of the secondary or it to which their li'es and dreams had een confined, and if this hope would not e realized in time for his own life to e graced y the change, it would in time at

&radleyHs own hope had een that once &lac"s were included in 'ast num ers in the highest le'els of higher education, and had wor"ed hard and pro'ed themsel'es, they would e so numerous, so no longer the to"en e9ception, that they would e'entually ha'e to e distinguished y criteria other than y Ithe uniform of s"in.I <owe'er, he e9perienced on the campus oth the o'ert and co'ert forms of anathematization which met the reaching of the interdiction that the lac" presence-asa-group implied (since what <ofstadter calls the category structure of the Irepresentational systemI IAmericaI] is ased on the dynamics of the contradiction etween indi'idual e@uality and group heirarchy6. These e9periences slowly stripped away the illusion of any fundamental change in the ordering of group relations. The shouts of I7iggerQ 7iggerQI in the citadel of reason in the heart of the non-rednec" campus, the phoned om threats, the fragile defenselessness of the &lac" students in the face of a mindless hostility, the ineffecti'e wringing of hands of concerned %i eral Whites, were paralleled y the more discreet acts of partition (+etienne, 21K16 y uni'ersity administrators, whose proscription of the financially star'ed &lac" $ulture $enter, always a whitewashed rotting house to e reached y a scram le up a muddy an", mainly always on the nether edge of campus, once again ga'e the rule-go'erned regularity of the game away. &lac"s would e allowed on the campus as a group, admitted to ha'e e'en a culture, as long as this IcultureI and its related encla'e studies could e made to function as the e9tracultural space, in relation, no longer to a Wasp, ut now more inclusi'ely to a White American, normati'ely Duroamerican intra-cultural spaceA as the mode of $haos imperati'e to the latterHs new self-ordering. (The readapted Western culture $ore $urriculum is the nonconscious e9pression of this more IdemocratizingI shift from Wasp to Duro.6 Indeed once this marginalization had een effected, the order of 'alue recycled in different terms, with the category homeostasis returning to its I uilt in normalcy,I the a use and the om threats ceased. Order and $haos were once more in their relational interdefining places, sta ly e9pressing the io-ontological principle of /ameness and +ifference of the present order, as the rule-go'erned discourse of 4alileoHs doctors of philosophy functioned to
least e realized for his sonHs. 'erify the physicoontological mode of /ameness and +ifference on which the $hristian medie'al order rested efore the

/tudia and $opernicus, efore the ;esterHs heresy of the figures of rogueCclownCfool, had pulled the Ihigh seriousnessI of its self-8ustifying self-representation down to earth. &radley now recognized that he had een wrong to hope that &lac" li'es, from his fatherHs to his own, had to Irun along the same line ... one that rises and falls li"e a sine wa'e,I one that is Ia graphed function not of a mathematical relation etween sides and angles ut of a social relationship etween &lac"s and American society itself.I /ometimes the line could e Ion the positi'e side of the ase line,I at other times on the negati'e side. If the effects were different, the function had always to remain the same. Thus his hope for the ne9t generation of &lac"s, in this case for his young godson, would ha'e to e cut down to realistic size. <is hope could only now e that y the time his godson came of age, the Igraph of lac" will once again e on the upswing,I gi'ing him, as &radley himself had had, Ia little time to gain some strength, some "nowledge, some color to hold inside himself.I )or that wouldCcould e, Iall the hope there is. 22 Oet the eginning of hope also lay here. The recognition of the regularities pointed outside the Ifunctional rhetoricI of the %i eral creed to the e9istence of o 8ecti'e limits and, therefore, of laws of functioning which, eyond the conscious intentionalities of their su 8ectsBWhite or &lac"Bdetermined the limits to the orderHs normati'e incorporation of those whose li'es in a IfreeI country had to e made to ser'e as the Igraphed functionI of the oundary maintaining system, as its mar"ers of $haos, the 7ot--s. The /panish historian Americo $astro had noted the e9istence of this systemic function of &lac"s in the comparison he made etween their function and that of ;ew and =oor in si9teenth-century /pain. Although con'erted $hristians and, therefore, Iaccording to the gospel and the sacraments of the $hurch,I forming a part of the Imystical &ody of $hrist and <is $hurch,I these categories had een stigmatized as eing of unclean lood and heretical descent (i.e., not /panish-$hristian6. Their proscri ed li'esBthey were e9cluded from 8o sA many were urnt at the sta"e y the In@uisition for IheresyIBena led them to function as the mode of +ifference from which the new secularizing onding principle of limpieza, which came to constitute the I oundary maintaining systemI of the /tatal 4roup /u 8ect of monarchical /pain, could e generated as an ontologized principle of /ameness. <ere Americo $astro pointed to the regularity of the parallel y which the su ordination of the li'es of the category- earers of difference to their Igrasped functionI is repeated in the li'es of present day American &lac"s, who are today re-enacting and Ili'ing a drama similar to that of the /panish moriscos and ;ews,I e'en though according to the $onstitution they form part of the American We

Only with their complete strategic marginalization did the y now antustanized encla'e studies egin to rethin" their function: to grasp a connection with that of the %iminal outsider ;esterHs role of the original /tudia, a role to which they were heir. This ecame clear as they egan to ta"e as their parallel o 8ects of in@uiry the representations which had een made of their groups y the order of discourse of mainstream scholarshipA as they egan to find that these representations, too, functioned according to across the oard, o 8ecti'e rules. What was here re'ealed, when ta"en all together, were the regularities of the IfiguringI of an Other e9cluded series, with the discourse functioning to constitute them as a Ihuman speciesI totemic operator
(Americo $astro, 21KK6 or group-/u 8ect. which paralleled that of the Ianimal speciesI totemic operator of traditional 7eolithic societies as well as the planetary grid of the $hristian medie'al order. This discourse, then, operated to ser'e the same e9tra-cogniti'e function of *tolemaic astronomy in the =iddle Ages. It re-enacted the celestialCterrestrial physico-ontological principle of +ifference in new terms: this time in terms of a ioontological principle of /amenessC+ifference, e9pressed, not in the /piritC)lesh order of 'alue of the $hristian-medie'al order, ut in the rationalCirrational mode of OrderC$haos of our own. Whate'er the groupBwomen, nati'es, niggersBwhate'er the categoryBthe Orient, Africa, the tropicsB the

ordering principle of the discourse was the same: the figuration of an ontological order of 'alue etween the groups who were mar"ers of IrationalityI and those who were the mar"ers of its %ac"-/tate. And the analyses which had egun to percei'e the lawli"e regularities of these ordering discourses
went from :irginia WoolfHs o ser'ation of the compulsi'e insistence y Iangry male professorsI on the mental inferiority of women, through $arter 4. WoodsonHs diagnosis (21EM6 of the lawli"e manner in which the curriculum in American schools distorted history so as to represent the Whites as e'erything and the &lac"s as nothing, to Aime $esaireHs +iscourse on $olonialism, which again diagnosed the regularities with which the colonizers rewrote the past to show themsel'es as ha'ing done e'erything and the colonized nothing, and, more recently A del =ale"HsCDdward /aidHs dissection of the phenomenon of Orientalism.GH What egan to come clear was the reality of the refle9 automatic functioning of rules of figuration, parallel to those of 4alileoHs doctors of philosophy, which went eyond the intentionality of the o 8ecti'ely rational scholar, rules which then re'ealed that the o 8ecti'ity was that of the ratiomorphic apparatus or cogniti'e mechanism of our present organization of "nowledge, one y which we are all, including the liminal Others, nonconsciously go'erned. A parallel suspicion of something automatic functioning eyond the conscious control of the human had impelled the e9change of letters etween Dinstein and )reud, which was to e pu lished under the title, Why War?. In the early decades of the century Dinstein had written )reud, as"ing if his new discipline could pro'ide some hope with

respect to, and in the conte9t of, the acceleration of the phenomenon of inter-human wars. )reud had responded that there was his theory of the instincts ut that as yet he had no o'erall answer. *sychology as a discipline, howe'er, was to confront the @uestion y focussing on the connection etween the phenomenon of nationalism and the processes of socialization which e9acer ated nationalist allegiances as a primary causal factor. And in his <istory of /e9uality, =ichel

)oucault suggested that with the shift from the monarchical order of things to the ourgeois order in its pure stateBthe transposition from a go'erning figurati'e Isym olic of loodI to what might e called a Imetaphorics of naturalityI in which the ourgeoisie comes to image its oundary-maintaining 4roup-/u 8ect system on the analogy of a li'ing organismBthe imperati'e of the selfpreser'ation of the Inatural communityI (nation-:ol", race, culture6 metaphorically ontologized as a I iologicalI &ody, had led to the acceleration of wars etween men who were now led to imagine themsel'es, for the first time in human history, as Inatural eings.IG! Recently %ewis Thomas, the iologist, has again focussed on the connection etween nationalismBwhich he sees as an e'olutionary lind alley for the human as a speciesBand the threat of nuclear e9tinction. %i"e Dinstein earlier, Thomas has glimpsed that hope, if it is to e9ist, would ha'e to e found in a new order of "nowledge. And he suggests that the disciplines that were concerned with the pro lems of human eha'ior, although still in a groping uncertain stage, are the only ones capa le of pro'iding an answer to man"indHs @uest for social hopeA that one day there would emerge from these uncertain attempts, a IsolidI discipline as IhardI as physics, plagued
Ias physics still is with am iguitiesI yet with new rules Iand new ways of getting things done, such as for instance getting

such a discipline can only emerge with an o'erall rewriting of "nowledge, as the re-enacting of the original heresy of a /tudia, rein'ented as a science of human systems, from the liminal perspecti'e of the I aseI
rid of patriotic rhetoric and thermonuclear warfare all at once.II The proposal I am ma"ing is that (+ewey, 21ML6 new /tudies, whose re'elatory heresy lies in their definition of themsel'es away from the $haos roles in which they had een definedB&lac" from 7egro, $hicano from =e9ican-American, )eminists from Women, etc. )or

these ha'e re'ealed the connection etween the way we identify oursel'es and the way we act uponC"now the world. They ha'e made clear that we are go'erned in the way we "now the world y the
templates of identity or modes of self-troping speciation, a out which each human system auto-institutes itself, effecting the dynamics of an autopoetics, whose imperati'e of sta le reproduction has hitherto transcended the imperati'es of the human su 8ects who collecti'ely put it into dynamic play. The proposed science of human systems, therefore, decenters the systemic su 8ect. Instead, it ta"es as the o 8ect of its in@uiry the modes of sym olic self-representation ($reutzfeld, 21K16, a out which each human system auto-institutes itself, the modes of self-troping rhetoricity through which the /u 8ect (indi'idualCcollecti'e6 actualizes its mode of eing as a li'ing entity. In addition, it ta"es the ratiomorphic apparatus or episteme, which e9ists as the ena ling rational world 'iew of the self-troping mode of eing as an o 8ect of in@uiry in the comparati'e conte9t in which it is defina le as one of the cogniti'e mechanisms determined y the

Ta"ing the connection that Thomas ma"es etween Ipatriotic rhetoricI and Ithermo-nuclear warfareI as a "ey lin"age, a science of human systems will ta"e most crucially as an o 8ect of its in@uiry the modes of cultural imagination of human systemsB;erisonHs Iimagery systemsIBtogether with the laws
IpsychogenyI of the human rather than y the phylogeny of purely iological organisms. of functioning of the rhetorically coded mode of figuration, which, with its internal mediation of the mimesis of +esire (4irard, 21JM6 and of A'ersion ()anon, 21JK6, orients the normati'e see"ingCa'oidingC"nowing eha'iors of the systemic su 8ects. )or it is this go'erning system of figuration generated from the mode of self-definition which integrates with the neurophysiological machinery of the rain, that functions as the shared integrati'e mechanism, determining not only the mode of consciousness or Iworld of mindI of the order, ut ser'ing also, at the aesthetico-affecti'e le'el of the order, to sta ilize the response to the target-stimuli of +esire for all that is the /elfCOrder and of A'ersion to all that is the $haos of the /elf, the +eath of its %ife. It is y there y securing shared and predicta ly functioning endogenous wa'eshapes in the rain (ThatcherC;ohn, 21KK6, of the normati'e /u 8ect of the order, that the system of figuration sets limits to that /u 8ectHs mode of imagining its /elfC4roup-/elf and, therefore, to the "nowledge that it can ha'e of its world. A science of human systems which ta"es the laws of figuration of human systems as its o 8ects of in@uiry must, therefore, adopt a synthetic rather than categorized approach to its su 8ect. In order to study their rhetor-neurophysiological laws of functioning, it must a o'e all reach the distinction etween rainCminds, the natural and the human sciences. )or one of its ma8or hypotheses is that systems

of figuration and their group-speciating )iguration-Wor" essentially


duction schemas through which human

constitute the shared go'erning rhetor-neurophysiological programs or a

4roup /u 8ects realize themsel'es as neurophysiological

oundary maintaining systems. These go'erning rhetor-

programs--which can often function as regressi'e defects of social fantasy (ThatcherC;ohn 21KK6 , as in the case of limpieza de sangre and of Aryaness, as well as of an ontologized whiteness--are the mechanisms which determine the limit of the figurati'ely coded I oundary-maintaingI systems. They then function, as in the case of the American order, to set o 8ecti'e limits (such as those to &radleyHs hopes6 to the definition of its fictionA and to the possi le non-proscription of &lac" $ulture $enter at the nether edge of the campus, as the physical e9pression of the rhetorical configuration of
the mode of chaos to the orderHs self-troping definition of itself. <ence the parado9 of the ma8or proposal that we ma"e: that it is the literary humanities which should e the um rella site for the transdisciplinary realization of a science of human systems.

%$N3 . E"ON
Economics is infiltrated with racist politics. #rowth differentially affects racial populations and leaves marginali/ed groups in the dust

#abriel and Todorova -, (/atyananda ;., D'genia O., .Racism and $apitalist Accumulation:
An O'erdetermined 7e9us,0 ;ournal of $ritical /ociology- 3/456

The per'asi'eness of racial consciousness cannot help ut shape the economic relationships in contemporary capitalist social formations. The interaction of racialized agents shapes the parameters of a wide range of economic processes such as mar"et e9change transactions, employment contracts, pricing, capital udgeting decisions, and so on. The fact that one can o ser'e patterns of differential economic success and failure ased on racial ca tegories is e'idence of the impact of racism upon agents. Dconomic
theories, oth =ar9ian and neoclassical, ha'e attempted to e9plain rational eha'ior of agents in the conte9t of the mar"et for la or-power. The =ar9ian approach has een to ma"e sense of this mar"et in the conte9t of capitalist e9ploitation, for which the mar"et in la or-power is a precondition. $apitalism presupposes the e9istence of free wage la orers. In the =ar9ian tradition, direct producers ecome IfreeI to sell their la or-power as a result of determinate social and natural

$apitalist freedom came to e9ist in contrast to serfdom and sla'ery. In this sense, it was orn of a comple9 association of ideas. In some instances, this would ha'e included, from the earliest stages of capitalist de'elopment, ideas produced within racist paradigms. The wage
processes. It is in this process of gaining capitalist freedom that the rationality of wage la oring is formed. la oring consciousness necessary for an agent to e willing and a le to sell her la or power would ha'e een influenced, in the Western Durope and 4reat &ritain of early capitalist de'elopment, y aristocratic racism and then later y white supremacist racism. The perception of capitalist freedom, in contrast to serfdom or sla'ery, would certainly ha'e made it easier to create, reproduce and e9pand the wage la oring consciousness. Thus, the creation of la or mar"ets would, necessarily, e 'ery different in an en'ironment where direct producers 'iew themsel'es as already free. There are countless stories of the difficulties of creating la or mar"ets in African colonies, for instance. The classic case is that of Tanganyi"a, under 4erman colonial rule, where resistance to wor"ing as wage la orers was so strong that entire 'illages would mo'e rather than su mit to the la or mar"et in order to meet the imposed hut ta9es. These 'illagers had li'ed as communal producers, collecti'ely performing and appropriating surplus la or. Their history was one of collecti'e decision-ma"ing, communal freedom, and the a sence of racialized consciousness. $apitalist freedom did not appear to e an attracti'e alternati'e. This was not the case in &ritain, Western Durope, or the -nited /tates, where the percei'ed alternati'e was, in many ut not all cases, serfdom or sla'ery. -nder those conditions, the legitimacy of capitalist freedom was less li"ely to e challenged. We ha'e already mentioned the importance of dissociation to creating a wage la oring

The 'arious forms of racialized consciousness that were pre'alent in most capitalist social formations, ha'ing already produced forms of dissociation and alienation in the consciousness of direct producers and others, may ha'e een critical to the rapidity with which la or mar"ets were esta lished and e9panded.
consciousness, one in which the indi'idual can sell her la or power li"e so many ushels of tomatoes.

%$N3 . W! ($N#
#lobal warming is not a product of all humanity. $t is caused by the uneven development engendered by Whiteness. The affirmative only notices warming when it might destroy white bodies4 which papers over e*isting destruction caused by racism

Wynter 9-< (/yl'ia, *rofessor Dmeritus in /panish and Romance %anguages at /tanford -ni'ersity,
.The <uman eing as noun? Or eing human as pra9is? Towards the Autopoietic turnCo'erturn: A =anifesto,0 otl!.wi"ispaces.comCfileC'iewCThe^Autopoetic^Turn.pdf 3/456
)or if, as Time magazine reported in ;anuary !LLK (Dpigraph !6, a -.7. Intergo'ernmental panel of 7atural /cientists, were soon to release Ia

smo"ing-gun report which confirms that human acti'ities are to lame for glo al warmingI (and there y for climate change6, and had therefore predicted Icatastrophic disruptions y !2LL,I y April, the issued Report not only confirmed the a o'e, ut also repeated the ma8or contradiction which the Time account had re-echoed. This contradiction, howe'er, has nothing to do in any way with the rigor, and precision of their natural scientific findings , ut rather with the contradiction referred to y +erridaHs @uestion in Dpigraph EBi.e., &ut who, we? That is, their attri ution of the non-natural factors dri'ing glo al warming and climate change to, generic human acti'ities, andCor to Ianthropocentric forcingsIA with what is, in effect, this mis-attri ution then determining the nature of their policy recommendations to deal with the already ongoing reality of glo al warming and climate change, to e ones couched largely in economic terms. That is, in the terms of our present mode of "nowledge production, and its Iperceptual categorization systemI as
ela orated y the disciplines of the <umanities and /ocial /ciences (or Ihuman sciencesI6 and which are reciprocally enacting of our present sociogenic genre of eing human, as that of the WestHs =an in its second %i eral or io-humanist rein'ented form, as homo oeconomicusA as optimally I'irtuous &readwinner, ta9payer, consumer, and as systemically o'er-represented as if it, and its eha'ioral acti'ities were isomorphic with the eing of eing human, and there y with

the ReportHs authors ecause logically ta"ing such an o'er-representation as an empirical fact, gi'en that, as highly trained
acti'ities that would e defina le as the human-as-a-species ones. $onse@uently, natural scientists whose domains of in@uiry are the physical and (purely6 iological le'els of reality, although their own natural-scientific order of cognition with respect to their appropriate non-human domains of in@uiry, is an imperati'ely

ecause in order to e natural scientists, they are therefore necessarily, at the same time, middle class Western or westernized su 8ects, initiated 2M as such, y means of our present o'erall education system and its mode of "nowledge production to e the optimal sym olically encoded em odiment of
self-correcting and therefore, necessarily, a cogniti'ely openCopen-ended one, ne'ertheless, the WestHs =an, it its second rein'ented io-humanist homo oeconomicus, and therefore ourgeois self-conception, o'er-

they also fall into the trap identified y +errida in the case of his fellow )rench philosophers. The trap, that is , of conflating their own e9istentially e9perienced (Western- ourgeois or ethno-class6 referent Iwe,I with the IweI of Ithe horizon of humanity.I This then leading them to attri ute the reality of eha'ioral acti'ities that are genre-specific to the WestHs =an in its second rein'ented conceptCself-conception as
represented as if it were isomorphic with the eing of eing human, homo oeconomicus, ones that are therefore as such, as a historically originated ensem le of eha'ioral acti'itiesas eing

This, in spite of the fact that they do historicize the origin of the processes that were to lead to their recent natural scientific findings with respect to the reality of the non-naturally caused ongoing acceleration of glo al warming and climate change, identifying this process as ha'ing egun with the 3WestHs5 Industrial Re'olution from a out 2KML onwards. That is, therefore, as a process that can e seen to ha'e een correlatedly
ostensi ly human acti'ities-in-general. concomitant in 4reat &ritain, oth with the growing e9pansion of the largely ourgeois enterprise of factory manufacturing, as well with the first stages of the political and intellectual struggles the &ritish ourgeoisie who were to

spearhead the Industrial Re'olution, to displace the then ruling group hegemony of the landed aristocracy cum gentry, and to do so, y inter alia, the autopoetic rein'ention of the earlier homo politicusC'irtuous citizen ci'ic humanist concept of =an, which had ser'ed to legitimate the latterHs traditionally landed, political, social and economic dominance, in new terms. This eginning with Adam /mith and the /cottish /chool of the Dnlightenment in the generation efore the American, )rench, and <aitian (sla'e6 re'olutions, as a rein'ention tat was to e effected in now specifically ourgeois terms as homo oeconomicusCand 'irtuous &readwinner. 22J That is as the now purely secular genre of eing human, which although not to e fully (i.e., politically, intellectually, and economically6 institutionalized until the mid-nineteenth

the new ruling class, was, from then on, to generate its prototype specific ensem le of new eha'ioral acti'ities, that were to impel oth the Industrial Re'olution, as well as the WestHs second wa'e of imperial e9pansion, this ased on the colonized incorporation of a large ma8ority of the worldHs peoples, all coerci'ely homogenized to ser'e its own redempti'e material telos, the telos initiating of glo al warming and climate change.
century, onwards, when its optimal incarnation came to e actualized in the &ritish and Western ourgeoisie as $onse@uently, if the ReportHs authors note that a out 21ML, a steady process of increasing acceleration of the processes of glo al warming and climate change, had egun to ta"e place, this was not only to e due to the /o'iet Re'olutionHs (from 212K onwards6 forced march towards industrialization (if in its still homo oeconomicus conception, since a march spearheaded y the 22J /ee the already cited essay y ;.4.A. *ococ" Isym olic capital,I education credentials owning and technically s"illed Dastern Duropean ourgeoisie6Bas a state-directed form of capitalism, nor indeed y that of =aoHs then $hina, ut was to e also due to the fact that in the wa"e of the range of successful anti-colonial struggles for political independence, which had accelerated in the wa"e of the /econd World War, ecause the new entrepreneurial and academic elites had already een initiated y the Western educational system in Western terms as homo oeconomicus, they too would see political independence as calling for industrialized de'elopment on the Icollecti'e o'arysme I22K

with the acceleration of glo al warming and climate change gaining e'en more momentum as all egan to industrialize on the model of homo oeconomicus, with the result that y the time of the *anelHs issued April !LLK Report the process was now eing dri'en y a now planetarily homogenizedCstandardized transnational Isystem of material pro'isioning or mode of techno-industrial economic production ased on the accumulation of capitalA as the means of production of e'er-increasing economic growth, defined as Ide'elopmentIA with this
model of the Western ourgeoisie. Therefore, calling for a single model of normati'e eha'ioral acti'ities, all dri'en y the now glo ally (post-colonially and post-the21F1-collapse-of-the-/o'iet -nion6, homogenized desire of Iall men (and women6 to,I realize themsel'esCoursel'es, in the

In the terms, therefore, of Iits single (Western- ourgeois or ethnoclass6 understandingI of ImanHs humanity,I o'er-represented as that of the humanA with the well- eing and common good of its referent IweIBthat, not only of the transnational middle classes ut e'en more optimally, of the corporate multinational usiness industries and their financial networ"s, oth indispensa le to the securing of the Western- ourgeois conception of the common good, within the o'erall terms of the eha'iorregulatory redempti'e material telos of e'er-increasing economic growth, put forward as the 4irardotterms of homo oeconomicus. type IcureI for the pro8ected =althusian-Ricardo transumed postulate of a Isignificant illI as that, now, ostensi ly, of man"indHs threatened su ordination to 3the trope5 of 7atural /carcity, this in the reoccupied place of $hristianity of its postulate of that IillI as that of ensla'ement to Original /in.I H

With the result that the 'ery ensem le of eha'ioral acti'ities indispensa le, on the one hand, to the continued hegemony of the ourgeoisie as a Western and westernized transnational ruling class, is the same ensem le of eha'iors that is directly causal of glo al worming and climate change, as they are, on the other, to the continued dynamic enactment and sta le replication of the WestHs second rein'ented concept of =anA this latter in response to the latterHs e9istential imperati'e of
guarding against the entropic disintegration of its genre of eing human and ficti'e nation-state mode of "ind. There y against the possi le ringing to an end, therefore, of the societal order, and autopoetic li'ing Western and westernized macro world system in it ourgeois configuration, which is reciprocally the formerHs (i.e., its genre of eing human, and ficti'e modes of "indHs condition of realization, at a now glo al le'el. This, therefore, is the cogniti'e dilemma, one arising directly from the WestHs hitherto unresol'a le aporia of the secular, that has een precisely captured y /'en %uttic"en in a recent essay. +espite, he writes, Ithe consensus that glo al warming cannot e ascri ed to normal fluctuations in the earthHs temperature...

3the5 social and political components of this process ha'e een

minimizedA man-made nature is re-naturalized, the new (un6natural history presented as fate.I And with this continuing to e so ecause (within the terms, I shall add, of our present Isingle understanding of manHs humanityI and the unresol'a le aporia which it continues to enact6, I3t5he truly terrifying notion is not that 3glo al warming and climate change5 is irre'ersi le, ut that it actually might e re'ersi leBat the cost of radically changing the economic and social order...I221 The changing, there y, of the now glo ally hegemonic iologically a solute answer that we at present gi'e to the @uestion to who we are, and of whose iohumanist homo oeconomicus sym olic lifeCdeath (i.e., naturally selectedCdysselected6 codeHs intentionality of dynamic enactment and sta le replication, our present Ieconomic and social orderI is itself the empirical actualization.

%$N3 . (A%T$"A%TA !%$S(


(ulticultural reforms have led to more racial ine;uality in %atin !merica =ooks -: (;uliet, *rofessor of 4o'ernment /tudies at the -ni'ersity of Te9as, .Indigenous
InclusionC&lac" D9clusion: Race, Dthnicity and =ulticultural $itizenship in %atin America0, ;ournal of %atin American /tudies, :ol. EK, 7o. ! (=ay, !LLM6, 3/456

4i'en that oth indians and lac"s in %atin America suffer from racial discrimination, one of the more puzzling aspects of the multicultural citizenship reforms adopted to rectify such pro lems, is simultaneous indigenous inclusion and lac" e9clusion. If oth
indians and lac"s in %atin America suffer from racial discrimination and social e9clusion, why ha'e Afro-%atinos not een as successful in winning collecti'e rights as indians? If lac"s in general suffer from racial discrimination, why do those Afro-%atinos who ha'e een a le to win such rights represent such a small percentage of the regionHs total

The wor" of scholars of indigenous mo ilisation in %atin America , while e9tremely useful for understanding the adoption of multicultural citizen- ship reforms y %atin American states, is less helpful in e9plaining lac" e9clusion. The recent implementation of multicultural citizenship reforms
population of African descent? in %atin America is surprising gi'en that many countries in the region de'eloped national ideologies of mestiza8e that portrayed their populations as o'erwhelmingly mestizo (racially mi9ed6 nations without racial or cultural dis- crimination. As a result, most of these states did not e'en recognise the e9istence of indigenous and Afro-%atin populations as such .

One e9planation for the adoption of multicultural policies in the past two decades is that neo-li eral reforms, especially economic ad8ustment policies, challenged indigenous local autonomy and li'elihoods and this led to in- creased ethnic mo ilisation, which in turn forced %atin American states to agree to indigenous demands. Others ha'e argued that
national elites pursued multicultural citizenship reforms as a means of enhancing the domestic legitimacy of the state at a time when %atin American states ha'e found it increasingly difficult to meet the material demands of their citizens. )inally, others suggest that neo-li eral states in %atin America are meeting certain demands y indigenous groups in order to delegitimise more radical claims. These

accounts pro'ide persuasi'e e9planations for the increasing salience of ethnic politics in %atin America in recent decades, ut they tend to focus on the incenti'es and pressures leading %atin American states to agree to demands for collecti'e rights y minorities, and on the structural conditions that incite these groups to mo ilise in fa'our of such rights. They do not ade@uately e9plain why Afro-%atinos ha'e
generally not gained the same collecti'e rights as indigenous groups during the two decades of multicultural citizenship reform in %atin America. The few scholars who ha'e noted the gap in the group rights achie'ed y lac"s and indians as a result of %atin AmericaHs new multicultural policies ha'e suggested a num er of different e9planations for the discrepancy, including differences in population size etween the two groups, the greater organisational capacity of the indigenous mo'ement, and lac" of political mo ilisation around collecti'e rights y Afro-%atinos. While these factors are important, they cannot account for the differential success of indians and lac"s in gaining collecti'e rights from the state in %atin America. They attri ute the gap in collecti'e rights to the differences e- tween indigenous and Afro-%atin politics (the "inds of demands that are eing made and how effecti'e the groups are in ad'ancing them6, without paying sufficient attention to the issue of why states were more disposed to grant rights ased on one identity than the other. Asserting a claim for group rights is no guarantee that the state will meet it. In order fully to understand why Afro-%atinos ha'e generally not een as successful in achie'ing collecti'e rights under %atin AmericaHs new multicultural citizenship regimes

pu lics ha'e een more recepti'e to claims made y indigenous groups than Afro-%atinos. While the goal of multicultural reforms may ha'e een the promotion of democratic legitimacy y remedying social e9clusion, the criteria used to determine the appropriate su 8ects of collecti'e rights ha'e not een racial discrimination or socio-economic and political marginalisation. I argue that the main
it is thus also crucial to consider why national elites and criterion used to determine the recipients of collecti'e rights in %atin America has een the possession of a distinct cultural group identity. )urthermore, ecause of the different ways in which indians and lac"s ha'e een racialised in %atin America, utilising the e9istence of a separate group identity concei'ed in ethnic or cultural terms as the asis for awarding group rights has made it possi le for indians to claim these rights more successfully than lac"s.

It is

important to understand the roots of the gap in group rights etween indians and lac"s ecause collecti'e rights ased on cultural difference ha'e ecome the primary legal a'enue used to re'erse the political e9clusion and racial discrimination suffered y lac" and indigenous %atin Americans. $ontemporary multicultural reforms thus determine the Hpolitical opportunity structureH faced y lac" and indigenous mo'ements in the region. State0based multicultural reforms reinforce ine;uality0 it acknowledges some identities as legitimate and sweeps others under the rug0 empirically true in %atin !merica =ooks -: (;uliet, *rofessor of 4o'ernment /tudies at the -ni'ersity of Te9as, .Indigenous
InclusionC&lac" D9clusion: Race, Dthnicity and =ulticultural $itizenship in %atin America0, ;ournal of %atin American /tudies, :ol. EK, 7o. ! (=ay, !LLM6, 3/456

The assertion of a claim to collecti'e rights does not ensure that such a demand will e met y the state. The @uestion of framing is critical to understanding why indigenous groups were more successful in gaining collecti'e rights in 2112 than lac"s in $olom ia, for e9ample. According to :an $ott , the frame that emerged to 8ustify lac" collecti'e rights at the time of the 7ational $onstituent Assem ly (A7$6 Hgained little sympathy from potential political allies or the mediaH. The lac" mo'ementHs initial orientation towards a politics of anti-racism that emphasised the need to o'ercome social e9clusion and racial discrimination rather than towards o taining special collecti'e rights ased on cultural difference did not resonate as much with $olom ian national elites or the pu lic. The
a ility of the indigenous mo'ement to frame its demand for collecti'e rights in ways that resonated with the concerns of national elites and the $olom ian pu lic was thus a result not only of its capacity to capitalise on new political opportunities, ut of the preferences of national elites and the pu lic that led them to 'iew certain demands as more legitimate than others. While the comparati'e le'el of organisation of lac" and indigenous mo'ements cannot therefore

this e9planation still does not ta"e into account the fact that national elites and pu lics were more recepti'e to some types of claims to group rights than others. The most commonly adduced e9planations for the comparati'ely lower
le'el of success of Afro-%atinos than indigenous groups in gaining collecti'e rights under multicultural citizenship regimes in %atin America - relati'e population size, lac" of mo ilisation around collecti'e rights y Afro- %atinos, and lower le'els of organisation of the lac" mo'ement - while important, cannot e9plain why there has een pu lic and political support in many %atin American countries for HindianH as an identity deser'ing of collecti'e rights, while the same has not een true for a H lac"H group identity.

e said to e unimportant to success in gaining collecti'e rights ,

Indian and lac" are oth racial categories that formed part of colonial and post-independence systems of racial classification in %atin America, and anti-racism is part of the political discourse of oth indigenous and lac" mo'ements, ut not all lac"s can ma"e claims ased on cultural distincti'eness as indigenous groups can. Ta le i shows how these different factors correlate (or not6 with the esta lishment of collecti'e rights for Afro%atinos. While le'els of group identity and degree of organisation can hardly e dismissed as unimportant, whether or not lac"s are seen as a distinct cultural group appears to e a crucial factor for understanding whether or not they gain collecti'e rights. The gap in collecti'e rights gained y indians and lac"s is thus not only a result of differences in the le'el of organisation of lac" and indigenous political mo'ements, ut is also a conse@uence of the fact that it is easier for

such rights are awarded ased on the percei'ed possession of a distinct cultural group identity, not a history of political e9clusion or racial discrimination. not organised around a
indians to win collecti'e rights than lac"s under %atin AmericaHs new multicultural citizenship regimes ecause distinct lac" identity from which collecti'e rights can e deri'ed, or ecause they are less mo ilised than indians, ut

%atin American states and pu lics ha'e een much more amena le to demands made y the earers of indigenous rather than lac" identities, and to calls for group rights posed
ecause in terms of cultural difference or ethnicity (indian-ness6 rather than race or racism ( lac"ness6. An important factor in

determining success in winning collecti'e rights under multicultural citizen- ship regimes is therefore the e9tent to which minority groups are a le to formulate their demands in terms that resonate with the logic under which collecti'e rights are 8ustified in this citizenship regime, which is the possession of a distinct cultural identity. &uilding on the wor" of scholars such as Ddmund T. 4ordon and *eter Wade who ha'e analysed the different ways in which national states in %atin

national elites in %atin America ha'e tended to percei'e indians as a distinct cultural group in a way that that has not een true for lac"s. The une'en scope of collecti'e rights gained under multicultural policies thus
America ha'e (or ha'e not6 incorporated indigenous and lac" citizens, I argue that corresponds to certain long-held assumptions across the region a out the "inds of racial su 8ects and national citizens

=ulticultural citizenship regimes were generally not adopted in the 211Ls in %atin America in order to resol'e political threats to national sta ility posed y indigenous or lac" mo'ements. Instead, in the ma8ority of cases, they came a out as a result of decisions
that lac"s and indians are. made y national elites to try to enhance their national-democratic legitimacy during periods of transition from

multicultural citizenship regimes are attempts to rectify past e9clusion that were moti'ated y the search for different sources of legitimacy for the state. &efore the current round of constitutional transformation, the ina ility of %atin American go'ernments to
authoritarianism. According to :an $ott impro'e the material welfare of their citizens and ensure e@uality under the law had produced a crisis of legitimacy of the state, she argues. In promoting multiculturalism therefore: H%atin American constitution-ma"ers ha'e wagered that ethnic di'ersity may ... promote national unity y drawing attention to the pro lem of political e9clusion, emphasising the importance of rights to democracy, and infusing the political culture with the 'alues of participation, inclusion, and tolerance

!ffirmation of %atin !merica multiculturalism systematically assimilates minorities into a system of dominance and papers over racist violence +ailey and Telles 'C (/tanley, *rofessor of /ociology at -$ Ir'ine- Ddward, *rofessor of /ociology at
*rinceton, .-nderstanding %atin American &eliefs a out Racial Ine@uality0, American ;ournal of /ociology, :ol. 22F, 7o. J (=ay !L2E6, 3/456 _This card has een modified from its original form ecause it was super a leist, which we don>t endorse_

multicultural afSrmation in much of %atin America, some scholars ha'e suggested that the hegemony of the mestiza8e myth has een central to slowing ethnoracial mo ilization and challenges to the racial status @uo, oth in the past and today <anchard 211GA *aschel !L2L . As illustration, Wade !LLE, p. !KM writes: ./o long as mestiza8e discourse is pre'alent, it will e hard to lin" racial identity to citizenship and rights0 in %atin America. In a similar 'ein, /afa !LLM, p. E2K remar"s: .&ecause of the co-opti'e strategy of mestiza8e, which
Although the tide may e turning toward con'inced mulattos they were more li"e whites than li"e their lac" rothers, there is also a reluctance to create `in %atin

The fact that many Afrodescendants and indigenous peoples were gradually a sor ed into amorphous national mestizo populations, and that lac"ness and indigeneity were systematically ignored, pro'ides a partial e9planation for %atin America>s scant record of multiculturalism =ar9 211FA *aschel and /awyer !LLF. The widespread denial of systematic disad'antage suffered y racial and ethnic minorities is another important mechanism through which, scholars argue, mestiza8e slowed ethnoracial mo ilization and antiracism policy. %atin American mestiza8e racial ideologies o fuscated the structural causes of ethnoracial ine@uality, leading to .color lindness0 *aschel !L2L, p. K!1 or .false consciousness0 Winant 2111, p. 11 that .denies the e9istence of any racism0 /idanius et al. !LL2, p. F!J , e'en in the minds of nonwhites themsel'es Twine 211F, p. F . &ec" et al. !L22, p. 2LJ write that, in Dcuador, .mestiza8e, and the wide swath of people who clearly identify as mestizo , produces a perceptual prism in which it is @uite easy to ignore, hide, downgrade, and ultimately
America confrontational racial locs such as e9ist in the -./.0

deny processes of pre8udice and discrimination.0 *erhaps clearest in connecting myths of mestiza8e with
a claim that nonwhite %atin Americans are color lind, Warren and /ue !L22, p. ML write that, across %atin America, .nonwhites0 ha'e .scant understanding of how race, oth its contemporary and historical forms, is directly lin"ed to the particular conSgurations of the la or mar"et, social welfare, ta9ation policies, housing, educational opportunities, and so forth.0 -sing ethnographic research, these authors conclude: .In

short, li"e -./. whites, they `%atin American nonwhites do not lin" race to economic and social marginalization0 p. ML . While noting the assimilationist core to these mestiza8e myths in %atin America, we contend that their role as hegemonic ideologies linding %atin American populations to racial discrimination and disad'antage, that is, conditioning their stratiScation eliefs, is an empirical @uestion needing further e9amination. While most research to date on mestiza8e has een
ased on @ualitati'e methods, large-sample sur'ey data may e uni@uely suited to e9ploring generalized attitudinal orientationsA to date, the a sence of those data and analyses using ad'anced sur'ey methods constitute a gap in the literature. 7ew sur'ey data may simply conSrm earlier ethnography, e9tending its e9planatory powerA sur'ey data could also re'eal new patterns that complicate localized perspecti'es. With the goal of ringing the lens of sur'ey research to the study of %atin American racial attitudes, we loo" Srst at general framings for understanding the effects of hegemonic racial ideologies on e9planations for racial ine@uality efore laying out a series of hypotheses a out the %atin American conte9t.

%$N3 . %!T$N !(E $"!N


%atin !merican economic policy is stained by racism0 ignoring this only fuels discrimination ivera0+ati/ -B ()rancisco, *rofessor of Dconomics and Dducation at $olum ia -ni'ersity, .$olor in
the Tropics: Race and Dconomic Outcomes in the Island of *uerto Rico0, =ay !LLG, http:CCwww.colum ia.eduCaflr1CdocumentsC$olorRinRtheU!LTropicsR*aper.pdf, pgs. 2-G, 3/456

The impact of race on economic outcomes is a topic that has recei'ed enormous attention among la or economists o'er the years. In the -nited /tates, hundreds of studies ha'e
e9amined the di'ergent economic opportunities on the asis of race and the mechanisms through which race affects

/imilarly, there is a growing ody of wor" on the connections etween race and economic outcomes in %atin America, including research on =e9ico, &oli'ia, &razil, and many others 3*sacharopoulos and *atrinos (211G6, %o'ell and Wood (211F6, %am (21116, *atrinos (!LLL6, )lorez and =edina (!LL26, and Oa"ley (!LL!65. &y contrast, there has een 'ery little analysis of how race and racial discrimination affect income and la or mar"et performance in the $ari ean. There is, of course, widespread recognition that issues connected to race form a fundamental part of the societal foundation of the $ari ean Islands, where Afro-$ari ean populations permeate the social landscape. &ut the role played y race and racism in determining economic opportunities has not een a matter of systematic research. In the Island of *uerto Rico, the topic of race and its impact on socioeconomic outcomes has made only rief appearances on social science research o'er the years . *artly, this has reflected the a sence of any ma8or social science research data ase that allows identification on the asis of race in *uerto Rico. )or instance, the @uestionnaire used y the -./. $ensus of *opulation, which has historically included racial categories, was modified for *uerto Rico after 21ML to e9clude any @uestions on race or s"in color. Only in the year !LLL was the race @uestion re-introduced into the $ensus @uestionnaire in *uerto Rico . &oth the a sence of systematic research on race and the lac" of data ases disaggregated on the asis of race or s"in color respond to a con'entional wisdom that @uestions the significance of race as a socioeconomic issue in *uerto Rico. This con'entional wisdom is 'ery much ali'e in pu lic
earnings, employment, etc. 3see the sur'eys y $ain (21FJ6 and Alton8i and &lan" (211165. opinion today. )or instance, in a recent ethnographic study of a sample of persons in *uerto Rico selected to e9amine their opinions and perceptions regarding the race @uestion in the !LLL $ensus, one of the participants replied: .I continue to as" myself why the $ensus wants to "now the num er of White and &lac" people in *uerto Rico. <ere we do not need to "now whether we are White or &lac" or tan or Indian in order to recei'e help. We are all children of 4od. When we are loo"ing for wor" we "now there are rules that prohi it re8ecting a person ecause of his race. 0

This perception has

traditionally een held y many social scientists. )or instance, in their classic wor" on *uerto Rican
social stratification, sociologists Tumin and )eldman dedicated some of their research into discussing the issue of race.

.The e'idence urges upon us the conclusion that s"in color is considera ly less important in *uerto Rico than in the -nited /tatesA that it is of 'irtually no significance
They concluded: whatsoe'er in many important areas of lifeA that the ma8ority feel that people of dar"er color are not loc"ed from any serious @uestionN y any o 8ecti'e measure, there is only a small and relati'ely insignificant relationship etween s"in color and education, income occupation, or any other indices of social and economic position0 3Tumin and )eldman (21J2,

This con'entional wisdom has een challenged o'er the years. /tatistical e'idence of racism or racial discrimination does not e9ist in the literature, ut o ser'ations regarding the presence of discrimination on the asis of race a ound. 4oing ac" to 21GM, anthropologist Dric Williams made the following comments regarding *uerto Rico: .+iscrimination is common in all the etter hotels and restaurantsN$lu s in *uerto Rico are customarily
!E1,!GM6.

classified as .first class0 and .second class.0 Whites

elong to oth types of clu , ut 7egroes elong only to .second class0 onesN/ocial discrimination has increased in *uerto Rico to such an e9tent that the legislature passed a $i'il Rights Act in 21GE guaranteeing the right of all persons irrespecti'e of race, creed or political affiliation to en8oy the facilities afforded y pu lic places, usinesses or any agency of the Insular 4o'ernment.0 3Williams (21K!, p. GM65 =ore recently, an article on Dl 7ue'o +ba (April !LL26 reports the comments of ;uan )igueroa, who was the +irector of the *uerto Rican %egal +efense and Dducation )und at the time, on the topic of race in *uerto Rico: .Although )igueroa said that racism in *uerto Rico may not ha'e the same dimensions it has in the -nited /tates, he as"ed how many lac" persons ha'e ser'ed in the 4o'ernor>s $a inet in *uerto Rico, how many appear on local tele'ision, and how many are models, .and you are aware of the pro lem,0 he indicated.0 This paper egins to ridge the gap in the literature y

The $ensuses of *opulation carried out in *uerto Rico under oth the /panish and American colonial periods historically included race @uestions, ut after 21ML the -./. $ensus of *opulation discontinued as"ing @uestions on racial identification in its decennial sur'ey of *uerto Rico. Then, in the 211Ls, at
e9amining the impact of race in the Island of *uerto Rico. the re@uest of the go'ernment of *uerto Rico, the $ensus &ureau was as"ed to ma"e the $ensus @uestionnaires for *uerto Rico identical to those for the -nited /tates mainland. As a result, for the first time in fifty years, the !LLL $ensus of *opulation included @uestions as"ing residents of *uerto Rico to self-identify in racial terms. This paper ta"es opportunity of the a'aila ility of these data to e9amine the connections etween race and socioeconomic outcomes in *uerto Rico.

%$N3 . "A+!
!merican conceptions of "uba are stained by anti0blackness0 their knowledge production silences ;uestions of race 3empf '- (Arlo, *rofessor of *hilosophy at the -ni'ersity of Toronto, .The *roduction of Racial %ogic
in $u an Dducation: An Anti-$olonial Approach0, https:CCtspace.li rary.utoronto.caC itstreamC2FLKC!J21KCJC#empfRArloR!L2L22R*h+Rthesis.pdf, pgs. M-J, 3/456

DuroC7orth American-centred anti-oppression theories are une@uipped to understand contemporary race relations in $u a. All "nowledge is contested, fluid and political. 7owhere is this truer than in the study of $u a. $u a is generally either lo'ed or hated, understood as a stifled tyranny or as a heroic socialist paradise. The traditional anti-$u a position, e9pressed most forcefully y -/ legislation (and ultimately y American 'oters6 is no more misguided than highly rhetorical and
empty romanticizations em odied in P$he> T-shirts and lind praise for $u a>s people and its leaders. While some scholarship has ta"en a more empirical approach to understanding the island, the 'ast ma8ority of literature, from tra'el guides, to history oo"s, to academic papers, is deri'ati'e of one of these =anichean positions Bthe study of race on the

While race is a topic of great pride in $u a, it is also pu licly understood most commonly, through official silences on race related @uestions. Writing in
island is often no e9ception. 2112, &roc" and $unningham argue: )or many years, there has een a need for rigorous scholarship on the @uestion of

Intellectuals on the left ha'e traditionally praised $u a as a nation free of all aspects of racism. )rom the right ha'e come a small num er of lac"s, such as $arlos =oore and ;ohn
race in re'olutionary $u a. $lytus, who portray $u a as a dogmatic =ar9ist country thri'ing on racism against a population that is largely lac". (p. 2K26 Although almost !L years old, the passage a o'e descri es the present 8ust as well as the past. In a recent letter drafted y Afro-$u an $arlos =oore (mentioned a o'e6 we hear the right wing call descri ed a o'e as he writes

.where'er we loo" in socialist $u a our eyes are confronted with a co we of social and racial ine@uities and racial hatred against lac" people0 (=oore !LLFa, 16. A recent letter from a
group of prominent Afro-$u an scholars and artists defending the $u an racial pro8ect against these and other charges y

$u ans of African descent, who had een among the 'ictims suffering the most from the neocolonial model on the island, immediately enefited from the attle waged y the re'olutionary go'ernment to eradicate all forms of e9clusion, including the cruel racism that mar"ed $u a at that time. (=ore8cn et al !LL1, 16 $leary the ideological inary has persisted and so too
=oore, argues: In 21M1 the $u an Re'olution found the ma8ority of the population in desperate conditions. has the paucity of scholarship on race in $u a, particularly y $u an scholars. D'en clear demographic data on the racial ma"eup of the population is hard to come y. According to the 21FLV21F2census figures, the racial rea"down is as follows: JJU white, 2!U lac" and !2.1U =estizo and 2U Asiatic (/awyer !LLG, p. K26. The ne9t census was not conducted until !LL! and it reported similar num ers: JM.LMU white, 2L.LFU lac", !E.FGU =estizo, and 2.L!U Asian. This is li"ely inaccurate. A report of the Institute for $u an and $u an American /tudies puts the percentage of Afro-$u ans and =estizos at J!U (=iami <erald, !LLK, EL6.2 7umerous $u an scholars ha'e also estimated the percentage of non-whites to e far higher (see *drez /arduy and /tu s !LLL, and Ro aina, !LL16. /awyer (!LLG6, de la )uente (!LL26 and others ha'e argued that the there is a historic under-representation of Afro-$u ans (numerically6 in national census>, which has ser'ed to downplay race- ased concerns at the political le'el. In addition to using self-identification to gather the num ers on race, /awyer points out that enumerators were mostly white, and he argues that the misrepresentation is part of constant efforts in the whitening of $u a, where y $u a is . est represented0 y a highly white population (!LLG, p. K26.On the con'ergence of race, whitening and sur'ey self-identification, *rofessor Dste an =orales of the -ni'ersity of

The pro lems related to .whitening0 still e9ist within our societal reality. What else would e9plain why so many people who are not white are unwilling to identify themsel'es that way? This distorts the census figures and mo'es the @uestion of race into a realm of deception and hypocrisy, ma"ing it a surd to thin" that mestizism might e the solution, when what has to
<a'ana adds: e mi9ed is 'arious forms of consciousness in order to create a consciousness that ma"es color disappear so that, as

7icolas 4uillen says, we come to .$u an color.0 The attitude of many lac" or =estizo people toward their own pigmentation indicates that they do not find it ad'antageous to identify themsel'es as such. (!LL1, p. 1K6

%$N3 . E"ONO($"S
Economics is infiltrated by anti0blackness0 that causes ine;uality is discrimination #ibson and (ng*itama -? (Andile, &lac" consciousness thin"er and organizer, 7igel $, &lac"
acti'ist and scholar, .&i"o %i'esQ $ontesting the %egacies of /te'e &i"o0, *algra'e =acmillon !LLF, http:CCwfeet.za.netC i"oRli'esRcontestingRthe.pdfepageZ2LJ, 3/456
At a time when the white li erals who had ecome radicals ha'e in the postapartheid period once again ecome li erals, &i"o>s criti@ue of white li erals remains rele'ant. ;ust as the turn to =ar9ism was not coincidental, argue Ally and Ally, the turn away from =ar9ism in postapartheid /outh Africa is e@ually not coincidental. Dspecially in as much as white

&y mo'ing from apartheid to neoli eralism, postapartheid /outh Africa considers whiteness an economic pro lem only in as far as it is a arrier to lac" inclusion. The material legacies of racial capitalism are ultimately reduced to the li eral pro lem of e@ual access. As %ewis 4ordon notes
li erals are now 'ery much part of the nation>s political, not only economic, decision ma"ing. in his foreword to I Write What I %i"e, since white li erals are content with a system that maintains and creates the poor, li erals don>t really care a out poor people. &ecause &i"o calls for the humanity of all lac"s, his appeal to &lac" $onsciousness is a call to get eyond such a system. &lac" $onsciousness is thus an anathema to the &DD approach.

.&lac" li eration, the pro8ect that emerges as a conse@uence of &lac" $onsciousness, calls for changing oth the material conditions of po'erty and the concepts y which such po'erty is structured.0K The inter'iews with leading &lac" $onsciousness
4ordon writes, acti'ists +e orah =atsho a and /trini =oodley offer reflections on &i"o from within the postapartheid conte9t. &oth recognized how profoundly &i"o and &lac" $onsciousness spo"e to the present 8uncture, and =oodley offered a surprising re uttal to those who lament &$>s disappearance from the historical record: .)rom my point of 'iew it>s good &$ has een written out of the struggle. &ecause if it was written in then we>re part of the pro lem. 7ow we>re still part of the solution.0 Why is it that although /outh Africa has produced acclaimed literary, political, and religious figures it has not produced well-"nown African philosophers and has no philosophical tradition of note, as"s =a ogo =ore. *hilosophy is em edded in the mar'elous cultural wor" of &$ poets and no'elists discussed y =phutlane Wa &ofelo in this 'olume. There is a strong tradition of e9istentialist philosophy in these genres, writes =ore, ut he warns against the tendency of .loc"ing0 African thin"ers in the iographical moment and political acti'ism. This happened to /te'e &i"o and to the &lac" $onsciousness philosophy he de'eloped. The first section of this 'olume not only rescues &i"o from such reductionism ut is also a li'ely de ate a out his philosophy. *hilosophical influences, such as )anon>s, /artre>s, ;aspers>, and )riere>s, are de ated (see =ore, Turner, 4ordon6 and there is discussion of e9istential, ontological, and epistemological issues including notions of Africana e9istentialism de'eloped in %ewis 4ordon>s wor" (see =ore and Wilderson6. Although it has een said that &i"o did not ha'e much access to nor read much <egel, his understanding of dialectic is much more sophisticated than some thin". In .&lac" $onsciousness and the fuest for a True <umanity,0 &i"o criticizes the synthetic thin"ing of the li erals who search for a .synthesis0 etween the two e9tremes of apartheid and non-racialism.

The

failure of the li erals is connected to their pro9imity to the system. In &i"o>s refashioning, .The
thesis is in fact a strong white racism and therefore, the antithesis to this must, ipso facto, e a strong solidarity amongst the lac"s on whom this white racism see"s to prey.0F Oet he also re8ects /artre>s idea that that lac" solidarity is a priori insufficient y itself. Indeed, rather than .class0 as an e9ternal unifier, it is already em edded in the dialectic of negati'ity:

.They tell us that the situation is a class struggle, rather than a racial one. %et them go to 'an
Tonder in the )ree /tate and tell him this.01 &lac" $onsciousness set in motion a new dialectic, argues %ou Turner, ased

To spea" of a new humanism is radical and &lac" $onsciousness transcends the former (analytical moment6 in order to achie'e a new form of self-consciousness or new humanity. And yet, )ran" &. Wilderson III argues, this presenceB ased on a senceBputs into @uestion the 'ery idea of li eral humanism . In a racist society human relations are unethical ecause the &lac" is positioned elow humanity. To
on the truth that the only 'ehicles for change are those people who ha'e lost their humanity.2L spea" of a .&lac" <uman,0 Wilderson argues, is an o9ymoron. Wilderson locates the source of this a sence in an ina ility

the .register of lac" suffering0 goes eyond the .the political su 8ect 3as5 imagined to e dispossessed of citizenship and access to ci'il society.0 It also goes eyond the
to recognize that /A$*>s formulation, which imagines the political su 8ect as eing dispossessed of la or power. Wilderson argues that

.375either formulation rises to the temperature of the &lac">s grammar of suffering.0 &$

on the other hand, he argues, accessed and articulated the possi ility of spea"ing such a grammar. +ifferent understandings and 'iewpoints of )anon>s criti@ue of /artre and <egel and dialectical thought directly affect approaches to &i"o. Turner notes a shortcoming in his own wor", )rantz )anon, /oweto and American &lac" Thought, written with ;ohn Alan in 21KF. <e argues that he emphasized )anon>s .deepening of the <egelian concept of self-consciousness0 ut did not fully see the duality that )anon posits in the dialectic of &lac" $onsciousness, namely that alongside a will to freedom is a will to power that ends up emulating the white master. 4ordon, at another register, argues that ecause

anti lac" racism structures lac"s outside of the dialectics of recognition, contradictions are not only of the dialectical "ind. These positions are not mutually e9clusi'e. The point here is that they are
part of a larger con'ersation represented in this 'olume in which the retrospecti'e on &i"o is a perspecti'e on the present. If &lac" $onsciousness was a new stage of cognition that ecame generalized in the struggles of the 21FLs, why didn>t the total li eration that &i"o en'isioned come a out? Although the mo'ement was wea"ened y state terror and internecine 'iolence, 4i son also highlights a failure of &$ organizations to de'elop &i"o>s conception of &lac" $onsciousness as a philosophy of li eration after his death. $ertainly &i"o gestured to the pro lematics of a postapartheid society that would produce only partial freedom. &ut li"e )anon and Amilcar $a ral, &i"o died too young and too soon to see how the new stage of re'olt, that he helped ring into eing, would unfold. Whereas )anon spo"e of the laziness and etrayal of the nationalist middle class and intelligentsia, $a ral ad'ised that such a class should commit suicide. These criticisms were muted in the period of negotiation and in postapartheid /outh Africa choices ha'e een reduced to the mar"et place. This is not the "ind of li eration that &i"o en'isioned.

Economic integration perpetuates racism0 we must re1ect the urge to conform to the system #ibson and (ng*itama -? (Andile, &lac" consciousness thin"er and organizer, 7igel $, &lac"
acti'ist and scholar, .&i"o %i'esQ $ontesting the %egacies of /te'e &i"o0, *algra'e =acmillon !LLF, http:CCwfeet.za.netC i"oRli'esRcontestingRthe.pdfepageZ2LJ, 3/456

.We elie'e that we ha'e to re8ect their economic system, their political system, and 'alues that go'ern human relationships . . . We are not really fighting against the go'ernmentA we are fighting the entire system0.21 &i"o had foreseen that an economic model that integrates lac"s into the 'ery structures of colonialism and apartheid would create an unhealthy and self-defeating competition amongst lac"s: .It is an integration in which lac" will compete with lac", using each other as rungs up a step ladder leading them to white 'alues. It is an integration in which the lac" man will ha'e to pro'e
&i"o ad'ocated the re8ection of such a scheme: himself in terms of these 'alues efore meriting acceptance and ultimate assimilation, and in which the poor will grow poorer and rich richer in a country where the poor ha'e always een lac".0!L The second contestation of &i"o>s memory comes from the state lin"ed political and ureaucratic classes. Their ascendance into the higher echelons of the postapartheid ureaucracy has in practice also mo ilized a 'ersion of &lac" $onsciousness which on the face of it

The discourse of .transformation,0 .representi'ity0 and reflecting the .demographics0 of society are the concepts employed in the process. <owe'er, the actual practice of power, as in the formal political system and its sym ols, still employs colonial and apartheid forms . As a ureaucracy, this confronts the ma8ority of lac"s as a cold, arrogant, often 'iolent and indifferent system. <ow could it e different, when democracy did not mean the esta lishment of new systems of
pri'ileges lac"ness. relations? The ureaucratic class at the higher le'els shares a lot with the lac" usiness class. Often senior ureaucrats ha'e left the administration for usiness after ha'ing laid out lucrati'e usiness possi ilities from state institutions, often through pri'atization efforts. It must also e said that in the attle for the heart of the postapartheid ureaucracy, the lac" aspirant ureaucrat has not shied away from recalling the painful past of lac" e9clusion as le'erage in the attle against white position holders. &ut once the position is held, the eha'ior, 'is-T-'is the lac" e9cluded, seldom changes. In &i"o>s conception of li eration, .integration0

into the white 'alue system stands opposed to

genuine . lac" li eration.0 The model of a

lac" pro8ect promoted y the lac" usiness and political classes is integration, and in practice the e9perience of postapartheid has een the realization of the .integration0 model that, as &i"o had predicted, .. . . could succeed in putting across to the world a pretty con'incing, integrated picture.0 This integrated picture chimes well with the ethic of reconciliation without 8ustice that is associated with the TR$ and the postapartheid 'ersion of nonracialism. The &i"o that these two main postapartheid lac" classes ha'e appropriated is a &i"o who is mute in the face of continued lac" suffering, e9clusion, and humiliation. The usiness and political classes

ha'e nothing to say to the multitudes who li'e in the shac"s and the Reconstruction and +e'elopment *rogramme (R+*6 houses that ha'e een descri ed as dog "ennelsA who continue to suffer unaccepta le infant mortality ratesA whose hospitals are less than places of a andonment and deathA who continue to die from AI+/. In a sense, &i"o>s thought has een reduced to slogans on T-shirts weaned of all radical content as a philosophy of lac" li eration, and images of &i"o ha'e come to adorn glossy magazines and fashion houses. As *rishani 7aidoo and Ahmed :eria'a put it in this 'olume, you might find &i"o>s face staring at you from a T-shirt selling for o'er RELL. &ut they warn us not to e confused y .corporate &lac" $onsciousness0 and the importance of &lac" pride. &i"o is ig in Rose an". /o ig that one can>t help ut

.not e'en the dead will e safer if the enemy wins. And the enemy has not ceased to e 'ictorious.
e reminded of Walter &en8amin>s warning:

%$N3 . &E(O" !"8


&emocracy and democratic practices are intertwined with racial violence. That means they perpetuate violent democratic structures Olson4 *rofessor of *olitical /cience at 7orthern Arizona -ni'ersity, -B (;oel, The Abolition of White Democracy, =innesota *ress, !LLG, Two pu lic acts characterized the democratic will of ante ellum America: the 'ote and the riot. The age that heralded the rise of the first mass democracy in the world was also one of the most 'iolent, tur ulent times in American history. Riots, lynch mo s, insurrections, and other distur ances swept the ur an landscape li"e a panic. In 2FEM alone,
se'enty-one people died in 2GK riots across the country. &etween 2FEL and 2FJM o'er se'enty percent of all cities with a population of !L,LLL or more e9perienced some "ind of ma8or ci'il disorder. 2 ;ac"sonian

mo s rioted for many reasons ut the greatest num er were in defense of sla'ery and &lac" su ordination. =o s attac"ed &lac" people, a olitionists, .amalgamators0Banyone whose actions or mere
e9istence raised the specter of social e@uality. &ut the riots were not the spontaneous actions of a few drun" mechanics

The ma8ority were organized, disciplined, and under the leadership of the city>s most prominent gentlemen. =ayors, congressmen, attorneys general, physicians, lawyers, and
gone mad. <ardly. newspaper editors directed the mo s> acti'ities at night and defended them in the morning, often citing them as

The riots, participants argued, were necessary to preser'e American democracy from attempts to undermine it y a olitionists, 7egroes, and Tory agents.! <ow could such 'iolence e done in the name of democracy and sla'ery ali"e? <ow could men, esteemed and lowly, in'o"e the heroes of the Re'olutionary
e9pressions of the .will of the ma8ority.0 War as they urned &lac" tenements? <ow could citizens of a democratic repu lic perpetuate such tyranny and terror? These @uestions go to the heart of the pro lem of race in American democracy. Their answer, I argue, lies in an analysis of the relationship etween race and democracy that was esta lished in the ante ellum era. In

lies in the relationship etween what it meant to e a citizen and what it meant to e white. A common apology for the white mo s is that they represented a sad a erration of
particular, it democracy. The uni'ersal democratic ideals of the +eclaration of Independence and the $onstitution had not yet een fully implemented in the ody politic due to significant e9clusions ased on race, gender, and class. Racist mo s were tragic proof that the -nited /tates had a ways to go efore it would fully li'e up to its own ideals. -nderlying this e9planation is the assumption that the mo s were antidemocratic. &ut this is certainly not how the rioters understood

=o leaders presented themsel'es as patriotsBse'eral claimed to ha'e ancestors who came o'er on the =ayXowerBwhile mo s christened themsel'es with names li"e the /ons of %i erty and the =inutemen. The mo s saw anti-&lac" riots as a solutely democratic, whether they in'ol'ed tarring &lac" people or smashing a olitionist presses. The @uestion 4 then, is not whether the white rioters were democratic ut what "ind of democracy they elie'ed in, practiced, and fought for. Riots and other acts of racial oppression ser'ed to protect the color line. &ut this line was much more than a ar that e9cluded certain people from
their actions. They too" themsel'es to e protectors of repu lican institutions . mem ership in the repu lic or that undermined democratic ideals. It constructed democratic citizenship itself. And in turn, citizenship ser'ed to construct and defend the color line. The result was the white citizen. To say that the ante ellum American citizen was white is not an empirical o ser'ation. Rather, it is an ac"nowledgment of a successful political struggle in which certain persons won the right to proclaim themsel'es white and therefore citizens or potential citizens, largely y distinguishing themsel'es from sla'es and free &lac" persons.

%$N3 . $N"%AS$ON
The affs strategy of inclusion can never account for the black body0 blackness is the presence of absence that can never access freedom Wilderson -? ()ran" &., *rofessor of +rama , -$ Ir'ine, .&i"o and the *ro lematic of *resence0,
*algra'e =acmillon !LLF addition, http:CCwfeet.za.netC i"oRli'esRcontestingRthe.pdfepageZ2LJ, 3/456

The world cannot accommodate a lac"ened relation at the le'el of odiesBsu 8ecti'ity. Thus, &lac" .presence is a form of a sence0 for to see a &lac" is to see the &lac", an ontological frieze that waits for a gaze, rather than a li'ing ontology mo'ing with agency in the field of 'ision. The &lac">s moment of recognition y the Other is always already .&lac"ness,0
upon which supplements are la'ishedBAmerican, $ari ean, Xhosa, gulu, etc. &ut the supplements are superfluous rather than su stanti'e, they don>t un lac"en. As 4ordon points out,

.there is Psomething> a sent whene'er lac"s are present. The more present a lac" is, the more a sent is this Psomething.> And

the more a sent a lac" is, the more present is this something.0 &lac"ness, then, is the destruction of presence, for &lac"s .seem to suc" presence into themsel'es as a lac" hole, pretty much li"e the astrophysical phenomenon that ears that name.0 The in'erse is e'en more de'astating to contemplate 'is-T-'is the dim prospects for &lac"s in the world. )or not only are Whites .prosthetic 4ods,0 the em odiment of .full presence,0 that is, .when a white is a sent something is

.the standpoint from which others are seen0A which is to say Whiteness is oth full *resence and a solute perspecti'ity. 3T5o loo" at a lac" ody is to loo" at a mere eing-among- eings . . . 3&ut5 the white
a sent,0 there is .a lacuna in eing,0 as one would assume gi'en the status of &lac"ness ut Whiteness is also ody, eing human (*resence6, doesn>t li'e as a mere- eing among- eings. It li'es with the potential to e a eing that stands out from mere eings. Its eing-in-itself ironically ena les it to e a eing-for-itself .

<uman 'alue is an

effect of recognition that is ine9trica ly ound with 'ision. <uman 'alue is an effect of perspecti'ity.
What does it mean, then, if perspecti'ity, as the strategy for 'alue e9traction and e9pression, is most 'isionary when it is White and most lind when it is &lac"? It

means that .to e 'alued 3is to5 recei'e 'alue outside of lac"ness.0 &lac"s, then, 'oid of *resence, cannot em ody 'alue, and 'oid of perspecti'ity, cannot estow 'alue. &lac"s cannot e. Their mode of eing ecomes the eing of the 7O. In a passage richly suggesti'e of maps, 4ordon writes, .The worlds of the lac" and the white ecome worlds separated y A sence leading to Pfate> on the one hand and *resence leading to Pfreedom> on the other. *ut differently, the former li'es in a world of W<D7 and the latter li'es in a
world of W<DT<DR.0 <ere the A sence of cartographic *resence resonates in the li idinal economy in the way &lac" .homeland0 (in this case, the $is"ei6 replicates the constituent deficiencies of &lac" . ody0 or .su 8ect.0 The &lac" .homeland0 is a fated place where fated &lac" odies are domiciled. It is the nowhere of no one. &ut it is moreBor lessB

The .homeland0 is an A sence of national *resence drawn on the A sence of continental *resenceA a &lac" .nation0 on a &lac" .continent0A nowhere to the power of two. %amenting Africa>s status as terra nullius in the <uman psyche, /artre
for .homeland0 cartography suffers from a dou le inscription. wrote, .A great many countries ha'e een present in their time at the heart of our concerns, ut Africa . . . is only an a sence, and this great hole in the map of the world lets us "eep our conscience clean.0 ;ust as the &lac" ody is a corpus (or corpse6 of fated W<D7 (when will I e arrested, when will I e shunned, when will I e a threat6, the &lac" .homeland,0 and the &lac" .continent0 on which it sits, is a map of fated W<D7 . attered down y tom-toms, canni alism, intellectual deficiency, fetishism, racial defects, sla'e ships, and a o'e all else, a o'e all P/ho good eatin.>0 )rom the terrestrial scale of cartography to the corporeal scale of the ody, &lac"ness suffers through homologies of A sence.

%$N3 . ST A"TA !% D$O%EN"E


The violence that the aff solves can never account for the ob1ective violence inflicted on the black body Wilderson '' ()ran" &., *rofessor of +rama , -$ Ir'ine, .The :engeance of :ertigo: Aphasia and
A 8ection in the *olitical Trials of &lac" Insurgents0, http:CCwww.yor"u.caCintentCissueMCarticlesCfran" wildersoniii.php, 3/456

/u 8ecti'e 'ertigo is 'ertigo of the e'ent. &ut the sensation that one is not simply spinning in an otherwise sta le en'ironment, that one>s en'ironment is perpetually unhinged stems from a relationship to 'iolence that cannot e analogized. This is called o 8ecti'e 'ertigo, a life constituted y disorientation rather than a life interrupted y disorientation. This is structural as opposed to performati'e 'iolence. &lac" su 8ecti'ity is a crossroads where 'ertigoes meet, the intersection of performati'e and structural 'iolence. Dlsewhere I ha'e argued that the &lac" is a sentient eing though not a <uman eing. The &lac">s and the <uman>s disparate relationship to 'iolence is at the heart of this failure of incorporation and analogy. The <uman suffers contingent 'iolence, 'iolence that "ic"s in when sChe resists (or is percei'ed to resist6 the disciplinary discourse of capital andCor Oedipus. &ut &lac" peoples> su sumption y 'iolence is a paradigmatic necessity, not 8ust a performati'e contingency. To e constituted y and disciplined y 'iolence, to e gripped simultaneously y su 8ecti'e and o 8ecti'e 'ertigo, is indicati'e of a political ontology which is radically different from the political ontology of a sentient eing who is constituted y discourse and disciplined y 'iolence when sChe rea"s with the ruling discursi'e codes.'i When we egin to assess re'olutionary armed struggle in this comparati'e conte9t, we find that <uman re'olutionaries (wor"ers, women, gays and les ians, post-colonial su 8ects6 suffer su 8ecti'e 'ertigo when they meet the state>s disciplinary 'iolence with the re'olutionary 'iolence of the su alternA ut they are spared o 8ecti'e 'ertigo. This is ecause the most
disorienting aspects of their li'es are induced y the struggles that arise from intra-<uman conflicts o'er competing conceptual framewor"s and disputed cogniti'e maps, such as the American Indian =o'ement>s demand for the return of Turtle Island 's. the -./.>s desire to maintain territorial integrity, or the )uerzas Armadas de %i eracicn 7acional>s

&ut for the &lac", as for the sla'e, there are no cogniti'e maps, no conceptual framewor"s of suffering and dispossession which are analogic with the myriad maps and framewor"s which e9plain the dispossession of <uman su alterns. The structural, or paradigmatic, 'iolence that
()A%76 demand for *uerto Rican independence 's. the -./.>s desire to maintain *uerto Rico as a territory. su sumes &lac" insurgents> cogniti'e maps and conceptual framewor"s, su sumes my scholarly efforts as well. As a &lac" scholar, I am tas"ed with ma"ing sense of this 'iolence without eing o'erwhelmed and disoriented y it. In other words, the writing must somehow e inde9ical of that which e9ceeds narration, while eing e'er mindful of the incomprehension the writing would foster, the failure, that is, of interpretation were the indices to actually escape the narrati'e. The sta"es of this dilemma are almost as high for the &lac" scholar facing hisCher reader as they are for the &lac" insurgent facing the police and the courts. )or the scholarly act of em racing mem ers of the &lac" %i eration Army as eings worthy of empathic criti@ue is terrifying. One>s writing proceeds with fits and starts which ha'e little to do with the pro lems of uilding the thesis or finding the methodology to ma"e the case. As I write, I am more aware of the rage and anger of my reader-ideal (an angry mo as readers6 than I am of my own inter'entions and strategies for assem ling my argument. :ertigo seizes me with a rash of condemnations that emanate from within me and swirl around me. I am spea"ing to me ut not through me, yet there seems to e no other way to spea". I am spea"ing through the 'oice and gaze of a mo of, let>s 8ust say it, White AmericansA and my efforts to marshal a mo of &lac" people, to con8ure the &lac" %i eration Army smac" of compensatory gestures. It is not that the &%A doesn>t come to my aid, that they don>t push ac", ut neither I nor my insurgent allies can ma"e the case that we are worthy of our suffering and 8ustified in our actions and not terrorists and apologists for terror who should e loc"ed away fore'er. <ow can we e worthy of our suffering without eing worthy of oursel'es? I press on, e'en though the 'ertigo that seizes me is so o'erwhelming that its precise natureBsu 8ecti'e, stemming from within me, or o 8ecti'e, catalyzed y my conte9t, the raging throngBcannot e determined. I ha'e no reference points apart from the mo that gi'es no @uarter. If I write .freedom fighter,0 from within my ear they scream

Their denunciations are sustained only y assertion, ut they ring truer than my painsta"ing e9egesis. 7o firewall protects me from themA no
.terrorist0Q If I say .prisoner of war,0 they chant .cop "iller0Q li erated psychic zone offers me sanctuary. I want to stop and turn myself in.

!%T . +A N $T &OWN
The alternative is to re1ect the affirmative as an act of burning down the structure of hierarchy that produces violence against the slave. 6reedom is an illusion created by the shackles of civil society4 and abandoning the pursuit for e;uality is the only way to break down the way that whiteness maintains itself.

6arley -: (Anthony *aul, *rofessor of %aw , &oston $ollege, .*erfecting /la'ery0, 2C!KC!LLM,
http:CClawdigitalcommons. c.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi?articleZ2L!F[conte9tZlsfp V 3/456

What is to e done? Two hundred years ago, when the sla'es in <aiti rose up, they, of necessity, urned e'erything: They urned /an +omingo flat so that at the end of the war it was a charred desert. Why do you urn e'erything? as"ed a )rench officer of a prisoner. We ha'e a right to urn what we culti'ate ecause a man has a right to dispose of his own la our, was the reply of this un"nown anarchist. The sla'es urned e'erything ecause e'erything was against them. D'erything was against the sla'es, the entire order that it was their lot to follow, the entire order in which they were positioned as worse than senseless things, e'ery plantation, e'erything. .%ea'e nothing white ehind you,0 said Toussaint to those dedicated to the end of whiteo'er lac". .4od ga'e 7oah the rain ow sign. 7o more water, the fire ne9t time.0 The sla'es urned e'erything, yes, ut, unfortunately, they only urned e'erything in <aiti. Theirs was the greatest and most successful re'olution in the history of the world ut the failure of their fire to cross the waters was the great tragedy of the nineteenth century. At the dawn of the twentieth century,
W.D.&. +u &ois wrote, .The colorline elts the world.0 +u &ois said that the pro lem of the twentieth century was the pro lem of the colorline. The

pro lem, now, at the dawn of the twenty-first century is the pro lem of the colorline. The colorline continues to elt the world. Indeed, the sla'e power that is the -nited /tates now threatens an entire world with the death that it has ecome and so the sla'es of yesterday, today, and tomorrow, those with nothing ut their chains to lose, must, if they would e free, if they would escape sla'ery, win the entire world. We egin as children. We are called and we ecome our response to the call. /la'es are not called. What ecomes of them? What ecomes of the ro"en-hearted? The sla'es are di'ided souls, they are ro"enhearted, the sla'es are split asunder y what they are called upon to ecome. The sla'es are called upon to ecome o 8ects ut o 8ecthood is not a calling. The sla'e, then, during its loneliest loneliness, is di'ided from itself. This is schizophrenia. The sla'es are not called, or, rather, the sla'es are called to not e. The sla'es are called unfree ut this the li'ing can ne'er e and so the sla'es urst apart and die. The sla'es egin as death, not as children, and death is not a eginning ut an end. There is no progress and no e9it from the undisco'ered country of the sla'e, or so it seems. We are trained to thin" through a progress narrati'e, a grand narrati'e, the grandest narrati'e, that ta"es us up from sla'ery. There is no up from sla'ery. The progress from sla'ery to the end of history is the progress from whiteo'er- lac" to white-o'er- lac" to white-o'er lac". The progress of sla'ery runs in the opposite direction of the past present future timeline. The sla'e only ecomes the perfect sla'e at the end of the timeline, only under conditions of total 8uridical freedom. It is only under conditions of freedom, of ourgeois legality, that the sla'e can perfect itself as a sla'e y freely choosing to ow down efore its master. The sla'e perfects itself as a sla'e y offering a prayer for e@ual

rights. The system of mar"s is a plantation. The system of property is a plantation. The system of law is a plantation. These plantations, all part of the same system, hierarchy, produce white-o'er lac", white-o'er- lac" only, and that continually. The sla'e perfects itself as a sla'e through its prayers for e@ual rights. The plantation system will not commit suicide and the sla'e, as stated a o'e, has "nowing non-"nowledge of this fact. The sla'e finds its way ac" from
the undisco'ered country only y urning down e'ery plantation. When the sla'e prays for e@ual rights it ma"es the free choice to e dead, and it ma"es the free choice to not e. Dducation is the call. We are called to e and then we ecome

)reedom is the only callingBit alone contains all possi le directions, all of the choices that may later lossom into the fullness of our li'es. We can only e free. /la'ery is death. <ow do sla'es die? /la'es are not orn, they are made. The sla'e must e trained to e that which the li'ing
something. We ecome that which we ma"e of oursel'es. We follow the call, we pursue a calling. cannot e. The only thing that the li'ing are not free to e is dead. The sla'e must e trained to follow the call that is not a call. The sla'e must e trained to pursue the calling that is not a calling. The sla'e must e trained to o 8ecthood. The sla'e

/la'ery is white-o'er- lac". White-o'er- lac" is death. White-o'er- lac", death, then, is what the sla'e must ecome to pursue its calling that is not a calling.
must ecome death.

!%T . 3O3ONT$S
The alternative is to vote negative to engage in an unflinching structural analysis of the ontological position of +lacknessEthe very possibility of ethics and freedom resides in a re1ection of the affirmatives the state

Kokontis 2011 (<ate, 'hD in 'erforman%e Studies from UC"-er=eley, )'erformative 7eturns and the 7ememory
of 0istory/ genealogy and performativity in the &meri%an ra%ial state,> a%%essed via 'ro?uest" 8S9:;
On one hand, she addresses the literal politics that the theological narrati'es espouse. There is a long tradition of deploying the D9odus narrati'e toward the pursuit of social reform. That is, instead of appealing to it in a way that focuses on the ne9t world, .3t5hrough i lical typology, particularly uses of D9odus, African Americans ele'ated their common e9periences to i lical drama and found resources to account for their circumstances and respond effecti'ely to them. 3...5 D9odus history sustained hope and a sense of possi ility in the face of insurmounta le e'il. The analogical uses of the story ena led a sense of agency and resistance in persistent moments of despair and disillusionment.0JG &ut e'en these efforts ha'e V not e9clusi'ely, ut often V relied on a particular iteration of the social gospel that

presupposes a set of moral and institutional imperati'es (for instance, the ideal of training racial, religious, se9ual, social, or institutional .de'iants0 or outlyers to eha'e according to an ostensi ly correct set of moral principles6 that run counter to a radical criti@ue of the underlying terms of the state and ci'il society which tend to ratify, naturalize, and in'isi ilize anti lac"ness andCor policies that ad'ersely impact lac" people who are not part of the middle class, rather than to criti@ue or su 'ert it. <artman, on the other hand, does call for, and mount, a radical criti@ue of the terms of the state and ci'il society: for her, they are inherently unethical rather than redeema le, ha'ing engendered centuries of lac" social death and historical un"nowa ility, and thus any struggle toward freedom demands an unflinching critical analysis rather than an implicit or e9plicit ratification of these institutions and the terms on which they are predicated. &ut more fundamentally, she
addresses the political implications of the assumpti'e logic of a theological teleology. I interpret <artman to posit that there is a "ind of freedom that can e predicated on not-"nowing: if there is no predetermined future, there is no di'ine imperati'e that might encourage an in'estment in the moral prescriptions of a conser'ati'e social gospel: a toppled faith in the redempti'e possi ilities of the struggle has the potential to open the door to in'ention, speculation, refashioning, and co ling together something from nothing, presence from a sence. I interpret her to posit that a 'ia le freedom dream necessitates the ac"nowledgment of loss and a sence and the history of processes of dehumanizing anti lac"ness, the ac"nowledgement of the wound and its psychic, social, political, and ethical causes V as well as an ac"nowledgement of its persistence V rather than eing deluded y tidy or optimistic ut under-analyzed narrati'es of progress or redemption.

Only then can any realistic stoc" e ta"en toward re-imagining the world and the possi ilities and imperati'es of a lac" freedom struggle. While <aley and 4ates draw on narrati'es that say that the past, including its suffering, was meaningful, <artman offers what might appear to e a much lea"er interpretation that insists that it is meaningless insofar as it is not folded into any sort of teleology. &ut in that is a "ind of freedomCdream, ecause the su 8ects of her narrati'e are free from a predetermination of the terms on which li eration is possi le, the structures around its enactment. What she calls for is a profound refashioning of the epistemology of the in'isi le, which is as fundamental a component of the lac" freedom struggle as is an epistemology of 'erifia le e'idence of oppression. That is, she ad'ocates the e9ca'ation of psychic structures and historical silences to replace an implicit or e9plicit faith in a di'ine logic in the (racial6 order of things. 4enealogy cannot connect with the un"nown, so it ecomes a ghost story, an e9ca'ation. The term might then e interpreted less as a means of accessing literal ancestors, and more as a process toward understanding. <artman constructs, in her

te9t, not a genealogy of anyone>s family, ut a genealogy of the stranger, of the sla'eA a genealogy of loss, of the lost, of

*ro8ects that ma"e use of imaginati'e, performati'e, @uasi-fictional or poetic de'ices can>t rest with not-"nowing: the imaginati'e de'ices emerge, in fact, from attempts to piece together or
searching. constructCin'ent e'idence from its lac". They all insist on the importance of "nowing, whether ecause of some large-scale

The imaginati'e de'ices don>t e9ist for the sa"e of eing imaginati'eA they e9ist for the sa"e of sur'i'al. &ut in eing imaginati'e, they allow for radical possi ilities to emerge that literality forecloses. *art of
sense of collecti'e responsi ility, or ecause of personal yearning, or oth. what performance might offer the study of history is a6 different "eys to e a le to fill in the gaps, that aren>t so hea'ily reliant upon e9plicit, legi le empiricism, and 6 not only permission for, ut encouragement of what uncertainty can yield. 4enealogy, roadly understood, is what furnishes e'idence: it is the "ey to filling in lan"s that are impossi le to fill. One 'ersion of it is capa le of eing profoundly literalA of ma"ing reconstruction possi leA it is used to fill in the lan" that has een lost to us V whome'er the Pus> is: the dispossessed, displaced, marginalized V pro'iding an o 8ect to slip into a gaping

genealogy as an o 8ect. A different 'ersion is used in order to understand the gaps, to underscore or illuminate the negati'e spaces and as" how they came to e, and filling in the conte9t around the lan" spaces, inheriting the loss, ecomes the way to trace the relationship etween the past, present, and future. This I would call genealogy as a process. What, then, is or could e critical or e'en radical in roots-see"ing genealogy pro8ects? There is something inherently conser'ati'e a out nostalgia, according to most interpretationsA ut not if a
negati'e space. This I would call notion of .radical nostalgia,0 such as that offered y *eter 4lazer, is pursued: such an enactment of notalgia engages in worldma"ing and in'entionA the definition ta"es for granted that nostalgia is for worlds and times that ne'er e9isted, and that therefore it is not conser'ati'e (i.e. a out returning to an idealized past6, ut that it is creati'e and always see"ing something new. *erformati'e returns are ine'ita ly pro8ects of yearning, of wishing for a past that was imagined to e etter than the present (which has de'ol'ed in some way6 or a future that has promise and potential. The mythical Aztec homeland Aztlan that was made popular during the $hicano =o'ement is a 'ery elegant e9ample: it is a wished-for, utopian space, ac"nowledged as eing impossi le to realize, ut always animating the spirit of the concrete efforts of its adherents toward social 8ustice and structural change (see Anaya and %omeli 21126. <artman writes:

.To elie'e, as

I do, that the ensla'ed are our contemporaries is to understand that we share their aspirations and defeats, which isn>t to say that we are owed what they were due ut rather to ac"nowledge that they accompany our e'ery effort to fight against domination, to a olish the color line, and to imagine a free territory, a new commons. It is to ta"e to heart their "nowledge of freedom. The ensla'ed "new that freedom
had to e ta"enA it wasn>t something that could e'er e gi'en to you. The "ind of freedom that could e gi'en to you could 8ust as easily e ta"en ac". 3...5 The demands of the sla'e on the present ha'e e'erything to do with ma"ing good the promise of a olition, and this entails much more than the end of property in sla'es. It re@uires the reconstruction of society, which is the only way to honor our de t to the dead. This is the intimacy of our age with theirs V an unfinished

To what end does one con8ure the ghost of sla'ery, if not to incite the hopes of transforming the present?0 (<artman !LLK, !J1-!KL6. &ut performati'e return is not necessarily critical, and
struggle. part of what I demonstrate throughout this dissertation is how such pro8ects are always more complicated than they seemA they wor" to challenge and olster the racial stateA they are in some ways radical and in others e9tremely conser'ati'e. And this @uestion of criticality has precisely to do with normati'ity: do genealogical practices, the conclusions they draw and the worldma"ing they do, wor" to undo or to reinscri e oppressi'e patterns, ha its, world'iews, a'aila le roles of and categories for historically marginalized groups of people? All three of these

pro8ects attempt to re-write the terms of America, such that the circumstances of African-Americans are configured as eing integral instead of outside the dominant narrati'eA constituti'e rather than an a erration. &ut they wa'er etween trying to write that as a narrati'e of progress, in which we ha'e left sla'ery ehind and ha'e ascended to a space of constituti'e normati'ityA and trying to underline the fundamental and unending nature of sla'ery V a "ind of re8oinder to uncritical narrati'es that not only attends to the su 8ecti'e space of social death that it has yielded ut the possi ilities and necessities of in'ention that ha'e flourished in its wa"e. What they
ha'e in common is that they present the necessity of grappling with the past instead of ignoring it, allowing AfricanAmericans> mo'ements and reinscriptions of migration to trou le the waters of complacency, forging a roader awareness of the fraught position they ha'e historically occupied. Dach contains "ernels of great possi ility for an inclusi'e 'ision of the future as well as more or less significant red flags. <artman>s 'ision, howe'er, seems to espouse a particularly

li erating articulation of freedom, ecause it does not try to deny or occlude the presence or significance of ongoing disparity and loss: while 4ates> and <aley>s su 8ects and implied audience ha'e already succeeded, gained access to ci'il society, and ha'e implicitly ratified the fundamental terms on which it is predicated, <artman>s are still struggling to ma"e something from nothingA they ha'e an urgency in attending to disparities, and no in'estment in a status @uo that

What she claims or ad'ocates is not a 'ictimized stance, ut rather a staunch acti'ist one that is inflected y a rigorous and unflinching structural analysis, and a sensiti'e and e@ually rigorous understanding of desire, yearning, and the possi ilities for rein'ention and reconstruction that emerge when faced with profound a sence and loss.
e9cludes or 'iolates their well- eing.

$(>!"T . D$O%EN"E
Whiteness create an unbreakable ga/e upon the +lack +ody4 causing order and control of races4 and internali/ed violence

8ancy 9-: (4eorge, Associate *rofessor of *hilosophy, +u@uesne -ni'ersity wor"s primarily in the areas of critical
philosophy of race, critical whiteness studies, and philosophy of the &lac" e9perience Whiteness and the Return of the &lac" &ody The ;ournal of /peculati'e *hilosophy 21.G (!LLM6 !2M-!G2, accessed 'ia =-/D, 3/456 On this score, it is not only the I&lac" odyI that defies the ontic fi9ity pro8ected upon it through the white gaze, and, hence, through the episteme of whiteness, ut the white ody is also fundamentally sym olic, re@uiring demystification of its status as norm, the paragon of eauty, order, innocence, purity, restraint, and no ility. In other words, gi'en the three suppositions a o'e, oth the I&lac" odyI and the Iwhite odyI lend themsel'es to processes of interpreti'e fracture and

To ha'e oneHs dar" ody in'aded y the white gaze and then to ha'e that ody returned as distorted is a powerful e9perience of 'iolation. The e9perience presupposes an anti-&lac" li'ed conte9t, a conte9t within which whiteness gets reproduced and the white ody as norm is reinscri ed. The late writer, actor, and acti'ist Ossie +a'is recalls that at the age of si9 or se'en two white police
to strategies of interrogating and remo'ing the 'eneer of their alleged o 8ecti'ity. officers told him to get into their car. They too" him down to the precinct. They "ept him there for an hour, laughing at him and e'entually pouring cane syrup o'er his head. This only created the opportunity for more laughter, as they loo"ed upon the IsillyI little &lac" oy. If he was a le to articulate his feelings at that moment, thin" of how the young +a'is was returned to himself: II am an o 8ect of white laughter, a uffoon.I The young +a'is no dou t appeared to the white police officers in ways that they had appro'ed. They set the stage, created a site of &lac" uffoonery, and en8oyed their sadistic pleasure without lin"ing an eye. /artwell notes that Ithe 3white5 oppressor see"s to constrain the oppressed 3&lac"s5 to certain appro'ed modes of 'isi ility (those set out in the template of stereotype6 and then gazes o sessi'ely on the spectacle he has createdI (211F, 226. +a'is notes that he Iwent along with the game of lac" emasculation, it seemed to come naturallyI (=ara le !LLL, 16. After that, Ithe ritual was completeI (16. <e was then sent home with some peanut rittle to eat. +a'is "new at that early age, e'en without the words to articulate what he felt, that he had een 'iolated. <e refers to the entire ritual as the process of Iniggerization.I <e notes: The culture had already told me what this was and what my reaction to this should e: not to e surprisedA to e9pect itA to accommodate itA to li'e with it. I didnHt "now how deeply I was scarred or affected y that, ut it was a part of who I was. (16 +a'is, in other words, was made to feel that he had to accept who he was, that IniggerizedI little &lac" oy, an insignificant plaything within a system of ontological racial

the tric" of white ideologyA it is to gi'e the appearance of fi9ity, where the Iloo" of the white su 8ect interpellates the lac" su 8ect as inferior, which, in turn, ars the lac" su 8ect from seeing himCherself without the internalization of the white gazeI (Weheliye !LLM, G!6. On this score, it is white odies that are deemed agential. They configure Ipassi'eI 3Dnd *age !2K5 &lac" odies according to their will. &ut it is no mysteryA for Ithe 7egro is interpreted in the terms of the white man. Whiteman psychology is applied and it is no wonder that the result often shows the 7egro in a ludicrous lightI (&raithwaite 211!, EJ6. While wal"ing across the street, I ha'e endured the sounds of car doors
differences. This, howe'er, is loc"ing as whites secure themsel'es from the Ioutside world,I a trope rendering my &lac" ody ostracized, different, un elonging. This outside world constitutes a space, a field, where certain &lac" odies are relegated. They are re8ected, ecause they are deemed suspicious, 'ile infestations of the (white6 social ody. The loc"s on the doors resound: $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic". $lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"$lic"Q Of course, the clic"ing sounds are always already accompanied y ner'ous gestures, and eyes that want to loo", ut are hesitant to do so. The cumulati'e impact of the sounds is deafening, maddening in their distorted repetition. The clic"s egin to function as coded sounds, reminding me that I am dangerousA the sounds create oundaries, separating the white ci'ilized from the dar" sa'age, e'en as I comport myself to the contrary. The clic"ing sounds mar" me, they inscri e me, they materialize my presence in ways that elie my intentions. -na le to stop the clic"ing, una le to esta lish a form of recognition that creates a space of trust and liminality, there are times when one wants to ecome their fantasy, to ecometheir &lac" monster, their ogeyman, to pull open the car door: I/urprise. OouH'e 8ust een car8ac"ed y a ghost, a fantasy of your own creation. 7ow, get the fuc" out of the car.I I ha'e endured white women clutching their purses or wal"ing across the street as they catch a glimpse of my approaching &lac" ody. It is during such moments that my ody is gi'en ac" to me in a ludicrous light, where I li'e the meaning of my ody as confiscated. +a'is too had the meaning of his young &lac" ody stolen. The surpluses eing gained y the whites in each case are not economic. Rather, it is through e9istential e9ploitation that the surpluses e9tracted can

e said to e ontologicalBIsem lances of determined presence, of full positi'ity, to pro'ide a sense of secure eingI (<enry 211K, EE6.

$(>!"T . ET"=$"S
The totali/ing dominance of whiteness makes ethical relations impossible 8ancy 9: (4eorge, Associate *rofessor of *hilosophy at +u@uesne -ni'ersity and $oordinator of the
$ritical Race Theory /pea"er /eries, .Whiteness and the Return of the &lac" &ody0, The ;ournal of /peculati'e *hilosophy 21.G (!LLM6 !2M-!G2,3/456
The reader will note that the @uestion regarding how it feels to e a pro lem does not apply to people who ha'e at some point in their li'es felt themsel'es to e a pro lem. In such cases, feeling li"e a pro lem is a contingent disposition that is

When &lac" people are as"ed the same @uestion y white America, the relationship etween eing &lac" and eing a pro lem is non-contingent. It is a necessary relation. Outgrowing this ontological state of eing a pro lem is elie'ed impossi le. <ence, when regarding oneHs Ie9istence as pro lematic,I temporality is frozen. One is a pro lem fore'er. <owe'er, it is important to note that it is from within the white imaginary that the @uestion I<ow
relati'ely finite and transitory. does it feel to e a pro lem?I is gi'en irth. To e human is to e thrown-in-the-world. To e human not only means to e thrown within a conte9t of facticity, ut it also means to e in the mode of the su 8uncti'e. It is interesting to note that the etymology of the word Ipro lemI suggests the sense of eing Ithrown forward,I as if eing thrown in front of something,

Within the white imaginary, to e &lac" means to e orn an o stacle at the 'ery core of oneHs eing. To e9-ist as &lac" is not Ito stand outI facing an ontological horizon filled with future possi ilities of eing other than what one is. Rather, eing &lac" negates the Ie9I of e9istence. &eing &lac" is reduced to facticity. )or e9ample, it is not as if
as an o stacle. it is only within the light of my freely chosen pro8ects that things are e9perienced as o stacles, as /artre might sayA as &lac", y definition, I am an o stacle. As &lac", I am the 'ery o stacle to my own meta-sta ility and trans-phenomenal

<ence, within the framewor" of the white imaginary, to e &lac" and to e human are contradictory terms. 3Dnd *age !EK5 /u stituting the historical constructi'ity of whiteness for Imanifest destiny,I whites remain imprisoned within a space of white ethical solipsism (only whites possess needs and desires that are truly worthy of eing respected 3/ulli'an !LL2, 2LL56. It would seem that many whites would rather remain imprisoned within the ontology of sameness, refusing to re8ect the ideological structure of their identities as Isuperior.I The call of the Other @ua Other remains unheard within the space of whitenessHs sameness. %oc"ed within their selfenthralled structure of whiteness, whites occlude the possi ility of de'eloping new forms of ethical relationality to themsel'es and to non-whites. It is partly through the process of a andoning their hegemonic, monologistic discourse (functioning as the Ioracle 'oiceI6 that whites might reach across the chasm of (nonhierarchical6 difference and em race the non-white Other in his or her
eing. As &lac", I am not a pro8ect at all. Otherness. IA true and worthy ideal,I as +u &ois writes, Ifrees and uplifts a peopleI (211M , GMJ6. <e adds, I&ut say to a people: HThe one 'irtue is to e white,H and people rush to the ine'ita le conclusion, I#ill the HniggerHQI Of course, the idea

Whiteness is a Iparticular social and historical 3formation5 that 3is5 reproduced through specific discursi'e and material processes and circuits of desire and powerI (=c%aren 211F, JJ6. On this score, reproduced through circuits of desire and power, whiteness stri'es for totalizationA it desires to claim the entire world for itself and has the misanthropic effrontery to territorialize the 'ery meaning of the Ihuman.I
that Ithe one 'irtue is whiteI is a false ideal, for it Iimprisons and lowersI (GMJ6.

,N" !TF ESSENT$!%$S(


Only an unflinching and paradigmatic analysis of +lackness can overturn anti0blackness . its their burden to prove that +lackness is anything but an ontological void

Wilderson ,-'- ()ran", Red, White, and &lac": $inema and the /tructure of -/ Antagonisms, 2L22- 3/456

Regarding the &lac" position, some might as" why, after claims successfully made on the state y the $i'il Rights =o'ement, do I insist on posting an operational analytic for cinema, film studies, and political theory that appears to e a dichotomous and essentialist pairing of =asters and /la'es? In other words, why should we thin" of today>s &lac"s in the -/ as /la'es and e'eryone else (with the e9ception of Indians6 as =asters? One could answer these @uestions y demonstrating how nothing remotely approaching .claims successfully made on the /tate0 ha'e come to pass. &ut that would lead us in the wrong directionA we would find oursel'es on .solid0 ground, which would only mystify, rather than clarify, the @uestion. We would e forced to appeal to .facts,0 the .historical record,0 and empirical mar"ers of stasis and change, all of which could e turned on their head with more of the same. -nderlying such a downward spiral into sociology, political science, history, andCor pu lic policy de ates would e the 'ery ru ric that I am calling into @uestion: the grammar of suffering "nown as e9ploitation and alienation, the assumpti'e logic where y su 8ecti'e dispossession is arri'ed at in the calculations etween those who sell la or power and those who ac@uire it. The &lac" @ua the wor"er. Orlando *atterson has already dispelled this faulty ontological grammar in /la'ery and /ocial +eath, where he demonstrates how and why wor", or forced la or, is not a constituent element of sla'ery. Once the .solid0 plan" of .wor"0 is remo'ed from sla'ery, then the conceptually coherent notion of .claims against the state0Bthe proposition that the state and ci'il society are elastic enough to e'en contemplate the possi ility of an emancipatory pro8ect for the &lac" positionBdisintegrates into thin air. The imaginary of the state and ci'il society is parasitic on the =iddle *assage. *ut another way: no sla'e, no world. And, in addition, as *atterson argues, no sla'e is in the world. If, as an ontological position, that is, as a grammar of suffering, the /la'e is not a la orer ut an anti-<uman, a positionality against which <umanity esta lishes, maintains, and renews it coherence, its corporeal integrityA if the /la'e is, to orrow from *atterson, generally dishonored, perpetually open to gratuitous 'iolence, and 'oid of "inship structure, that is, ha'ing no relations that need e recognized, a eing outside of relationality, then our analysis cannot e approached through the ru ric of gains or re'ersals in struggles with the state and ci'il society, not unless and until the interlocutor first e9plains how the /la'e is of the world. The onus is not on one who posits the =asterC/la'e dichotomy, ut on one who argues there is a distinction etween /la'eness and &lac"ness. <ow, when, and where did such a split occur? The woman at the gates of $olum ia -ni'ersity awaits an answer.

,N" !TF $NTE SE"T$ON!%$T8


6oregrounding interlocking oppressions in a chain of e;uivalence denies the structuring force of anti0blackness . that dooms solvency

Sexton 10 (5ared, asso%iate professor of &fri%an &meri%an studies and film and media studies at the University of
California, 1rvine, )'eople"of"Color"-lindness>, So%ial +e@t 2A1A Bolume 2C, Dumber 2 1A3/ 31"#E, 8S9:;

If the oppression of non lac" people of color in, and perhaps eyond, the -nited /tates seems conditional to the historic instance and functions at a more restricted empirical scope,
anti lac"ness seems in'ariant and limitless (which does not mean that the former is somehow negligi le and short-li'ed

the sort of comparati'e analysis outlined a o'e would li"ely impact the formulation of political strategy and modify the demeanor of our political culture. In fact, it might denature the comparati'e instinct altogether in fa'or of a relational analysis more ade@uate to the tas". Oet all of this is o 'iated y the silencing mechanism par e9cellence in %eft political and intellectual circles today: .+on>t play Oppression OlympicsQ0 The Oppression Olympics dogma le'els a charge amounting to little more than a leftist 'ersion of .playing the race card.0 To fuss with details of comparati'e (or
or that the latter is e9hausti'e and unchanging6. If pursued with some consistency, relational6 analysis is to play into the hands of di'ide-and-con@uer tactics and to promote a callous immorality. K!

one notes in this catchphrase the unwarranted translation of an in@uiring position of comparison into an insidious posture of competition, the translation of ethical criti@ue into unethical attac". This point allows us to
<owe'er, as in its conser'ati'e complement, understand etter the intimate relationship etween the censure of lac" in@uiry and the recurrent analogizing to lac"

they ear a common refusal to admit to significant dif ferences of structural position orn of discrepant histories etween lac"s and their political allies, actual or potential. We might, finally, name this refusal people-of-color- lindness, a form of color lindness inherent to the concept of .people of color0 to the precise e9tent that it misunderstands the specificity of anti lac"ness and presumes or insists upon the monolithic character
suffering mentioned a o'e: of 'ictimization under white supremacy KE Bthin"ing (the afterlife of6 sla'ery as a form of e9ploitation or colonization or a species of racial oppression among others. KG The upshot of this predicament is that o

scuring the structural position of the category of lac"ness will ine'ita ly undermine multiracial coalition uilding as a politics of radical opposition and, to that e9tent, force the @uestion of lac" li eration ac" to the center of discussion. D'ery analysis that attempts to understand the comple9ities of racial rule and the machinations of the racial state without accounting for lac" e9istence within its framewor"Bwhich does not mean simply listing it among a chain of e@ui'alents or returning to it as an afterthoughtBis doomed to miss what is essential a out the situation. &lac" e9istence does not represent the total reality of the racial formationBit is not the eginning and the end of the storyB ut it does relate to the totalityA it indicates the (repressed6 truth of the political and economic system. That is to say, the whole range of positions
within the racial formation is most fully understood from this 'antage point, not unli"e the way in which the range of gender and se9ual 'ariance under patriarchal and heteronormati'e regimes is most fully understood through lenses that are feminist and @ueer. KM What is lost for the study of lac" e9istence in the proposal for a decentered, .post lac"0 paradigm is a proper analysis of the true scale and nature of lac" suffering and of the strugglesBpolitical, aesthetic, intellectual, and so onBthat ha'e sought to transform and undo it. What is lost for the study of non lac" nonwhite e9istence is a proper analysis of the true scale and nature of its material and sym olic power relati'e to the category of

e'ery attempt to defend the rights and li erties of the latest 'ictims of state repression will fail to ma"e su stantial gains insofar as it forfeits or sidelines the
lac"ness. KJ This is why

fate of lac"s, the prototypical targets of the panoply of police practices and the 8uridical infrastructure uilt up around them. Without lac"s on oard, the only 'ia le political option and the only effecti'e defense against the intensifying cross fire will in'ol'e greater alliance with an anti lac" ci'il society and further capitulation to the magnification of state power. At the ape9 of the
midcentury social mo'ements, #wame Ture and $harles <amilton wrote in their 21JF classic, &lac" *ower: The *olitics of %i eration, that lac" freedom entails .the necessarily total re'amping of the society.0 KK )or <artman, thin"ing of the entanglements of the African diaspora in this conte9t, the necessarily total re'amping of the society is more appropriately en'isioned as the creation of an entirely new world: I "new that no matter how far from home I tra'eled, I would ne'er e a le to lea'e my past ehind. I would ne'er e a le to imagine eing the "ind of person who had not een made and mar"ed y sla'ery. I was lac" and a history of terror had produced that identity. Terror was .capti'ity without the possi ility of flight,0 inescapa le 'iolence, precarious life. There was no going ac" to a time or place efore sla'ery, and going eyond it no dou t would entail nothing less momentous than yet another re'olution. KF

,N" !TF >E (


The current order derives its ontological consistency in opposition to blackness4 trying to work within this system is impossible

Wilderson and =oward '- ()ran", Assoc prof of African American /tudies, *ercy,
*sychotherapist, .)ran" Wilderson, Wallowing in the $ontradictions, *art 20 http:CCpercyE.wordpress.comC!L2LCLKCL1Cfran"- -wilderson-UD!UFLU1$wallowing-in-thecontradictionsUD!UFLU1+-part-2C 3/456
)W Reparations

suggests a conceptually coherent loss. The loss of land, the loss of la or power, etc. In other words, there has to e some form of articulation etween the party that has lost and the party that has gained for reparations to ma"e sense. 7o such articulation e9ists etween &lac"s and the world. This is, ironically, precisely why I support the Reparations =o'ementA ut my emphasis, my energies, my points of attention are on the word .=o'ement0 and not on the word .Reparation .0 I support the mo'ement ecause I "now it is a mo'ement toward the end of the worldA a mo'ement toward a catastrophe in epistemological coherence and institutional integrity BI support the mo'ement aspect of it ecause I "now that repair is impossi leA and any struggle that can act as a stic" up artist to the world, demanding all that it cannot gi'e( which is e'erything 6, is a mo'ement toward something so lindingly new that it cannot e imagined. This is the only thing that will sa'e us. *< As a *sychotherapist, I was 'ery interested to see
your contrasting )rantz )anon and %acan concerning their conceptualizations of potential paths to .emancipation in the li idinal economy0, as you put it. I am ashamed to admit that I ha'e ne'er read )anon, ut ha'e read %acan. *lease illuminate your idea that the star" difference in their conceptualizations of conflictCantagonism differ are ased on the fact that %acan would still see &lac"s as fundamentally situated in personhood, ut that )annon (and yourself6 see &lac"s as .situated a priori in a solute dereliction0. )W This is a ig @uestion, too ig for a concise answerBI thin" I ta"e a out thirty to forty pages to try and get my head around this in the oo". &ut the "ey to the answer lies in the concept of .contemporaries.0 )anon rather painfully and meticulously shows us how the human race is a community of

community 'ouchsafes its coherence (it "nows its orders6 through the presence of &lac"s. If &lac"s ecame part of the human community then the concept of .contemporaries0 would ha'e no outsideA and if it had no outside it could ha'e no inside. %acan assumes the category and thus he imagines the analysand>s pro lem in terms of how to li'e without
.contemporaries.0 In addition, this neurosis among ones contemporaries. )anon interrogates the category itself. )or %acan the analysands suffer psychically due to pro lems e9tant within the paradigm of contemporaries. )or )anon, the analysand suffers due to the e9istence of the contemporaries themsel'es and the fact that sChe is a stimulus for an9iety for those who ha'e contemporaries. 7ow ,

contemporary>s struggles are conflictualBthat is to say, they can e resol'ed ecause they are pro lems that are of- and in the world. &ut a &lac"s pro lems are the stuff of antagonisms: struggles that cannot e resol'ed etween parties ut can only e resol'ed through the o literation of one or oth of the parties. We are facedBwhen dealing with the &lac" Bwith a set of psychic pro lems that cannot e resol'ed through any form of sym olic inter'ention such as psychoanalysisBthough addressing them psychoanalytically we can egin to e9plain the
antagonism (as I ha'e done in my oo", and as )anon does6, ut it won>t lead us to a cure.

The permutation mystifies the paradigm anti0blacknessEthere is no way of incorporating +lackness into a civil society or state founded on its constitutive negation

Pak 2012 (Fumi, 'hD in literature from UC"San Diego, )6utside 7elationality/ &utobiographi%al Deformations
and the Literary Lineage of &fro"pessimism in 2Ath and 21st Century &fri%an &meri%an Literature,> Dissertation through 'ro?uest;

I turn here to <artman>s wor" in African American cultural studies, wherein she pro

lematizes the notion

of empathy as a useful or neutral structure of feeling. In /cenes of /u

8ection: Terror, /la'ery, and /elf-=a"ing in 7ineteenth-$entury America, <artman recounts ;ohn Ran"in>s letter to his rother, where he descri es how deeply mo'ed he was after witnessing a sla'e coffle. <e writes that his imagination forces him to elie'e, .Pfor the moment, that I myself was a sla'e, and with my wife and children placed under the reign of terror. I egan in reality to feel

This notation of eginning to .feel,0 where the feeling supplants .reality,0 is the point of <artman>s contention and my inter'ention. As she writes, .in ma"ing the sla'e>s suffering his own, Ran"in egins to feel for himself rather than for those whom this e9ercise in imagination presuma ly is designed to read.0 Or, in other words, .the ease of Ran"in>s empathic identification is as much due to his good intentions and heartfelt opposition to sla'ery as to the fungi ility of the capti'e ody0 (216. Ran"in can feel lac" ecause lac"ness is fungi le: lac"ness is simultaneously trada le and replacea le. This is precisely what Wilderson criti@ues as the .ruse of analogy.0 <e writes that this ruse .erroneously locates &lac"s in the world V a place where they ha'e not een since the dawning of &lac"ness,0 and continues that this attempt at .analogy is not only a mystification, and often erasure, of &lac"ness>s grammar of suffering0 (Red, White [ &lac" EK6. In other words, Ran"in is a le to feel for himself, his wife and his
for myself, my wife, and my children>0 (/cenes of /u 8ection 2F, emphasis mine6. children precisely ecause the sla'e is erased in that feeling. <e reads himself as analogous to the sla'e as a means of understanding his su 8ect status when that analogy misreads and misplaces lac"ness. I contend <imes is ma"ing the same argument: y creating a figure that critically displaces the idea of a .shared humanity,0 y ma"ing ;immy white, he negates an identificatory practice which grounds itself on an e'entual recognition of su 8ecti'ity, or an insertion into ci'il society. <ence, <imes 'oids the no'el of lac"ness (e9cept for the most periphery figures6 precisely ecause lac"ness is constituted through the a sence of relationality itself. )urthermore, I posit that ;immy>s whiteness is symptomatic of Afro-pessimism 'ia the @uandary +a'id =arriott poses in his scholarship, where he challenges us to @uestion .how we can understand lac" identity when, through an act of mimetic desire, this identity already gets constructed as white0 (<aunted %ife !LF6. =arriott re-reads )anon>s seminal encounter with a young white oy in &lac" /"in, White =as"s, and an anecdote of a little lac" girl attempting to scru herself clean of racial mar"ings, not as encounters of interpellation, ut as intensely fraught moments of 'iolent pho ic recognition of the self as something hateful and hated. =arriott states, .3i5n these two scenes a suppressed ut noticea le anger and confusion arises in response to the intruding other0 (the other eing the little white child for )anon, and her own image for the little girl6 and that this response has .to do with the realization that the other, as racial imago, has already occupied and split the su 8ect>s ego0 (!2L6.G1 It is not that lac"ness is set in <egelian opposition to whiteness as the OCother, ut rather that lac"ness is dependent on whiteness always

lac"ness is not .something missing,0 ut rather .the addition of something undesira le and dirty that fragments the ody y destroying all positi'e sem lances of the self.0 This .addition0 of lac"ness results in .the self>s desire to hurt the imago of the ody in a passionate id to escape it0 (!2L6. In this reading of )anon, =arriott offers his contri ution to the field of Afro-pessimism: e'en on a psychic le'el, within the discourse of self and ontology, lac"ness is null and 'oid. The lac" ody is occupied y a white unconscious, one that lo'es hisCherself as white, and hates hisCherself as lac".ML
already ha'ing een present. In other words, As =arriott writes in the introduction to On &lac" =en, .3t5he lac" man is, in other words, e'erything that the wishfulshameful fantasies of culture want him to e, an enigma of in'ersion and of hate V and this is our e9istence as men, as lac" men0 (On &lac" =en 96. themsel'es,0 that indeed, .this prototypical identification with whiteness0 is .a foundational culture and tradition which can e neither a'oided nor eluded0 (MM V MJ6. The a sence of a lac" interiority is also addressed y #e'in &ell as he e9amines the 21ME meeting etween <imes, Richard Wright and ;ames &aldwin at %es +eu9 =agots in *aris. &ell writes that many of <imes>s literary contemporaries, including Wright and &aldwin, are mostly in'ested in .sonorities, colors, and mo'ements that... constitute little more than added fla'orings, punctuations and accents y which to augment an already- esta lished, normati'e Pwhite> interiority0 (.Assuming0 FME6. This is in contrast to <imes, who waylays coherence and a structured lac" su 8ecti'ity for the .suffocating thic"ness of a crazy, wild-eyed feeling0 which is the discord always present in the lac" unconscious, or the realization that one has always een, and will always e, at war with oneself (FMJ6. ;immy thin"s that .he could see his mind standing 8ust eyond his reach, li"e a white, weightless s"eleton0 (Oesterday M!6. <is mind is not his to grasp, always .8ust eyond his reach,0 and is imagined as

It is impossi le to incorporate ;immy and his mind in much the same way as it is impossi le to ring lac"ness into relationality, or to enfold him within ci'il society. To do
a white figure of death.

so would lead to the logical unfolding present in Wilderson>s wor", and one which <imes> articulates forty years earlier during an inter'iew: .3t5he

lac" man can destroy America completely, destroy it as a nation of any conse@uence. It can 8ust fritter away in the world. It can e destroyed completely0 (.=y =an <imes0 GJ6. In other words, to ma"e lac"ness relational is to lead to the incoherence and dismantling of ci'il society as it currently stands.

The affirmative neatly packages black resistance through various logics of Whiteness ensuring co0option and closing off the radical ethical possibilities of authentic abolitionism.

Hoescht 2008 (<eidi, *h+ in %iterature from -$/+, .Refusa

le *asts: /peculati'e +emocracy, /pectator $itizens, and the +islocation of )reedom in the -nited /tates,0 *ro@uest +issertations6

/la'ery is the other side of this coin. As with negotiations with indigenous people, the fundamental dependence oppressors on the oppressed conditioned the se'ere ine@uality in the south. /peculati'e e9change and

y the

e9ploitation of human chattel also created openings for re ellion and resistance. Interregional connections created y the domestic -./. sla'e trade ena led unpredicta le circuits of rumor through which ensla'ed African Americans imagined and communicated. The 'iolence and indignity of sla'ery made it necessary for ensla'ed people to communicate in'enti'ely. Re ellions y 7at Turner and others put pressure on sla'e owners, in'estors, an"ers, and complicit go'ernments to 8ustify the dehumanizing practice of mar"ing people with a price. &lac" a olitionists li"e +a'id Wal"er, /o8ourner Truth, =artin +elany, )rederic" +ouglass and many others, staged powerful struggles against /outhern /la'ery. In their related efforts to desegregate the ;im $row 7orth, they also imagined and created lac"

This freedom was uilt from lac" institutions, and was committed to lac" sur'i'al, su sistence, resistance, affirmation, and education. It did not necessarily depend on li eral precepts a out law or mar"et participation. &lac" peopleHs efforts to design and demand self-determination and freedom, howe'er, also produced a class of spea"ers, organizers, and writers who fit the needs of the white a olitionist mo'ement. The promises of freedom white a olitionists offered were also committed to IrestoringI democratic ideals, ut y preser'ing the property interests of white nationalists.IH The sentimental cultures of a olitionists emphasized the humanity of sla'es in a way that actually upheld plantation fantasies and protected white pri'ilege e'en while ad'ocating the end of sla'ery. The struggles o'er freedom that speculati'e networ"s ena led also produced struggles o'er personhood that white nationalists endea'ored to manage. The freedoms African Americans and 7ati'e Americans
networ"s of freedom to escape from per'asi'e white 'iolence. dreamed and struggled to retain during the ;ac"sonian period are not necessarily reflected in the promises they secured.I

%i eral translation from human rights to property rights is the recurring pattern in the
emancipatory mo'ements that speculati'e climates ma"e possi le. The road social mo'ements for la or unionization and against fascism and lynching during the 21ELs cultural front period rought ple ian artists and intellectuals together to imagine -./. culture across ethnic di'isions. As =ichael +enning has shown in his deser'edly influential te9t, the egalitarian social mo'ements at the center of The $ultural )ront drew on popular cultural history to create multi-ethnic alliances and renewed calls for democratic pluralism. The international mo'ement of the *opular )ront pro'ided a social foundation for imagining democracy as a 8oint pro8ect waged through la or solidarities. The emphasis on culture as a force that rought different groups together also ga'e rise to the American /tudies mo'ement, restoring intellectual faith in promises many had imagined had een irrepara ly corrupted y the mar"et. Oet as I argue at length in the opening

the conditions of inclusion through cultural conformity to li eral ideals in the democratic pro8ect of the cultural front reproduced the terms of e9clusion that refuse alternati'e imaginaries for freedom. The national pro8ect that emerged during the cultural front period elucidates how speculati'e logics e9tend eyond economic practices
chapters of this pro8ect, in the -nited /tates. /cholarship in this period o scured the social, political, and cultural mechanisms of speculation y

refusing to recognize the actual economic conditions of the past in their reflections a out the ;ac"sonian period for the I%incoln Repu lic.I

,N" !TF !6 O0O>T$($S(


The demand for political coherence and reformism obliterates the position of the slave . their integrationist optimism cannot take into account the gratuitous violence directed towards +lackness

=artman and Wilderson 9C (/aidiya, professor of Dnglish and comparati'e literature and
womenHs and gender studies at $olum ia -ni'ersity, )ran", Associate *rofessor of African American /tudies, +rama at -$ Ir'ine, .T<D *O/ITIO7 O) T<D -7T<O-4<T0, fui *arle, :ol. 2E, 7o. ! /pringC/ummer !LLE, ;/TOR, 3/456

people consciously or unconsciously peel away from the strength and the terror of their e'idence in order to propose some "ind of coherent, hopeful solution to things. Oour oo", in mo'ing through these scenes of su 8ection as they ta"e place in sla'ery, refuses to do that. And 8ust as importantly, it does not allow the reader to thin" that there was a radical enough rea" to reposition the lac" ody after ;u ilee.H That is a tremendous and courageous
What I mean, is that so often in lac" scholarship, mo'e. And I thin" whatHs important a out it, is that it corro orates the e9perience of ordinary lac" people today, and of strange lac" people li"e you and me in the academy 3laughter5. &ut thereHs something else that the oo" does, and I want to tal" a out this at the le'el of methodology and analysis.

If we thin" a out the registers of su 8ecti'ity

as eing preconscious interest, unconscious identity or identifications, and positionality, then a lot of the wor" in the social sciences organizes itself around precon-scious interestA it assumes a su 8ect of consent, and as you ha'e said, a su 8ect of e9ploitation, which you reposition as the su 8ect of accumulation.! 7ow when this sort of social science engages the issue of positionality B if and when it does B it assumes that it can do so in an un-raced manner. ThatHs the est of the wor". The worst of the wor" is a "ind of multiculturalism that assumes we all ha'e analogous identities that can e put into a as"et of stories, and then that as"et of stories can lead to similar interests. )or me, what youH'e done in this oo" is to split the hair here. In other words, this is not a oo" that cele rates an essential Afrocentrism that could e captured y the multicultural discourse. And yet itHs not a oo" that remains on the surface of preconscious interest, which so much history and
social science does. Instead, it demands a radical racialization of any analysis of positionality. /o. Why donHt we tal" a out that? /aidiya : <artman B WellQ ThatHs a lot, and a num er of things come to mind. I thin" for me the oo" is a out the pro lem of crafting a narrati'e for the sla'e as su 8ect, and in terms of positionality, as"ing, IWho does that narrati'e

e'ery attempt to employ the sla'e in a narrati'e ultimately resulted in his or her o literation, regardless of whether it was a leftist narrati'e of political agency B the sla'e stepping into someone elseHs shoes and then ecoming a political agent B or whether it was a out eing a le to un'eil the sla'eHs humanity y actually finding oneself in that position. In
ena le?I ThatHs where the whole issue of empathic identification is central for me. &ecause it 8ust seems that many ways, what I was trying to do as a cultural historian was to narrate a certain impossi ility, to illuminate those

On one hand, the sla'e is the foundation of the national order, and, on the other, the sla'e occupies the position of the unthought. /o what does it mean to try to ring that position into 'iew without ma"ing it a locus of positi'e 'alue, or without trying to fill in the 'oid? /o much of our political 'oca ularyCimaginaryCdesires ha'e een implicitly integrationist e'en when we imagine our claims are more radical. This goes to the second part of the oo" B that ultimately the metanarrati'e thrust is always towards an integration into the national pro8ect, and partic-ularly when that pro8ect is in crisis, lac" people are called upon to affirm it. /o certainly itHs a out more than the desire for inclusion with-in the limited set of possi ilities that the national pro8ect pro'ides. What then does this
practices that spea" to the limits of most a'aila le narrati'es to e9plain the position of the ensla'ed.

B the gi'en language of freedom Bena le? And once you realize its limits and egin to see its ine9-ora le in'estment in certain notions of the su 8ect and su 8ection, then that language of freedom no longer ecomes that which res-cues the sla'e from his or her former condition, ut the site of the re-ela oration of that condition, rather than its transformation. ). W. B This is one of the reasons why your oo" has een called IpessimisticI y Anita
language *atterson.H &ut itHs interesting that she does-nHt say what I said when we first started tal"ing, that itHs ena ling. IHm assuming that sheHs white B I donHt "now, ut it certainly sounds li"e it. /.:.<. B &ut I thin" thereHs a certain integrationist rights agenda that su 8ects who are 'ariously positioned on the color line can ta"e up. And that pro8ect is

attempt to ma"e the narrati'e of defeat into an opportunity for cel-e ration, the desire to loo" at the ra'ages and the rutality of the last few centuries, ut to still find a way to feel good a out our-sel'es. ThatHs not my pro8ect at all, though I thin" itHs
something I consider o scene: the actually the pro8ect of a num er of people. -nfortunately, the "ind of social re'isionist history underta"en y many leftists in the 21KLs, who were trying to locate the agency of dominated groups, resulted in cele ratory narrati'es of the oppressed.G -ltimately, it led into this cele ration ,

as if there was a space you could car'e out of the ter-rorizing state apparatus in order to e9ist outside its clutches and forge some autonomy. =y pro8ect is a different one. And in partic-ular, one of my hidden polemics in the oo" was an argument
against the notion of hegemony, and how that notion has een ta"en up in the conte9t of loo"ing at the status of the sla'e. ).W. B ThatHs 'ery interesting, ecause itHs something IH'e een thin"ing a out also in respect to 4ramsci. &ecause Anne /howstac" /assoon suggests that 4ramsci rea"s down hegemony into three categories: influence, leadership, and consent.H =ay e we could ring the discussion ac" to your te9t then, using the e9amples of <arriet ;aco s,J a sla'e, and ;ohn Ran"in,H a white anti-sla'ery 7ortherner, as ways in which to tal" a out this. 7ow, whatHs really interesting is that in your chapter I/eduction and the Ruses of *ower,I you not only e9plain how the positionality of lac" women and white women differs, ut you also suggest how lac"ness disarticulates the notion of consent, if we are to thin" of that notion as uni'ersal. Oou write: I3&5eing forced to su mit to the will of the master in all things defines the predicament of sla'eryI (/, 22L6. In other words, the female sla'e is a possessed, accumulated, and fungi le o 8ect, which is to say that she is ontologically different than a white woman who may, as a house ser'ant or indentured la orer, e a su ordinated su 8ect. Oou go on to say, IThe opportunity for nonconsent 3as regards, in this case, se95 is re@uired to esta lish consent, for consent is meaningless if refusal is not an option. . . . $onsent is unseemly in a conte9t in which the 'ery notion of su 8ecti'ity is predicated upon the negation of willI (/, 2226.

,N" !TF O>> ESS$ON O%8(>$"S


"laims that we play GOppression OlympicsH are used to shut down criti;ues of anti0blackness and oppression Se*ton '- associate professor of African American studies and film and media studies at the -ni'ersity of $alifornia,
Ir'ine (;ared, I*eople-of-$olor-&lindness,I !L2L, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageCse9tonR*O$. lindness./T.pdf6CCA=

If the oppression of non lac" people of color in, and perhaps eyond, the -nited /tates seems conditional to the historic instance and functions at a more restricted empirical scope, anti lac"ness seems in'ariant and limitless (which does not mean that the former is somehow negligi le and short-li'ed or that the latter is e9hausti'e and unchanging6. If pursued with some consistency, the sort of comparati'e analysis outlined a o'e would li"ely impact the formulation of political strategy and modify the demeanor of our political culture . In fact, it might denature the comparati'e instinct altogether in fa'or of a relational analysis more ade@uate to the tas". Oet all of this is o 'iated y the silencing mechanism par e9cellence in %eft political and intellectual circles today: .+on>t play Oppression OlympicsQ0 The Oppression Olympics dogma le'els a charge amounting to little more than a leftist 'ersion of .playing the race card.0 To fuss with details of comparati'e (or relational6 analysis is to play into the hands of di'ide-and-con@uer tactics and to promote a callous immorality. <owe'er, as in its conser'ati'e complement, one notes in this catchphrase the unwarranted translation of an in@uiring position of comparison into an insidious posture of competition, the translation of ethical criti@ue into unethical attac". This point allows us to understand etter the intimate relationship etween the censure of lac" in@uiry and the recurrent analogizing to lac" suffering mentioned a o'e: they ear a common refusal to admit to significant differences of structural position orn of discrepant histories etween lac"s and their political allies, actual or potential. We might, finally, name this refusal people-of-color- lindness, a form of color lindness inherent to the concept of .people of color0 to the precise e9tent that it misunderstands the specificity of anti lac"ness and presumes or insists upon the monolithic character of 'ictimization under white supremacy Bthin"ing (the afterlife of 6 sla'ery as a form of
e9ploitation or colonization or a species of racial oppression among others.

,N" !TF 6 !(EWO 3


8our role as a 1udge and educator is to give up your badge . refuse to police +lack thought4 the only decision calculus Schnyder ? (+amien =ichael, *h+, -ni'ersity of $alifornia>s *resident>s *ostdoctoral )ellow, I)irst
/tri"e,Ihttps:CCwww.li .ute9as.eduCetdCdC!LL1Cschnyderd!MJFFCschnyderd!MJFF.pdfhttps:CCwww.li .ute9as.eduCetdCdC!LL1Cschnyderd!MJFFCschnyderd!MJFF.pdf, 3/456
=s. )o9>s clear disregard for her students elies a racist logic that dehumanizes &lac"ness while also reifying white

At the cru9 of this logic is that &lac" students are destructi'e to ci'il society. As .There is something organic to &lac" positionality that ma"es it essential to the destruction of ci'il society. There is nothing willful or speculati'e in this statement, for one
supremacy. argued y )ran" Wilderson, III, could 8ust as well state the claim the other way around: There is something organic to ci'il society that ma"es it essential to the destruction of the &lac" ody0 (Wilderson III, !LLE, 2F6. 4i'en that the asis of Western society has een predicated upon particular notions of wor"Cla or, the construction of ci'il society is predicated upon forced la or. The function of society as dictated y capitalist interest is the production of wor"ers. )or e'en as a wor"er, the threat to the system is merely reformist. )or as Wilderson comments, .The wor"er demands that producti'ity e fair and democratic0 (Wilderson III, !LLE, !!6. $ontrast to the position of the wor"er, Wilderson argues, .The sla'e demands that production stop, without recourse to its ultimate democratization. Wor" is not an organic principle forthe sla'e0 (Wilderson III, !LLE,

&lac" odies, through their collecti'e e9periences of su 8ugated &lac"ness, ecome a threat to the 'ery function of ci'il society. &lac"ness has to e contained and managed in order to protect white supremacy. $rucial to Wilderson>s argument is that white supremacy needs the reproduction of social relations of power (i.e. the identification of the wor"er6 in order to maintain its su 8ecti'e ad'antage with respect to &lac"ness.B: It is at this moment 0 when &lac"ness ecomes identified as antithetical to the notions of wor" Vthat white supremacy is a le to unleash it>s fury upon the &lac" ody. )or it is within this space that the &lac" ody can ha'e anything and e'erything done to protect the order of ci'il society.GJ Thus in order to contain the threat of &lac"ness, the <erculean managers of the hydra-li"e attac" upon
!!6. society are teachers (%ine augh [ Redi"er, !LLL6.GK Within the de'elopment of ci'il society, the function of teachers is to oth categorize states of eing and enclose &lac"ness. The categorization is clear y the actions of =s. )o9 while processes

/tudents are pre'ented from inter8ecting alternati'e 'ersions of economic systems within the framewor" of the discussion . /tudents
of enclosure are e9emplified in =r. #eynes> classroom. must perform the perfunctory duty of wor" ( asic memorization and recitation s"ills6 not to only to e awarded with a

The result is a silencing of &lac" 'oices whose life e9periences are in direct contradiction with hegemonic constructions of economy (i.e. supply and demand6 that was taught y =r. #eynes. There was no space to analyze the racial structure that frames economic modes of relation, nor was there opportunity to engage in dialogue
passing grade, ut not to e penalized. with regards to the economics of why many of the students had to wor" to support their families. =r. #eynes> classroom management and pedagogical style e9emplifies the need of white supremacy to control, define and enclose racialized su 8ects. The primary o 8ecti'e of =r. #eynes in addition to =r. +a'is and =s. )o9 was to socialize the students as

The main thrust ehind this socialization effort was to define the students as su 8ects and remo'e the possi ility for self-identification that was not located within a white supremacist conception of eing V for a self-assertion outside of these parameters is the greatest threat to white supremacist modes of social (re6production. GFThe 'eil of no ility and morality that cloa"s the teaching
producti'e wor"ers in order to fit within the hierarchal confines of ci'il society. profession has to e understood as a tool utilized y the state to maintain its power. Inside of the walls of /$</, teachers operated within a genealogy of &lac" su 8ugation that see"s to enclose all sites of &lac" self-e9pression and thoughtCaction and as stated y Wilderson ultimately .destroy the &lac" ody.0

In it>s current manifestation, the process

of &lac" su 8ugation functions within the logic of the prison regime as outlined
during times of economic .crises0 Ruth Wilson 4ilmore notes that

y +ylan Rodrbguez. Within this logic, teachers ser'e as agents of dissemination, discipline and socialization in order to preser'e the economic, political, racial, se9ual and gendered hierarchies esta lished y the -nited /tates nation pro8ect. )urther,

the 'eil of white pri'ilege is remo'ed as the logic of white supremacy that frames American nationalism is fully re'ealed 2#ilmore4 '77C5.B7 In order to untangle the multifaceted issues within pu lic education, it is incum ent to analyze the root causes of ine@uality and ine@uity. In agreement with scholars such
as Drica R. =einers who ad'ocate that white supremacy is the root cause, e'en teachers with the est of intentions ha'e to realize that their role is 'ital to the maintenance of state domination of &lac" su 8ects.

>olicy is only going to come after radical abolitionist pedagogy starts to go into effect odrigue/ 9'- (+ylan Rodriguez, *h+ in Dthnic /tudies *rogram of the -ni'ersity of $alifornia
&er"eley and Associate *rofessor of Dthnic /tudies at -ni'ersity of $alifornia Ri'erside, .+isorientation of the Teaching Act: A olition as *edagogical *osition0, Radical Teacher, 7um er FF, /ummer !L2L, p. K-2L, 3/456

*erhaps, then, there is no 'ia le or defensi le pedagogical position other than an a olitionist one. To li'e and wor", learn and teach, and sur'i'e and thri'e in a time defined y the capacity and
political willingness to eliminate and neutralize populations through a culturally 'alorized, state sanctioned ne9us of institutional 'iolence, is to etter understand why a olitionist pra9is in this historical moment is primarily pedagogical,

While it is concei'a le that in future moments, a olitionist pra9is can focus more centrally on matters of (creating and not simply opposing6 pu lic policy, infrastructure uilding, and economic reorganization, the present moment clearly demands a con'ening of radical pedagogical energies that can uild the collecti'e human power, epistemic and "nowledge apparatuses, and material sites of learning that are the precondition of authentic and li eratory social transformations . The
within and against the .system0 in which it occurs.
prison regime is the institutionalization and systemic e9pansion of massi'e human misery. It is the production of odily and psychic disarticulation on multiple scales, across different physiological capacities. The prison industrial comple9 is, in its logic of organization and its production of common sense, at least proto-genocidal. )inally, the prison regime is insepara le fromBthat is, present inBthe schooling regime in which teachers are entangled. *rison is not simply a place to which one is displaced and where one>s physiological eing is disarticulated, at the rule and whim of the state and its designated representati'es (police, parole officers, school teachers6. The prison regime is the assumpti'e premise of classroom teaching generally. While many of us must li'e in la ored denial of this fact

in order to teach as we must a out .American democracy,0 .freedom,0 and .(ci'il6 rights,0 there are opportune moments in which it is useful to come clean: the 'ast ma8ority of what occurs in -./. classroomsBfrom preschool to graduate schoolBcannot
accommodate the are truth of the proto-genocidal prison regime as a 'iolent ordering of the world, a primary component of ci'il societyC school, and a material presence in our e'eryday teaching acts.

As teachers, we are institutionally hailed to the ser'ice of genocide management, in which our pedagogical la or is 'ariously engaged in mitigating, 'alorizing, criti@uing, redeeming, 8ustifying, lamenting, and otherwise reproducing or tolerating the profound and systemic 'iolence of the glo al-historical -./. nation uilding pro8ect. As .radical0 teachers, we are politically hailed to etray genocide management in
order to em race the urgent challenge of genocide a olition. The short-term sur'i'al of those populations rendered most immediately 'ulnera le to the mundane and spectacular 'iolence of this system, and the long-term sur'i'al of most of the planet>s human population (particularly those descended from sur'i'ors of ensla'ement, colonization, con@uest, and economic e9ploitation6, is significantly dependent on our willingness to em race this form of pedagogical audacity.

,N" !TF

O%E>%!8$N#

Role *laying is only a disinterested form of spectatorship that maintains structures of domination. El 3ilombo < (Dl #ilom o Intergalactico !LLK $ollecti'e in durham 7$ that inter'iewed
/u comandante Insurgente =arcos, &eyond Resistance: D'erything p. 1-2L, 3/456

/econd, we must reassess the grounds for potential political change . If we are to ta"e the gapatistas seriously and conclude that the politics of the politicians is a sphere that functions through the simulation of pu lic opinionBthrough polls and the circulation of sound ites and imagesBto administer the interests of transnational capital, it would e near suicide to continue to do politics as a competition for influence within that sphere. 7o matter how well-intentioned or .progressi'e0 a gi'en party or platform may e, the pro9imity of politicians to the 'ertical structure and logic of the /tate today assures only their complete functionality to the larger system of ine@ualities. In addition, we must remind oursel'es that these politicians are not there to simulate for 8ust any powerA they are there to simulate social peace for a glo al power that is today greater than the collecti'e power of any particular state. Thus, any
opposition that limits itself to the le'el of a single state, no matter how powerful, may e futile. Oet, at the same time that these futilities surface, other

strategies and tactics simultaneously emerge within this new situation, strategies that rise to the challenge of the contemporary impasse faced y our pre'ious social 'isions. $onsider for e9ample the tremendous inspiration pro'ided y the following lines written
y /u comandante Insurgente =arcosA what appears at first as poetic license should e read more carefully as the outline of a rilliant strategy for our times: .The social ship is adrift, and the pro lem is not that we lac" a captain. It so happens that the rudder itself has een stolen, and it is not going to turn up anywhere. There are those who are de'oted to imagining that the rudder still e9ists and they fight for its possession. There are those who are see"ing the rudder, certain that it must ha'e een left somewhere. And there are those who ma"e of an island, not a refuge for self-satisfaction ut a ship for finding another island and another and anotherN022 M The )ourth World War continues una ated and the result has een a near total de'astation of the earth and the misery of the grand ma8ority of its inha itants. 4i'en this situation and the sense of despair it rings, it would e easy to lose a sense of purpose, to raise our hands in defeat and utter those words that ha'e een drilled into us for the past thirty years: .there is in fact no alternati'e.0 +espite the new contours of the )ourth World War and the sense of social dizziness that it has created, it is important for us to realize that this war shares one fundamental constant with all other wars in the modern era: it has een foisted upon us in order to maintain a di'ision (an ine@uality6 etween those who rule and those who are ruled. /ince the attempted con@uest of the .7ew World0 and the conse@uent esta lishment of the modern state-form, we ha'e so internalized this di'ision that it seems nearly impossi le to imagine, let alone act on, any social organization without it. It is this 'ery act of radical practice and imagination that the gapatistas elie'e is necessary to fight ac" in the era of total war. &ut how might this alternati'e ta"e shape? In order to egin to address this @uestion, the gapatistas implore us to

relie'e oursel'es of the positions of .o ser'ers0 who insist on their own neutrality and distanceA this position
may e ade@uate for the microscope-wielding academic or the .precision-guided0 T.:. audience of the latest om ings o'er &aghdad, ut they are completely insufficient for those who are see"ing change. The gapatistas insist we throw away our microscopes and our tele'isions, and instead they demand that we e@uip our .ships0 with an .in'erted periscope.0 2! According to what the gapatistas ha'e stated, one

can ne'er ascertain a elief in or 'ision of the future y loo"ing at a situation from the position of .neutrality0 pro'ided for you y the e9isting relations of power. These methods will only allow you to see what already is, what the alance of the relations of forces are in your field of in@uiry. In other words, such methods allow you to see that field only from the perspecti'e of those who rule at any gi'en moment. In contrast, if one learns to harness the power of the periscope not y honing in on what is happening .a o'e0 in the halls of the self-important, ut y placing it deep elow the earth, elow e'en the 'ery ottom of society, one finds that there are struggles and

memories of struggles that allow us to identify not .what is0 ut more importantly .what will e.H &y harnessing the transformati'e capacity of social mo'ement, as well as the memories of past struggles that dri'e it, the gapatistas are a le to identify the future and act on it today. It
is a parado9ical temporal insight that was perhaps est summarized y .Dl $landestino0 himself, =anu $hao, when he proclaimed that, .the future happened a long time agoQ02E 4i'en this insight afforded y adopting the methodology of the in'erted periscope, we

are a le to shatter the mirror of power,2G to show that power does not elong to those who rule. Instead, we see that there are two completely different and opposed forms of power in any society: that which emerges from a o'e and is e9ercised o'er people (*ower with a capital .*06, and that which is orn elow and is a le to act with and through people (power with a lower case .p 06. One is set on maintaining that which is (*ower6, while the other is premised on transformation (power6.

,N" !TF "!>$T!%$S(


Racism is historically separate from capitalism ut is crucial to its 'ery operation and e9istence

(iles and +rown 9C (7obert and ,al%olm, 7obert ,iles is the Dire%tor of Study &broad and 'rofessor of
So%iology and 1nternational Studies at the University of Dorth Carolina, Chapel 0ill$ ,al%olm -rown is Le%turer in So%iology at the University of (@eter$, )7a%ism (<ey 1deas;>, -ritish Library Cataloguing in 'ubli%ation Data, pg$ 11 " 11C" 8S9:;

We regard racialisation and racism as historically specific and necessarily contradictory phenomena. Racism has appeared in a num er of different forms, ut it has a 'arying interaction with economic and political relations in capitalist and non-capitalist social formations. Racialisation and racism are not e9clusi'e Pproducts> of capitalism ut ha'e origins in Duropean societies prior to the de'elopment of the capitalist mode of production and ha'e a history of e9pression within social formations dominated y noncapitalist modes of production in interaction with the capitalist mode. In other words, racism is an ideology with conditions of e9istence that are, at least in part, independent of the interests of the ruling class and the ourgeoisie within capitalist societies. To define racism as functional to capitalism is to presuppose the nature and outcome of its interaction with economic and political relations, and with other ideologies. /uch a definition mista"enly assumes that a homogeneous ruling class ine'ita ly and necessarily deri'es economic andCor political ad'antages from its e9pression. The use of racism to limit the size of the la our mar"et is not necessarily in the interests of those employers e9periencing a la our shortage, nor of those who re@uire s"illed la our, while racism and e9clusionary practices that result in ci'il distur ance will not necessarily e welcomed y capitalists whose usiness acti'ity has een disrupted as a result, or y the state that may need to increase e9penditure to maintain social order. <ence, we analyse racism as a necessarily contradictory phenomenon. The e9pression of racism, and the su se@uent structuring of political and economic relations, has a 'ariety of temporally specific conse@uences for all those implicated in the process, and whether or not they are ad'antageous will depend upon class position and con8uncture. Racism is therefore a contradictory phenomenon ecause what is Pfunctional>
for one set of interests may e Pdysfunctional> for another, and ecause the conditions that sustain its ad'antageous

The effecti'ity of racism is therefore historically specific and hence "nowa le only as a result of historical analysis rather than a stract theorising. The o 8ecti'e of this chapter is to illustrate and ela orate these claims. *art of the e9planation for this e9clusionary practice lies in the fact that the ma8ority of migrants, including those who considered themsel'es s"illed in the conte9t of relations of production in the $ari ean and the Asian su continent, had few s"ills rele'ant to an industrial capitalist economy (Wright 21JF: ELVGL6. On this criterion, they were
e9pression are rarely permanent, and changed circumstances may clash with the continued e9pression of racism. li"ely to e e9cluded from any form of s"illed manual or non-manual employment. Additionally, racism was a determining factor. /ome employers e9plained their e9clusionary practices y reference to the anticipated or real opposition of their e9isting wor"force to wor"ing with Pcoloureds>, opposition that they endorsed y acting in this manner. Others negati'ely stereotyped Asians as Pslow to learn>, or African $ari ean people as lazy, unresponsi'e to discipline and truculent, or Pcoloured people> generally as prone to accidents or re@uiring more super'ision than Pwhite> wor"ers (Wright 21JF: F1V 2GG6. In all these instances, migrants were signified y s"in colour and attri uted collecti'ely with negati'ely e'aluated characteristics. 7ot all employers in Wright>s sur'ey articulated such racist 'iews, so unanimity should not e assumed. 7e'ertheless, the interrelationship etween the racialisation of migrants, racism and e9clusionary practice limited the

parameters of the la our mar"et open to migrants from the $ari ean and Asian su continent. Thus, while there e9isted a demand for an increase in the size of the &ritish wor"ing class V which there y stimulated migration V racism and associated e9clusionary practices placed those migrants in, and largely restricted them to, semi- and uns"illed manual wor"ing-class positions.

"apitalism is not the root cause0 White slaves would have attributed more capital4 been cheaper4 and would have led to faster development than !frican !mericans Wilderson '- ()ran" .-nspea"a le Dthics0, Red, White, [ &lac": $inema and the /tructure of -./. Antagonisms 2F6 Dltis meticulously e9plains how the costs of ensla'ement would ha'e een dri'en e9ponentially down had White sla'es een ta"en en masse from Duropean countries. /hipping costs from Durope to America were considera ly lower than shipping costs from Durope to Africa and then on to America. <e notes that .shipping costsNcomprised y far the greater part of the price of any form of imported onded la or in the AmericasNIf we ta"e into account the time spent collecting a sla'e cargo on the African coast as well, then the case for sailing directly from Durope with a cargo of 3Whites5 appears stronger again 0 (2GLM6. )urthermore, stuffing White sla'es head to toe in the holds of cargo ships would ha'e dri'en down the costs of shipping e'en more. Dltis sums up his data y concluding that if Duropean merchants, planters, and statesmen imposed chattel sla'ery on some mem ers of their own societyBsay, only ML,LLL White sla'es per yearBthen not only would Duropean ci'il society ha'e een a le to a sor these losses ut ci'il society .would 3also5 ha'e en8oyed lower la or costs, a faster de'elopment of the Americas, and higher e9ports and income le'els on oth sides of the Atlantic0 (2G!!6.

"apitalism can never articulate the slaves position0 it can never understand the ontological position and the fungibility of the +lack and the slave Wilderson '- ()ran" .-nspea"a le Dthics0, Red, White, [ &lac": $inema and the /tructure of -./. Antagonisms 2K-2F6 I raise Dltis>s counterposing of the sym olic 'alue of sla'ery to the economic 'alue of sla'ery in order to de un" two gross misunderstandings: One is that wor"Bor alienation and e9ploitationBis a constituent element of sla'ery. The other is that the profit moti'e is the consideration within the sla'eocracy that trumps all others. +a'id =arriott, /aidiya
<artman, Ronald ;udy, <ortense /pillers, Orlando *atterson, and Achille = em e ha'e gone to considera le lengths to show that, in point of fact, sla'ery is and connotes an ontological

status for &lac"nessA and that the constituent elements of sla'ery are not e9ploitation and alienation ut accumulation and fungi ility (<artman6: the condition of eing owned and traded. acial and capitalist oppression are not conditioned upon each other . understanding the racial ne*us independently solves #abriel and Todorova C *rofessor of Dconomics at =ount <olyo"e $ollegeA student at =ount <olyo"e
$ollege (/atyananda ;. 4a rielA D'genia O. Todoro'a, ;anuary !LLE, .Racism and $apitalist Accumulation: An O'erdetermined 7e9us,0 ;ournal of $ritical /ociology 'ol. !1 no. 2, /age ;ournals6CC#*

In this paper we ha'e theorized racism as the process of creation and reproduction of racialized consciousnessCsu 8ecti'ity, grounded in a notion of transcendental races, created from supernatural concepts of phenotype andCor genetic origins. It is our argument that the

presence of racism in a social formation results in the racialization of all other social and natural processes. Racism changes the decision-ma"ing of agents engaged in economic (as well as other6 processes. Therefore, e'ery transaction carried out y racialized agents is necessarily racialized. The free mar"et is a racialized free mar"et. /imilarly, capital udgeting decisions --- the choice and Snancing of in'estments --- are shaped y racism. The social conditions under which people li'e in a society where racism is pre'alent are shaped y racism. These racialized social conditions, including employment opportunities, incomes, health statistics, and a wide range of other factors are used as data in social analysis.
)or e9ample, income ine@uality along constructed racial lines pro'ides data for the racist narrati'e in which race is gi'en

su stance as a real iological determinant of a ilities, eha'iors, and sentiments. The racialized capital udgeting decisions that produce higher I lac"I unemployment and lower I lac"I incomes ecome the data for arguing that I lac"sI are innately less producti'e . Our position is that the e9istence of racism alters the logic of capitalist accumulation and 'ice 'ersa. This is not to say, howe'er, that we 'iew either as the condition of e9istence of the other. The struggle to end racism is not collapsi le into the struggle to end capitalist e9ploitation. 7or is the re'erse the case. There is a need to further untangle the ne9us connecting racism
and capitalist accumulation, as part of a larger effort to recognize and ma"e sense of these two phenomena. In particular,

for those who are interested in understanding capitalist accumulation and crises, understanding this ne9us promises to signiScantly alter and impro'e their analyses. The same can e said for introducing this ne9us into attempts to ma"e sense of racism. "apitalism cant e*plain anti0blackness . perpetuates violence Woods < teaches in the +epartment of $riminology and $riminal ;ustice at /onoma /tate -ni'ersity. <e has wor"ed
in <I:CAI+/ peer education and harm reduction in 7ew Oor" $ity, AI+/ housing in /eattle, and police accounta ility in Oa"land. <is current pro8ect e9amines capti'ity and social death across the African +iaspora. (Tryon, IThe )act of Anti&lac"ness: +ecolonization in $hiapas and the 7iger Ri'er +elta,I !LLK, http:CCwww.o"cir.comCArticlesU!L: U!L/pecialCTryonWoods.pdf6 This article considers )rantz )anon>s interrogation of the fact of anti- lac"ness in light of the ongoing decolonization struggles in our current historical moment.E +e

t regimes, structural ad8ustment, neoli eral military-prison industrial comple9es, and corporate impunity are some of the idioms of power through which colonialist legacies and imperialist desires li'e today. The antiglo alization and anti-war mo'ements ha'e de'eloped elo@uent criti@ues of the 'agaries of neo-li eralism, including the machinations of corporate media and the omnipresence of mar"et relations. &y o scuring the lac">s singular relation to suffering, howe'er, these important challenges ser'e to reconstitute the anti- lac" world. To ma"e it plain: when criti@ues of glo alization, such as those proffered y the gapatistas out of southern =e9ico, spea" of solidarity with all peoples in8ured and threatened with e9tinction y neo-li eralism, they do nothing to undo the =anichean world )anon shows us. In this .=anichean delirium,0 the &lac" is o'erdetermined from the outsideA to use 7igel 4i son>s formulation of )anon, the .&lac" is ody and the ody>s death is death0 (!LLE: !L6. In other words, lac" people e9perience odily punishmentA they are imprisoned, harassed, eaten, or murderedA criminalized, stigmatized, tortured or "illedA impo'erished, diseased, e9iled, or homeless not ecause of a particular political economy, nor ecause of national oppression or underde'elopment . They are not hunted down

ecause they ha'e organized themsel'es militarily to resist state 'iolence and the designs of capital for the e9ploitation of their lands, as in the case of the gapatista Re ellion, the most prominent social mo'ement currently acti'e in $hiapas.

Rather, they are su 8ected to premature death ecause they are lac", and as such, they are the 'iolence that must e countered and e9punged.

Oppression resulting from blackness outweighs . fundamentally distinct from economic structures Woods < teaches in the +epartment of $riminology and $riminal ;ustice at /onoma /tate -ni'ersity. <e has wor"ed
in <I:CAI+/ peer education and harm reduction in 7ew Oor" $ity, AI+/ housing in /eattle, and police accounta ility in Oa"land. <is current pro8ect e9amines capti'ity and social death across the African +iaspora. (Tryon, IThe )act of Anti&lac"ness: +ecolonization in $hiapas and the 7iger Ri'er +elta,I !LLK, http:CCwww.o"cir.comCArticlesU!L: U!L/pecialCTryonWoods.pdf6 In Wretched of the Darth, )anon

ma"es clear the distinction etween domination and colonialism. The difference is that eing dominated racially is not the same as ha'ing one>s humanity e9punged. In the colonial condition, the humanity of the colonized ecomes the thing that re@uires 8ustiScation: as )anon puts it, not only must the designated inferior race as" who am I, ut also, what am I? The uni'erse of meanings that colonialism has created, that le9icon of endlessly repeating and entangled opposites, is therefore @ualitati'ely distinct from the structure of the political economy. Although oth le'els structure the li'ed e9periences of Africans and indigenous Americans, )anon reminds us that the materiality of the colonized su 8ect cannot e found in la or e9ploitation or national oppression. Rather, 'iolence pro'ides the materiality of the colonial su 8ect (;udy 211F6. The historical circumstances of eing .loc"ed in thingness y non-recognition,0 as &.
=arie *erin am puts it, or in )anon>s words, S9ed into the position of the thingsla'e, as one who .is condemned to ite himself,0 means that consciousness is predicated considers, then, the 'iolence that colonialism produces.

on 'iolence (*erin

am 21F!: !L6. This section riehy

!nti0blackness is a precondition to capitalism Woods < teaches in the +epartment of $riminology and $riminal ;ustice at /onoma /tate -ni'ersity. <e has wor"ed
in <I:CAI+/ peer education and harm reduction in 7ew Oor" $ity, AI+/ housing in /eattle, and police accounta ility in Oa"land. <is current pro8ect e9amines capti'ity and social death across the African +iaspora. (Tryon, IThe )act of Anti&lac"ness: +ecolonization in $hiapas and the 7iger Ri'er +elta,I !LLK, http:CCwww.o"cir.comCArticlesU!L: U!L/pecialCTryonWoods.pdf6

As a result of sla'ery, the concept of freedom in the West de'eloped through its negation, unfreedom. /ince to e human is to e free, the emergence of Western mod dernity came a out through the production of .races.0 #nowledge a out human freedom in the modern world thus needs to e grounded in the historical production of sla'ery (*atterson 21F!6. One of the signiScant meanings of the African sla'e trade, then, is that 'iolence against the lac" ody is the precondition for the formation of the modern ourgeois state (Wilderson !LLM6. Africa as a concept remains the metaphor through which the West sees itselfBor as Achille = em e puts it, Africa is a mediation for the West>s self-deception (= em e !LL2: E6. Africa thus ecomes the site of lac", or a sence,
of non- eing, for the West, going all the way ac" to <egel, for whom Africa was the place where all that is foreign to humanity is to e found. This

non eing-ness is precisely the essence of a sla'e formation: the sla'e (the &lac"6 and the sla'e formation (Africa6 are Sgures and places without history. &eing socially dead, e9pelled from humanity altogether, the sla'e>s central 'alue lies in his or her usefulness: he or she has nothing ut an appearance, only a ody that the colonizerC master can seize and use as needed. The constituent elements of sla'ery are thus not e9ploitation and

alienation, ut accumulation and fungi ilityBthe

condition of eing owned and used. The relationship etween humanity and sla'ery is therefore a structural positionality mar"ed y its usefulness for the masterCsettler. In short, the world uses the lac" to esta lish what is not human.
)anon puts it succinctly: .The white man sla'es to reach a human le'el0 (21M!: 16.

The criti;ue perpetuates anti0blackness4 ignoring its epistemological and ontological underpinnings and making it impossible to resolve genocide Woods < teaches in the +epartment of $riminology and $riminal ;ustice at /onoma /tate -ni'ersity. <e has wor"ed
in <I:CAI+/ peer education and harm reduction in 7ew Oor" $ity, AI+/ housing in /eattle, and police accounta ility in Oa"land. <is current pro8ect e9amines capti'ity and social death across the African +iaspora. (Tryon, IThe )act of Anti&lac"ness: +ecolonization in $hiapas and the 7iger Ri'er +elta,I !LLK, http:CCwww.o"cir.comCArticlesU!L: U!L/pecialCTryonWoods.pdf6 In effect, the gapatistas ha'e scaled down the structural antagonism of genocide to a social conhict within the discursi'e space of the nation. $i'il

society cannot e ethically restored, howe'er, simply y shifting its paradigm of resource accumulation and distri utionA to produce, as )anon would ha'e it, a world of mutual human recognition, also re@uires ad8usting the society>s epistemological and ontological foundations. The li'ing death of genocide for the indigenous Sgure, as with ensla'ement for the &lac", can only e grasped y way of a narrati'e a out something that it is notB so'ereignty. The point, howe'er, is not that the gapatistas ha'e retreated from the only ethical stance that genocide
demands. gapatismo is nuanced enough that what appears at one 8uncture to e a disa ling contradiction, turns out to ha'e car'ed a space for singular life-forms otherwise threatened with e9tinction in the homogenizing world of the mar"et.J The point is that there was an alternati'e option a'aila le to them at all. This a'aila ility is the primary and enduring distinction etween the 7iger +elta and $hiapas. Although

gapatismo represents profoundly trou ling possi ilities for the nation-state and international capital, it is not an ethical restoration of humanity ecause it rests upon this silent disa'owal of the suffering of the sla'e and of the genocided indigenous. While gapatismo may not e an acti'e form of anti- lac"ness, it ne'ertheless acti'ates its ontological structure y articulating with the nation through the namea le loss of so'ereignty. The gritty reality of this situation is that as the
gapatistas access the uni'ersal language of li eral political community, the logos of modern humanity, the 7iger +elta recedes further into non-e9istence. In contrast to the gapatistas, the discourse coming out of the +elta has not prominently featured calls for greater rights and inclusion within the 7igerian political ody. Instead, it has e9plicitly lin"ed the struggle against a neo-colonialist state and multinational corporations to a longer history and roader picture of imperial con@uest. A leader of the I8aw- ased 7iger +elta *eople>s :olunteer )orce recently e9plained: .We were forced into 7igeria y the &ritish colonialists. We are not 7igeriansBthere is no such nation as 7igeria0 (Al-;azeera !LLG6. +irect challenges to the social order in the +elta ha'e ta"en the form of "idnapping or "illing foreign oil wor"ers, attac"ing and disa ling oil production infrastructure, and sa otaging pipelines for the illicit mar"et in fuel. =ilitary repression is intense, regular, and e9tensi'eBthe historical timeline is dotted with numerous massacres of +elta communities and

The spectacle always o scures the mundane, howe'er, and it is the anality of 'iolence that mar"s the post-colony in Africa. The form of power that go'erns this space is carni'orous: "illing a human eing proceeds from the same logic as "illing an animal. %i"e
constant clashes etween the state, the security forces of the oil companies, and 'arious pri'ate militia groups. that of the animal whose throat is cut, the death inhicted on a human eing is percei'ed as em racing nothing. It is the death of a purely negati'e essence without su stance, the emptying of a hollow, unsu stantial o 8ect that, falling ac" into

The neo-li eral carni'ore delegates the "illing to the colonized themsel'es, the negated su 8ect who already e9periences death at the 'ery heart of his e9istence (= em e !LL2: !L26. -nder structural ad8ustment, de t is the ideological mechanism through which the delegated "illing in the +elta is understood: the lac" ecomes the .locus of lame0 for the
loss, .Snds itself only as a lost soul.0 In other words, the hollow o 8ect dies of its own accord. (= em e !LL2: !LL

inarticula le 'iolence of colonialism and .the site of a errance0 for the repressed 'iolence of the post-colony (<artman 211K: 2EE6. It is an in'ersion through which genocide appears as suicide.K Irrespecti'e of similar positions in the political economy of glo al capital accumulationB.lea'ing e9istence y the wayside,0 as )anon puts itBthe structure of the world>s semantic Seld is ound together y anti- lac" solidarity. Whereas the gapatistas
ha'e generated an enormous transnational solidarity networ"B.We are all gapatistasQ0Bthere is no analogous identiScation y glo al ci'il society with the situation in the +elta.F &y the same to"en, whereas the ta"ing up of arms y the Dg%7 effecti'ely created a space for the gapatista claims to e heard, the specter of mass lac" 'iolence in Africa generally elicits shoc" or re'ulsion from glo al ci'il society. &lac" 'iolence is illegi le ecause it emerges as if from a 'oid, the place of a sence, where loss cannot e named.

&eracinating is indistinct from whiteness . it 1ust eliminates black consciousness which is key #ordon < +irector of the Institute for the /tudy of Race and /ocial Thought, +irector of the $enter for Afro-;ewish
/tudies and a %aura <. $arnell *rofessor of *hilosophy at Temple -ni'ersity and *resident of the $ari ean *hilosophical Association. <as written many wor"s in race theory, Africana philosophy, postcolonial phenomenology, etc. and has een a professor at oth Oale and &rown (%ewis R., I7ot Always Dnsla'ed, Oet 7ot fuite )ree: *hilosophical $hallenges from the -nderside of the 7ew World,I 2LC2MCLK, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageCgordonRnot.always.ensla'ed.pdf6CCA=

The phenomenology of &lac" $onsciousness suggests, then, that such a consciousness cannot properly function as a negati'e term of a prior positi'ity. Its lin" to the political is such that its opposition would ha'e to e the chimera appealed to in retreats to neutrality and lindness. /hould we consider, for instance, the popular li eral model of cosmopolitanism, the conclusion will e that such claims hold su terranean endorsements of white normati'ity. This is ecause white consciousness is not properly a racial consciousness. It is that which does not re@uire its relati'e term , which means, in effect, that it could simply assert itself, at least in political terms, as consciousness itself. The effect would e an affirmation of status @uo conditions through an appeal to an ethics of the self: The
cosmopolitanist, for instance, fails to see that politics is at wor" in the illusion of transcending particularity. To point this

It would mean to lac"en the cosmopolitan world, or, in the suggesti'e language of &i"o>s criti@ue, to render it conscious of political reality, to egin its path into &lac" $onsciousness. This is to say that freedom, from such an Africana perspecti'e, re@uires the articulation of political life as a face-to-face relationship.
out to the cosmopolitanist would constitute an intrusion of the political in the dream world of ethical efficacy.

!fropessimism is a precursor to politics "hico 7 (./ome curious things a out Iafropessimism,0 MC21CL1, http:CCcosmicho
curious-things-a out-afropessimism.html6CCA=

oes. logspot.comC!LL1CLMCsome-

This distinction-- etween I lac"s are human su 8ects who are sometimes treated adlyI 'ersus I lac"sH repeated ad treatment shows that they are not human su 8ectsI -- is not @uite the cru9 of an afropessimist argument, ut it is an important component of one. The IpessimismI in
afropessimism comes ac", for me, to something my parents used to tell me-- something pretty much all lac" parents I "now ha'e to tell their children, regardless of age: I7o matter where you go, no matter who youHre with, always remem er where you are and who you are.I This is not solely or e'en essentially a reminder to e proud of oneHs heritage and carry the stri'ings of one>s ancestors where'er one goes. Rather, it constitutes a reminder that we

are not agents, and

that any num er of things can and will happen to us at any time without our parents

eing a le to protect us in any way. As %ewis 4ordon says in &ad )aith and Anti lac" Racism, with the lac", it is a matter of Iwhen,I

not Iwhether.I It

reflects an awareness that lac"ness is a position formed y the 'iolence essential to =odernity and that that fact does not change no matter how much society may seem to change, no matter how much the company of friends may change, no matter how much my performance changes, no matter my age. Afropessimism is, at its heart, a fundamental criti@ue of performati'ity and hy ridity ecause it says that no amount of incremental change can create an ethical order so long as lac" incarceration, fungi ility, and death is the precondition for social sta ility.
*essimism. /ounds li"e a horri le, hopeless way to li'e doesnHt it? In a sense, perhaps it should sound that way. As /aidiya <artman says in the a o'e-cited inter'iew with )ran", it

is Io sceneI to ta"e Ithe narrati'e of defeatI and Istill find a way to feel good a out oursel'esI (2FM6. We should not shrin" from itA
<artman says that her pessimistic account of the 'iolence of nineteenth-century lac" su 8ect formation should e read as Ian allegory of the presentI (21L6. =oreo'er, as she puts it clearly in /cenes of /u 8ection, W It

is impossi le to fully redress this pained condition without the occurrence of an e'ent of epic and re'olutionary proportions--the a olition of sla'ery, the destruction of a racist social order, and the actualization of e@uality (KK6 W In that possi ility of radical change-- what )anon would call Ithe end of the worldI-- may lie some hope. %et>s e clear. Afropessimism is not a politics. &ut it does hold political potential. It is pro a ly etter to thin" of it as a precursor to a politics. It is an attemptBhowe'er, as yet, incompleteB to frame a rage, a rage that will not find an articulation or a signification within any politics that ta"es the modern order as its presumption and premise. 6ocus on unitary approaches while ignoring our own racial biases destroys effective social movements . progressive spaces are 1ust as marginali/ing Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* &ut suggest

that racism and discrimination are also significant pro lems in more .progressi'e spaces,0 e'en among self-proclaimed li erals and leftists themsel'es B and that it might e unearthed in our political mo'ements B and prepare to e met with icy stares, or worse, a selfrighteous 'itriol that see"s to separate .real racism0 (the right-wing "ind6 from not-so-real racism (the "ind we on the left sometimes foster6. And "now that efore long, someone will admonish you to focus on the .real enemy,0 rather than fighting amongst oursel'es. .What we need is unity,0 these 'oices say, .and all that tal" a out racism on the left 8ust di'ides us further.0 &ut such arguments, in addition to eing terri ly con'enient for the white fol"s who typically spout them B since it relie'es us of ha'ing to e9amine our own practices and rhetoric B are also horri ly shortsighted. Only y addressing our own racism (howe'er inad'ertent it may e at times6 can we grow mo'ements for social 8ustice. &y gi'ing short shrift to the su 8ect, internally or in the larger society, we 'irtually guarantee the defeat of whate'er mo'ements for social transformation we claim to support. It>s worth recalling that at the height of the ci'il rights mo'ement it was not merely conser'ati'es and reactionaries who were the targets of the freedom struggle. Indeed, some of the harshest criticism was reser'ed for moderates and e'en li erals, whether the white clergy whom +r. #ing was chastising in his .%etter from a &irmingham ;ail,0 or *residents #ennedy and ;ohnson. In the case of the latter two, neither their relati'e li eralism (when compared to their political opponents6 or party affiliation insulated them from the legitimate ire of peoples of color and their white antiracist allies. 4oing ac" further we should recall that it

was perhaps the nation>s most progressi'e president, )ran"lin Roose'elt, who not only O#d the internment of ;apanese Americans, ut who was also willing to cut out 'irtually all African Americans from the "ey programs of the 7ew +eal so as to placate southern segregationists in his own party (26. $apitulating to racism, and e'en practicing it, has a sad pedigree on the left of the spectrum as with the right. And it is time we faced this fact honestly. The left is not e*empt from the racism they criti;ue . blackness becomes tainted by implicit biases and e*cuses Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* +istinguishing Racism on the %eft from Racism on the Right That said, and efore detailing what li eral and progressi'e racism often loo"s li"e, let me e clear: racism

on the left is not e9actly the same as its counterpart on the right. Whereas conser'ati'e theory lends itself almost intrinsically to racist conclusions, for reasons I e9plained in the first essay, li eral theory is generally egalitarian and intuiti'ely antiracist. %i eral and left-leaning fol"s typically endorse notions of e@uality in oth the political and
economic realms. %i"ewise, most all on the left outwardly re8ect the attri ution of iological or cultural superiority to racial groups. And those on the left are @uic" to ac"nowledge and decry the systemic in8ustices that ha'e een central to the creation of racial disparities in the -nited /tates. /o too, 'irtually all the acti'ists in the ci'il rights struggle, contrary to the re'isionism of fol"s li"e 4lenn &ec", were decidedly to the left. %i erals and left-radicals populated the mo'ement and pro'ided its energy, while leading conser'ati'es li"e William ). &uc"ley and his colleagues at The 7ational Re'iew pu lished paeans to white supremacy in which they ad'ised that integration should wait until

#ing B e'en as conser'ati'es li"e &ec" ha'e tried to co-opt his message and his legacy B put forth a consistently progressi'e and e'en leftist politics, in terms of his 'iews on race, as well as economics and militarism. &ut despite the o'erwhelming role of li erals and leftists in the struggle for racial e@uity, and despite the antiracist narrati'e that do'etails with left philosophy, li eral and left indi'iduals and groups in practice ha'e manifested racism in a num er of ways. Racism !.L: White %i erals and the *ro lem of .Dnlightened D9ceptionalism0 )or years, the insistence y whites that .some of (their6 est friends0 were lac" was perhaps the most o 'ious if unintentional way for these whites to e9pose their roader racial 'iews as anything ut enlightened. Whene'er we as white fol"s ha'e felt the need to mention our close personal relationships with African Americans, it has usually een after ha'ing 8ust inserted our feet into our mouths y saying something racially intemperate or e'en racist in the presence of someone of color. 7owadays, the assurance that .some of my est friends are lac"0 as a way to demonstrate one>s open-minded ona fides has een supplanted y a more tangi le and ostensi ly political statement: namely, that .I 'oted for &arac" O ama.0 Thus, imply the persons stating it (often @uite li eral in terms of their o'erall political sensi ilities6, don>t accuse me of racism. &ut as I e9plained in my !LL1 oo", &etween &arac" and a <ard *lace: Racism and White +enial in the Age of O ama, the a ility of whites to support and 'ote for O ama says little a out our larger 'iews regarding people of color generally, or lac" fol"s in particular. Indeed, many white li eral O ama supporters openly admitted that what they li"ed a out the candidate was his a ility to .transcend race0 (which implicitly meant to transcend his own lac"ness6, to .ma"e white people feel good a out oursel'es,0 and the fact that he .didn>t come with the aggage of the ci'il rights mo'ement.0 In other words, many whites li"ed O ama precisely ecause they were a le to 'iew him as fundamentally different than other lac" fol"s. <e was an e9ception. <is lac"ness wasn>t pro lematic. It didn>t ma"e white people uncomforta le. &ut to 'iew &arac" O ama as different from the lac"

lac"s had progressed enough, in ci'ilizational terms, to e mingled with their etters. +r.

norm B and

to 'iew this difference as a positi'e thing B is to suggest that .normal0 lac"ness is tainted, negati'e, to e a'oided, and certainly not supported politically. It is to re-stigmatize lac"ness
and the lac" community writ large, e'en as one praises and identifies with one lac" indi'idual writ small. It is to turn &arac" O ama into the political e@ui'alent of $liff <u9ta le, from The $os y /how: a lac" man with whom, despite his lac"ness, white America is a le to identify. Indeed, polling

data suggests that plenty of whites who

'oted for O ama B including many who are no dou t li eral on issues li"e a ortion or the en'ironment B nonetheless har or deep-seated racial iases. )or instance, one A* sur'ey in /eptem er of !LLF found that a out a third of white +emocrats were willing to admit to holding negati'e and racist stereotypes a out lac"s, and that a out JL percent of these nonetheless supported &arac" O ama for president and intended to 'ote for him. $onsidering the research on racial ias among whites, which finds that nearly all of us continue to har or certain anti- lac" stereotypes and iases, it is safe to say that millions of otherwise li eral white fol"s are practitioners of racism, al eit a !.L 'ariety, as opposed to the old school, 2.L type, to which we ha'e cast most of our attention. %iberal ideas of colorblindness and colormuteness perpetuates systemic ine;ualities and white privilege . e*treme class reductionism prevents effective reform Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* &eyond Indi'idual &ias: <ow %i erals and the %eft *ractice Racism &eyond some e9tent within all of us (including those who are progressi'e6, li

the personal iases that e9ist to erals and those on the left operate within institutional spaces and e'en in our political acti'ism in ways that contri ute to systemic racial ine@uity. This we do through four primary mechanisms. The first is a well-intended ut destructi'e form of color lindness. The second is an e@ually destructi'e colormuteness. These mean, @uite literally, a tendency among many on the white li eral-left to neither see nor gi'e 'oice to race and racism as central issues in our communities and the institutions where we operate, or their connection to and interrelationship with other issues. &oth li eralCleft color lindness and colormuteness perpetuate the marginalization of people of color and their concerns, in the larger society and within progressi'e formations for social change. The third mechanism y which li eral and left acti'ists and ad'ocates perpetuate racism is y the latant manifestation of white pri'ilege in our acti'ities , issue framing, outreach and analysis: specifically, the fa'oring of white perspecti'es o'er those of people of color, the co-optation of lac" and rown suffering to score political points, and the unwillingness to engage race and racism e'en when they are central to the issue eing addressed. And fourth, left acti'ists often marginalize people of color y operating from a framewor" of e9treme class reductionism, which holds that the .real0 issue is class, not race, that .the only color that matters is green,0 and that issues li"e racism are mere .identity politics,0 which should ta"e a ac" seat to promoting class- ased uni'ersalism and programs to help wor"ing people. This reductionism, y ignoring the way that e'en middle class and affluent people of color face racism and color- ased discrimination (and y presuming that low income fol"s of color and low income whites are e@ually oppressed, despite a wealth of e'idence to the contrary6 reinforces white denial, pri'ileges white perspecti'ism and dismisses the li'ed reality of people of color. D'en more, as we>ll see, it ignores perhaps the most important political lesson regarding the interplay of race and class: namely, that the iggest reason why there is so little wor"ing

class consciousness and unity in the -ntied /tates (and thus, why class- ased programs to uplift all in need are so much wea"er here than in the rest of the industrialized world6, is precisely ecause of racism and the way that white racism has een deli erately inculcated among white wor"ing fol"s. Only y confronting that directly (rather than sidestepping it as class reductionists see" to do6 can we e'er hope to uild cross-racial, class ased coalitions . In other words, for the policies fa'ored y the class reductionist to wor" B e they social democrats or =ar9ists B or e'en to come into eing, racism and white supremacy must e challenged directly. &y way of all four of the a o'e mechanisms B which we will now e9plore in-depth B li erals and progressi'es reinforce the notion that persons of color are less important, their concerns less central to the larger 8ustice cause, and that ultimately they are to e 'iewed as inferior 8unior partners in the mo'ement for social change. "ommunisms colorblindness ignores material ine;ualities and encourages inclusive thinking Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* %i eral $olor lindness and the *erpetuation of Racism &y .li

eral color lindness0 I am referring to a elief

that although racial disparities are certainly real and trou ling B and although they are indeed the result of discrimination and une@ual opportunity B paying less attention to color or race is a progressi'e and open-minded way to com at those disparities . /o, for instance, this is the type of color lind stance often e'inced y teachers, or social wor"ers, or fol"s who wor" in non-profit ser'ice agencies, or other .helping0 professions . Its em odiment is the elementary school teacher who I seem to meet in e'ery town to which I tra'el who insists .they ne'er e'en notice color0 and ma"e sure to treat e'eryone e9actly the same, as if this were the height of moral eha'ior and the ultimate in progressi'e educational pedagogy. &ut in fact, color lindness is e9actly the opposite of what is needed to ensure 8ustice and e@uity for persons of color. To e lind to color, as ;ulian &ond has noted, is to e lind to the conse@uences of color, .and especially the conse@uences of eing the wrong color in America.0 What>s more, when teachers and others resol'e to ignore color, they not only ma"e it harder to meet the needs of the persons of color with whom they personally interact, they actually help further racism and racial ine@uity y deepening denial that the pro lem e9ists, which in turn ma"es the pro lem harder to sol'e. To treat e'eryone the same B e'en assuming this were possi le B is not progressi'e, especially when some are contending with arriers and o stacles not faced y others. If some are dealing with structural racism, to treat them the same as white fol"s who aren>t is to fail to meet their needs. The same
is true with women and se9ism, %4&T fol"s and heterose9ism, wor"ing-class fol"s and the class system, persons with disa ilities and a leism, right on down the line. Identity

matters. It shapes our e9periences. And to not to e color lind in the face of profound racial disparities can encourage the mindset that whate'er disparities e9ist must e the fault of those on the ottom. As parents, for e9ample, if we do not
recognize that is to increase the li"elihood that e'en the well-intended will perpetuate the initial in8ury. Indeed, discuss racism and discrimination with our children B and white parents, including li eral ones, show a serious hesitance to do this B they will grow up without the critical conte9t needed to process the glaring racial ine@uities they can see with their own eyes @uite clearly. /o, white children may well come to conclude that the reason lac"s, %atinos, and American Indian fol"s are so much more li"ely to e poor, and li'e in .less desira le0 neigh orhoods or communities is ecause there is something wrong with them. They must not try hard enough to succeed. If

us to ignore color and its conse@uences, as it must almost

color lindness encourages y definition, then we are left with

e9planations for ine@uity that are not only conser'ati'e in nature, ut racist too. )or children of
color, color lindness, no matter the li erality ehind it, can lead them to e ill-prepared for discrimination when and if it occurs in their li'es. It can also lead them to internalize the lame for the ine@uities they too can see, and to conclude that

many li eral and color lind child-rearing is the way to raise antiracist children, the est and most recent research on the matter completely de un"s this popular notion. &eyond the personal and familial settings, color lindness also pro'es pro lematic in the realm of political acti'ism. Within oth li eral and further-left political ad'ocacy and organizing, color lindness leads persons in these formations to ignore the racial ma"eup of our own group efforts, and to pay no attention to how white-dominated they can often e. This
progressi'e parents thin" color lindness, y linding us to the way in which li eral and left groups come to e so white (e'en when data says people of color tend to e more progressi'e than whites, and so, if anything, should e o'er-represented in these groups6, ma"es it unli"ely that indi'iduals will interrogate what it is a out their own practices that rings a out such a s"ewed demographic. In short, while

lac" and rown fol"s ha'e less than whites, on a'erage, ecause they deser'e less. Although

progressi'e formations should almost instincti'ely recoil from o'erwhelming whiteness B since it li"ely signals serious failings in coalition- uilding, strategy and tactics, as well
as utter o li'iousness to the way in which we>re going a out our usiness and ase- uilding B li eral-left

color lindness trades this critical introspection for a land and dispassionate nonchalance. .Oh well,0 some will say, .We put up signs and sent out e-mails, and we can>t control who comes to the
meetingsCralliesCprotests and who doesn>t.0 Dnd of story, end of pro lem. /o in the case of progressi'e organizing,

color lindness means we>ll ignore the o 'ious @uestions we should e as"ing when trying to ensure a more representati'e and di'erse mo'ement for change. 7amely, @uestions li"e: When are the organizing meetings eing held and where? Are people of color in on the planning at the eginning, or merely added to the agenda after the fact, as spea"ers at the rally or some such thing? Are we organizing mostly online (which means we>ll miss a lot of fol"s of color who don>t ha'e regular internet access6, or really uilding relationships across physical lines of community? Are we spea"ing to the immediate concerns in communities of color , and lin"ing these to whate'er issue we>re
organizing around (more on this elow6? D'en cultural issues come into play. After all, if you>re trying to uild a multiracial formation for social 8ustice, or multiracial antiwar coalition, or mo'ement for ecological sanity, you

can>t e'ince a cultural style at e'ery e'ent that reflects what white fol"s may e comforta le with ut which might seem distant to fol"s of color. /o, for instance, to sing the same fol" songs at a rally that you were
singing forty years ago, or to come to an antiwar rally dec"ed out in tie-dye, ut not to include the music and styles of youth of color influenced y hip-hop, is to ensure the permanent marginality of your mo'ement in the eyes of lac" and rown fol"s (and truthfully, young people of all colors6. *ut simply, freedom songs today are and must e different than in the si9ties. &ut too often white-dominated li

eral-left e'ents and organizations resem le holdo'ers from an earlier time, rather than a mo'ement that has grown to include multiple 'oices, styles and cultural norms.
This is what happens when we don>t pay attention to, or care enough a out, who is included and who isn>t at the ta le. It is the result, at least in part, of li eral-left color lindness.

The colormuteness of social movements reinforces racial divisions and ignores root causes Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* %i eral $olormuteness and the *erpetuation of Racism &ut as trou ling as color lindness can e when e'inced y li erals, colormuteness may e e'en worse. $olormuteness comes into play in the way many on the white li eral-left fail to gi'e 'oice to the connections etween a gi'en issue a out which they are passionate, and the issue of racism and racial ine@uity. /o, for instance, when planet in

en'ironmental acti'ists focus on the harms of pollution to the the a stract, or to non-human species, ut largely ignore the day-to-day en'ironmental

issues facing people of color, li"e disproportionate e9posure to lead paint, or municipal, medical and to9ic waste, they marginalize lac" and rown fol"s within the mo'ement, and in so doing, reinforce racial di'ision and ine@uity. %i"ewise, when climate change acti'ists focus on the ecological costs of glo al warming, ut fail
to discuss the way in which climate change disproportionately affects people of color around the glo e, they undermine the a ility of the green mo'ement to gain strength, and they reinforce white pri'ilege. <ow

many climate change acti'ists, for instance, really connect the dots etween glo al warming and racism ? D'en as people of color are twice as li"ely as whites to li'e in the congested communities that e9perience the most smog and to9ic concentration than"s to fossil fuel use? D'en as heat wa'es connected to climate change "ill people of color at twice the rate of their white counterparts? D'en as agricultural disruptions due to warming B caused disproportionately y the white west B cost African nations YJLL illion annually? D'en as the contri ution to fossil fuel emissions y people of color is !L percent elow that of whites, on a'erage? /adly, these facts are typically su ordinated within climate acti'ism to simple .the world is ending0 rhetoric , or predictions (accurate though they may e6 that unless emissions are rought under control glo al warming will e'entually "ill millions. )act is, warming is "illing a lot of people now, and most of them are lac" and rown. To uild a glo al mo'ement to roll ac" the ecological catastrophe facing us, en'ironmentalists and clean energy ad'ocates must connect the dots etween planetary destruction and the real li'es eing destroyed currently, which are disproportionately of color. To do anything less is not only to engage in a form of racist marginalizing of people of color and their concerns, ut is to wea"en the fight for sur'i'al. The same is true for other issues, such as health care, where to ignore the specific racial aspects of the su 8ect, as so many li erals and progressi'es do, is to further a form of color lind racism. /o, for instance, in the American health care de ate, reform proponents typically focus on uni'ersal co'erage alone, without addressing the way that e'en people of color with co'erage recei'e inferior and often racist care, and the way that their e9periences with racism (e'en if they ha'e insurance6 ha'e health conse@uences that uni'ersal co'erage cannot sol'e. To elie'e that uni'ersal co'erage or e'en .single
payer0 could close racial health gaps etween whites and people of color is to ignore the research on the primary causes of those gaps: research that says money and access are not the principal pro lems. In fact, to e lind to the importance of racism within the health care de ate is to commit a huge strategic lunder as well. After all, research

suggests that one of the principal reasons that the -nited /tates has such a paltry social safety net (including less comprehensi'e health care guarantees than those in other western industrialized nations 6 is ecause of a common elief that .those people0 (meaning people of color6 will ta"e unfair ad'antage of such programs. /o to not connect the dots etween the nation>s ro"en health care system and racism is to miss one of the main reasons we>re in such a position in the first placeQ Their movement is the manifestation of white privilege . coalitions are impossible without confronting racism Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* &latant White *ri'ilege and *erspecti'ism on the %eft &ut more distur ing than either li eral-left color lindness or colormuteness is the

manifestation of latant white pri'ilege y those who claim to e progressi'e. Whereas color lindness and colormuteness on the left stem largely from ignorance on the part of otherwise well-intended persons, this final aspect of li eral-left racism is far more pernicious, ecause it is so often assaulti'e and the result of seemingly deli erate indifference to people of color. *erhaps the
classic e9ample of how li eral-left acti'ists can manifest white pri'ilege is that of the white-dominated women>s mo'ement. Although women of color ha'e long engaged in feminist theorizing, acti'ism and ad'ocacy, the predominant

strain of American feminism B and that which has een largely responsi le for setting the political agenda for women>s issues for the past fi'e decades B has een disproportionately white. As such, the way in which that part of the mo'ement framed issues, and made their case to an oftentimes hostile pu lic, reflected first and foremost the concerns of white (and, it should e noted, middle-class6 women. Thus, to frame the fight for women>s li eration as a fight for the right to a career and to rea" free from the chains of domesticity (as was so central to the early feminist writings of women li"e &etty )riedan6, presupposed that women were not currently wor"ing outside the home. &ut of course, most women of color in the -nited /tates had always wor"ed outside the home (as well as in it6 and so the struggle as articulated in oo"s li"e The )eminine =ysti@ue was implicitly white, and of little 'alue to women of color whose li'ed realities were different. D'en the notion of .sisterhood0 so central to /econd-Wa'e white feminism was largely e9clusionary to women of color, who readily pointed out (and still do6 how racism and white pri'ilege limit the e9tent to which they ha'e een treated as true sisters, or heard as mem ers of the larger community of women. %i"ewise, in the struggle o'er reproducti'e freedom and choice, li eral white feminists ha'e often een @uic"er to support women who see" to terminate pregnancies than to support women who are ha'ing their a ility to choose motherhood restricted: women who are disproportionately of color. /o

when thousands of lac" and 7ati'e American women were eing in'oluntarily sterilized throughout the !Lth century (right up until the 21KLs6 B as discussed y Thomas /hapiro in his 21FM oo", *opulation $ontrol *olitics, and <arriet Washington in her !LLJ award-winning 'olume, =edical Apartheid B few in the white feminist community made the restriction of their reproducti'e freedom a central issue. %i"ewise, in 2112 when neo-7azi (and state legislator6 +a'id +u"e proposed ri ing women on welfare
to use 7OR*%A7T contracepti'e inserts as a way to control their fertility B and this he did, of course, for latantly racist reasons, as his anti-welfare rhetoric made clear B %ouisiana>s largest and most mainstream li eral pro-choice coalition

&y disregarding the li'ed realities of people of color in this way, li eral-left acti'ists ele'ate a destructi'e white perspecti'ism to the le'el of un@uestioned and unassaila le uni'ersal truth, and reinscri e the concerns of whites as those of paramount importance. The same phenomenon can e o ser'ed in a range of li eral(an affiliate of 7ARA%6 refused to ta"e a pu lic stand against the proposed legislation (!6. left mo'ements and issue causes. Among these one would ha'e to again consider the en'ironmental mo'ement, in which large num ers of otherwise li eral types in the /ierra $lu ha'e for years een pushing latantly 9enopho ic and racist resolutions against immigration from south of the -nited /tates order. Or, in the case of the 7ew Orleans area /ierra $lu , e9tending a .legislati'e leadership0 award to the /t. &ernard *arish *resident B so as to honor him for his wor" on wetlands restoration B e'en as he was also one of the main proponents of a . lood relati'e renter law0 passed after #atrina, which would ha'e made it almost impossi le for lac"s to return to the *arish and rent there. In fact, the *arish *resident e'en went to court to defend the law B which would ha'e arred renting property to anyone who wasn>t a lood relati'e in this 1MU white *arish B despite its o 'ious racist intent. &ut to the white /ierra $lu leadership, his racism was unimportant. What mattered was his record on wetlands alone. Or consider animal rights acti'ists, especially the fol"s at *DTA, who seem to go out of their way to appropriate the suffering of racialized minorities (as with their infamous .<olocaust on Oour *late,0 and .Are Animals the 7ew /la'es?0 campaigns, the latter of which compared factory farming to the lynching of lac"s6. While trying to ma"e a perfectly legitimate point a out the way that cruelty to non-human animals contri utes to an ethic of e9ploitation that is connected to cruelty to humans, such efforts disregard or minimize the suffering of racialized minorities, e9ploit that suffering to score cheap emotional points, and do all of this with little or no regard for the strategic wisdom of alienating millions of people deli erately. After all, to say (as *DTA chief Ingrid 7ew"ir" has6 that .At least the 7azis didn>t eat the o 8ects of their derision0 as a way to con'ince people of the wisdom of 'egetarianism, suggests not only a le'el of indecency and a lac" of perspecti'e that is distur ing, ut more to the point, a strategic incompetence so mind- oggling as to defy rational description. Or consider the struggle for %4&T rights and e@uality. <istorically,

the role of people of color in the mo'ement and %4&T community has een largely ignored, and the struggle for @ueer li eration has een considera ly whitewashed. )rom the whitening of the /tonewall Riots B considered the first sal'o in the gay li mo'ement, in
which *uerto Rican drag @ueens and trans fol" li"e /yl'ia Ri'era played a central role, although mainstream white li eral remem rances of the e'ent often o scure this fact B to the current focus on marriage e@uality, acti'ists within the %4&T community ha'e presented a largely white face for the mo'ement. The

cele rities who front the mo'ement

are white, the pu

lications and media that are used to define the community to the larger society are white and affluent

in orientation, and the

desire of much of the %4&T acti'ist community to present an image of normalcy (as ased on a white middle class understanding of what constitutes normal. While les ian, gay, ise9ual and transgendered fol"s of color ha'e long spo"en out against
in, .we>re 8ust li"e straight fol"s06 is their marginalization within the larger mo'ement for @ueer li eration, the conflict etween whites and people of color in the mo'ement has een ele'ated e'en more so during the fight for marriage e@uality. After the passage of *roposition F in $alifornia B which anned gay marriage B many within the white %4&T community lamed lac"s for the outcome.

Although lac" support for the measure was higher than that for whites, early reports of KL percent appro'al in the African American community were dramatically inflated and ased on a small num er of precincts. And since lac"s only comprise a small share of the electorate in $alifornia, to lame the lac" community for the outcome is to ignore the much larger o'erall role played y whites in the election. &ut despite these facts, li eral %4&T acti'ists and writers li"e +an /a'age, and the leading gay pu lication, The Ad'ocate, played upon latant racial imagery in their post-*rop F discussions. The Ad'ocate actually ran a co'er story announcing that .4ay Is the 7ew &lac",0 and /a'age, for his part, launched into a thinly 'eiled racist tirade, in which he insisted that lac" homopho ia was a far greater threat to gays and les ians (presuma ly white ones, since he showed no recognition of the dou le- ind identity of @ueer fol"s of color6, than white %4&T racism was to the lac" and rown. That the Ad'ocate would float such an idea signaled the inherent whiteness of the pu lication>s perspecti'e. To suggest that gay might e the .new lac"0 ignored the fact that for millions of %4&T lac" fol"s, lac" had ne'er stopped eing an oppressed identity, and there was nothing at all .new0 a out their marginalization. As =aurice Tracy e9plained in his comprehensi'e ta"edown of the .4ay is the 7ew &lac"0 meme, .4ay can ne'er e the new lac" ecause first and foremost this phrase does not ac"nowledge the fact that there are those of us who are already gay A7+ lac". We li'e within the margins, not ecause we choose to ut ecause society places us there.0 And as for laming the lac" community for the result on *rop F, Tracy noted, .people who attended church regularly, regardless of race, were the ones who o'erwhelmingly supported *rop. F. Therefore, what we ha'e here is not a case of P lac" homopho ia> ut religious homopho ia. P&lac" culture> therefore ecame an easy target for the lazy indi'idual. The fact is that lac" culture is homopho ic ecause America is homopho ic.0 4i'en the almost non-e9istent outreach to the lac" community y the .7o <Fi campaign B and the way in which the campaign relied on white cele rities and entertainers to ma"e the pu lic case for them B it is hardly surprising that African Americans may ha'e come to see the %4&T struggle in $alifornia as a white one, di'orced from their day-to-day concerns. &ut that is not the fault of people of color. Rather, the responsi ility for this unhappy outcome rests almost entirely with the white-dominated %4&T mo'ement, whose principal organizations (li"e the <uman Rights $ampaign6 ha'e only nominal people of color in'ol'ement at the top le'els of policy and decision ma"ing. As %.g. 4randerson noted in his re uttal to the .4ay is the 7ew &lac"0 notion, at the !LLF <R$ national fundraiser in +.$., the only lac" people who appeared on the stage in the entire three hour program were there as entertainers. D'en the way in which mainstream male .gayness0 has een constructed in the mass media (with the open colla oration of persons within the gay community6, as a compendium of .fa ulousness,0 materialism, fashion, and a uni@ue a ility to design one>s home interior (or get fa'ora le co'erage and shout-outs on the &ra'o 7etwor"6, alienates those who for reasons of race (and class status6 ha'e een left out of the reigning imagery of what constitutes Pgay chic.> Oth er

e9amples of li eral-left marginalizing of fol"s of colors> concerns B and thus, people of color themsel'es B include the way many progressi'es see" to consciously downplay the role of race and racism in particular political struggles, e'en when such matters are central to the issue at hand. )or instance, during the mid-211Ls de ate o'er welfare reform, mainstream li erals and progressi'e policy ad'ocates often engaged the assault on poor fol"s without discussing the latantly racist component of the antiwelfare hysteria that had, y that point, gripped the nation for se'eral decades. At a national conference organized
y the $enter on &udget and *olicy *riorities B in which progressi'e messaging around udget, ta9 and welfare issues was eing plotted and planned B white li erals at the upper echelons of the organization resisted any discussion of racism as a central moti'ator for the conser'ati'e attac", or using antiracist organizing strategies as a mechanism of resistance. When the su 8ect was raised, y myself and se'eral others (all of us, interestingly, southerners6, the response was dismissi'e. We were assured that ringing up racism was a sure-fire way to lose the fight. We had to stic" to de un"ing common anti-welfare myths and appealing to white people. &ringing up racism would only distract from that goal, we were told, and pro'o"e more ac"lash. The needs and interests of whites were what mattered. 7ot

only did the strategy of course fail, ut in refusing to openly engage racism, progressi'e acti'ists forfeited the opportunity to uild coalitions across lines of race and class: coalitions that may ha'e pro'en empowering in years to come . And
y allowing welfare critics to a'oid eing confronted y the racism that was so inherent to their position, li eral organizations allowed those critics to remain ehind a 'eil of innocence and denial that, if anything, strengthened their resol'e. As I discuss in my newest oo", $olor lind, e'idence

from the field of psychology suggests it is etter to openly confront racism and call it out B e'en at the ris" of causing short-term ac"lash and anger B as doing so forces those eing called out to contemplate their real moti'ations, and occasionally to rethin" their positions, once confronted with the possi ility that those moti'ations are less pure than they had imagined. When racism is allowed to remain su limated and su tle, and isn>t called out directly, it is actually more capa le

of controlling indi'idual and collecti'e eha'ior. The same pro

lem emerged in the mid-to-late 1Ls in $alifornia and Washington /tate, when white-dominated li eral acti'ists and campaigners were trying to sa'e affirmati'e action from allot initiati'es that sought to eliminate it. In oth cases, despite the o 'ious centrality of white racial resentment to the issue, organizers a'oided discussing racism, either as a moti'ator for the anti-affirmati'e action mo'ement, or e'en as a reason for why affirmati'e action was still needed and should e defended. Rather, they chose to focus on the impact to women as women (and especially white women6 if affirmati'e action were ended. &elie'ing B against all e'idence to the contrary B that this self-interest focus and color lind approach would e the est way to con'ince whites to oppose the initiati'es, these acti'ists marginalized the concerns of people of color, pri'ileged white interests and narrati'es, and wea"ened what could otherwise ha'e een long-term cross-racial coalitions. The strategy not only failed ut furthered white pri'ilege and racism within the li eral community and dro'e wedges etween forces that should ha'e and could ha'e een wor"ing together.

"ommunisms is class reductionism . discussing racism first is a prere;uisite to class revolution Wise '- anti-racist acti'ist and author, former ad8unct faculty mem er at the /mith $ollege /chool for /ocial Wor"
(Time Wise, 2K August !L2L, .With )riends %i"e These, Who 7eeds 4lenn &ec"? Racism and White *ri'ilege on the %i eral-%eft,0 http:CCwww.timwise.orgC!L2LCLFCwith-friends-li"e-these-who-needs-glenn- ec"-racism-and-whitepri'ilege-on-the-li eral-leftC6CC#* $lass-&ased Reductionism on the %eft *erhaps the

most common way in which fol"s on the left sometimes perpetuate racism is y a 'ulgar form of class reductionism, in which they ad'ance the notion that racism is a secondary issue to the class system, and that what leftists and radicals should e doing is spending more time focusing on the fight for dramatic and transformati'e economic change (whether reformist or re'olutionary6, rather than engaging in what they derisi'ely term .identity politics.0 The pro lem, say these 'oices, are corporations, the rich, the elite, etc., and to get sidetrac"ed into a discussion of white supremacy is to ignore this fact and wea"en the mo'ement for radical change. &ut in fact, racism affects the li'es of people of color @uite apart from the class system. &lac" and rown fol"s who are not poor or wor"ing class B indeed those who are upper middle class and affluent B are still su 8ected to discrimination regularly ,
whether in the housing mar"et, on the part of police, in schools, in the health care deli'ery system and on the 8o . True enough, these etter-off fol"s of color may e more economically sta le that their poor white counterparts, ut in the class system they

compete for stuff against whites in the same economic strata : a competition in which they operate at a decided and unfair disad'antage. /o too, poor and wor"ing class whites, though they suffer the indignities of the class system, still ha'e decided ad'antages o'er poor and wor"ing class people of color: their spells of unemployment are typically far shorter, their a ility to find afforda le and decent
housing is far greater, and they are less li"ely to find themsel'es in resource-poor schools than e'en lac"s and %atinos in middle class families. In fact, lower

income whites are more li"ely to own their own home than middle class lac"s, and most poor whites in the -./. do not li'e in poor neigh orhoods B rather they are mostly to e found in middle class communities where opportunities are far greater B whereas most poor people of color are surrounded y concentrated po'erty . And lac" fol"s with college degrees,
professional occupational status and health insurance co'erage actually ha'e worse health outcomes than white dropouts, with low income and low-le'el if any medical care, than"s to racism in health care deli'ery and lac" e9periences with racism, which ha'e uni@uely de ilitating health affects at all income le'els. To

ignore the uni@ue depri'ations of racism (as with se9ism, heterose9ism, a leism, etc6 so as to forward a white-friendly class analysis is inherently marginalizing to the li'ed e9perience of lac" and rown fol"s in the -nited /tates. And what>s more, to ignore racism is to actually wea"en the struggle for class unity and economic transformation. Research on this matter is crystal clear: it is in large measure due to racism B and the desire of wor"ing class whites to maintain a sense of superiority o'er wor"ers of color, as a .psychological wage0 when real wages and enefits ha'e pro'en inade@uate B that has di'ided the wor"ing class. It is this holding onto the status conferred y whiteness, as a form of .alternate property0 (to paraphrase -$%A

%aw *rofessor, $heryl <arris6, which has undermined the a ility of white and of-color wor"ing people to engage in solidarity across racial lines. -nless

we discuss the way in which racism and racial ine@uity wea"ens our onds of attachment, we will ne'er e a le to forward a truly progressi'e, let alone radical politics. In other words, unless all of our organizing ecomes antiracist in terms of outreach, messaging, strategizing, and implementation, whate'er wor" we>re doing, around whate'er important issue, will e for naught. Only y uilding coalitions that loo" inward at the way racism and white pri'ilege may e operating within those formations, and that also loo" outward, at the way racism and pri'ilege affect the issue around which we>re organizing ( e that schools, health care, 8o s, ta9 e@uity, the en'ironment, %4&T rights, reproducti'e freedom, militarism or anything else6, can we hope to eat ac" the forces of reaction against which we find oursel'es arrayed. The other side has pro'en itself ready and willing to use racism to di'ide us. In response, we must commit to using antiracism as a force to unite.

,N" !TF N$ETIS"=E


%in" turn V the status @uo is ressentiment V a new whiteness o'ercomes this Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#* Royce>s final suggestion does not directly relate to wise forms of whiteness since whiteness is not literally a physical or architectural spaceBunless it applies negati'ely in that middle and upper class white

people, in particular, often ha'e poured energy and money into creating attracti'e and orderly all-white neigh orhoods. When residential gated communities first appeared in the -nited /tates in the
latter half of the nineteenth century, for e9ample, they were e9plicitly designed as 3Dnd *age !MJ5 places for wealthy (white6 people to

escape from the percei'ed ugliness and disorder of ur an (non-white6 industrializing centers.GJ And while ostensi ly not a out race, current ur an processes of eautification through the restoration of historical homes tend to e fueled y middle-to-upper class white people, whose well-organized desire for such homes sometimes mas"s an inchoate longing for a past that included white supremacy.GK With this sort of history and present, a wise whiteness should
discourage the culti'ation of white-only spaces, at least if those spaces are 'iewed through an apolitical aesthetic lens. In the case of whiteness, aesthetics rarely if e'er can e neatly separated from politics, and so the @uestion of whether a white neigh orhood is attracti'e is rarely a simple @uestion of whether its gardens ha'e weeds, its uildings are well designed and preser'ed, etc. To treat the @uestion as merely aesthetic does not eliminate its connection with political issues regarding race. It only uries those issues, allowing co'ert forms of white pri'ilege and interests to operate unchec"ed. =ore interesting, I thin", is to ta"e Royce>s final piece of ad'ice a out material adornment psychologically, rather than architecturally. (The

psyche is not di'orced from the material, after all.6 As a psycho-ontological .space,0 the souls of white fol" are fairly ugly and in need of eautification , as +u &ois tells us.
.I see these souls undressed and from the ac" and side,0 he charges, .I see the wor"ing of their entrails . . . . they preach and strut and shout and threaten, crouching as they clutch at rags of facts and fancies to hide their na"edness, they go twisting, flying y my tired eyes and I see them e'er stripped,Bugly, human.0GF And in ;ames &aldwin>s words, .the great, unadmitted crime is what 3the white man (sic65 has done to himself.0G1 While

we might thin" that white people ha'e spent too much time adorning themsel'esBfor e9ample, with praise and honors for eing the allegedly sole sources of eauty, truth, progress, democracy, and so onBthe opposite is the case. White people ha'e arely egun to adorn themsel'es with white ha its of which they can e proud. To this point, white psycho-ontological .adornment0 too often has een with the products of what /pinoza called the sad passions: fear, hate, anger, en'y, and a'ersion connected, in this case, to an9iety a out the possi ility of .contamination0 y the non-white Other.ML Or with what 7ietzsche descri ed as ressentiment, which results when a people has uilt itself up as .good0 only y first tearing another people down as .e'il.0M2 When whiteness operates with passions and resentments such as these, it is to9ic to people of other races, as well as ultimately to themsel'es. To adorn their sel'es @ua white would mean for white people to em ody 8oyful passions that would not reduce the power of other races to act and thri'e at the e9pense of white people. It would mean for white people to ecome healthy enough, in 7ietzsche>s terms, that they do not poison other races when interacting with them, ut instead can 3Dnd *age !MK5 reciprocally nourish each other. White people need to ecome more, not less .selfish0 in that they need to adorn their souls with genuine treasures, rather than counterfeit gems. Only then will they e in a psycho-ontological position that allows them to .flow ac" 3to others5 from 3their5 fountain,0 to fairly,

generously, and e'en lo'ingly engage with others rather than respond to them out of a soul-star'ed stinginess.M! The risk must be taken . transforming whiteness is necessary to create an anti0racist body Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#* While much more can and needs to e said a out how to de'elop a wise form of whiteness, the answer to the main @uestion with which I egan this essay is .yes0: the

racial category of whiteness can e concretely transformed into wise whiteness, which means that efforts to critically conser'e whiteness need not inad'ertently fuel white domination. Dfforts to reha ilitate the racial category of whiteness admittedly will e politically and e9istentially dangerous. When words such as .loyalty0 are used in the conte9t of whiteness, for e9ample, there is an ine'ita le and significant ris" that they will e heard andCor used as endorsements of white supremacy . &ut I thin" this ris" should e ta"enBindeed, that it must e ta"enB ecause e'en though there is nothing ahistorically essential a out whiteness, it is not li"ely to disappear any time soon .ME Re8ecting racial essentialism, as Royce did and most contemporary philosophers do, does not mean that pro lems associated with whiteness simply e'aporate. White people do not ha'e sole control o'er their whitenessA other racial groups ha'e contri uted and will continue to contri ute to the meaning of whiteness.MG &ut white people are uni@uely responsi le for their whiteness. The @uestion for them thus is how will they ta"e up that responsi ility. And Royce>s essay on
pro'incialism can help them egin to figure out an answer.

,N" !TF #A$%T +!&


Our goal is not to create guilt . instead4 whiteness must be transformed . guilt leads to moral paralysis Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#*

I deli erately ha'e refrained from using the term .guilt0 when s"etching the contours of white humility. While white people ha'e a 'iolent history (and sometimes present6 as a race and continue to enefit 3Dnd *age !M25 from economic, psychological, geographical, and other forms of racial pri'ilege, I do not thin" that guilt is the most helpful way to respond to white supremacy and hegemony. In part, this is ecause white guilt tends to direct white people to their feelings in a non-producti'e way. %et me ela orate this point. /ome critical race theorists, such as Ignatie', ha'e suggested that anti-racist wor"shops for white people are pro lematic ecause they tend to focus on helping white people feel good a out themsel'es rather than on political struggle against racism.E! I disagree that white people>s feelings a out their whiteness are irrele'ant to anti-racist struggle, ut I agree that such struggle is the point. White guilt tends to produce a self-focused, emotional wallowing that distracts white people from political struggle while ma"ing it seem as if they are doing something to counter racism .EE A related reason that I do not descri e white humility in terms of guilt is that white guilt can produce a "ind of moral paralysis in white people , especially with regard to issues of race. )eeling guilty a out past oppression of non-white people and the ongoing racial pri'ileges they en8oy, white people sometimes feel demoralized and unworthy and thus incapa le of ma"ing moral 8udgments a out racial matters since
they are tainted y their whiteness. Indeed, /hel y /teele has gone so far as to define white guilt as .the 'acuum of moral authority that comes from simply "nowing that one>s race is associated with racism.0EG /teele argues that white

people today who ac"nowledge the e9istence of white racism .step into a 'oid of 'ulnera ilityellipsis3that5 lea'es no room for moral choice .0EM One could say that white guilt hum les white people, ut it does so y .o ligat3ing5 3them5 to lac" people ecause they needed the moral authority only lac" people could estow.0EJ This "ind of humility merely re'erses the pre'ious situation in which only white people could ha'e moral authority . While that re'ersal might seem li"e a good de'elopment from an anti-racist perspecti'e, it tends to ma"e lac" and other non-white people solely responsi le for white redemption and deli'erance from racism. /teele>s analysis of white guilt and racial discrimination more roadly is pro lematic in se'eral ways, including
its atomistic indi'idualism and dismissal of systemic racism. &ut /teele accurately portrays a danger that faces many antiracist white people and that a wise whiteness should a'oid. -nderstood as ta"ing responsi ility for past and present forms of white oppression of non-white people, then white guilt surely has a role to play in wise whiteness. &ut if

white guilt translates into the ina ility to ma"e moral and other 8udgments if issues of race are in'ol'ed, it undermines white attempts to fight racism. If white humility is to support those efforts, it cannot ta"e the form of duc"ing o ligation to ma"e decisions a out racial matters and positing non-white people as the only possi le moral agents, especially when it comes to race. 3Dnd *age !M!5 =y claim that white people should accept their moral agency in racial
situations does not mean that anti-racist white people always "now what the right thing is to do or that their decisions necessarily will produce anti-racist effects. Refusing

to e paralyzed y guilt does not guarantee that a white person won>t do something intended to reduce racism that she later will 8udge to e a mista"e. And that is o"ayBnot ecause acts with unforeseen racist effects are

desira le, ut ecause a wise form of whiteness needs to challenge the @uests for purity and control that are at the heart of white pri'ilege and domination. A wise whiteness should see" to .trou le the e9pectation that we 3white people5 can "now e9actly what will count as antiracist in e'ery situation and thus can always act lamelessly .0EK White people
often are unsure how to ma"e a right decision when in'ol'ed in a situation infused with race and they nonetheless are responsi le for ma"ing the est possi le decision that they can.

,N" !TF D$O%EN"E +!&


6ear of violence is a conservative political maneuver .the ;uestion is not whether or not there will be violence but whether it will be directed at an un1ust social order

Wilderson ,-'' ()ran" &., -ni'ersity of $alifornia Ir'ine V African American /tudiesC+rama
+epartment, .The :engeance of :ertigo: Aphasia and A 8ection in the *olitical Trials of &lac" Insurgents0, InTensions ;ournal, Issue M, )allCWinter !L22- 3/456

=any pacifist scholars and acti'ists consider the strategies and tactics of armed re'olutionaries in )irst World countries to e short-sighted ursts of narcissism.9'ii What pacifist detractors forget, howe'er, is that for 4ramsci, the strategy of a War of *osition is one of commandeering ci'ic and political spaces one trench at a time in order to turn those spaces into pedagogic locales for the dispossessedA and this process is one which com ines peaceful as well as 'iolent tactics as it mo'es the struggle closer to an all-out 'iolent assault on the state. The &%A and their White re'olutionary co-defendants may ha'e een etter 4ramscians than those who
criti@ue them through the lens of 4ramsci. Their tactics (and y tactics I mean armed struggle as well as courtroom

If the end-game of 4ramscian struggle is the isolation and emasculation of the ruling classes> ensem le of @uestions, as a way to alter the structure of feeling of the dispossessed so that the ne9t step, the 'iolent o'erthrow of the state, doesn>t feel li"e such a monumental underta"ing, then I would argue the pedagogic 'alue of retaliating against police y "illing one of them each time they "ill a &lac" person, the e9propriating of an" funds from armored cars in order to further finance armed struggle as well as community pro8ects such as acupuncture clinics in the &ron9 where drug addicts could get clean, and the om ing of ma8or centers of -./. commerce and go'ernance, followed y trials in which the defendants used the ma8ority of the trial to criti@ue the go'ernment rather than plead their case, ha'e as much if not more pedagogic 'alue than peaceful protest. In other words, if not for the .pathological pacifism0 ($hurchill6 which clouds political de ate and scholarly analysis there would e no @uestion that the &%A, ha'ing not e'en read 4ramsci,9'iii were among the est 4ramscian theorists the -./. has e'er "nown . &ut though the &%A were great 4ramscian theorists, they could not ecome 4ramscian su 8ects. The political character of one>s actions is ine9trica ly ound to the political status of one>s su 8ecti'ityA and while this status goes without saying for 4il ert and $lar", it is always in @uestion for &alagoon and &u"hari. 3EG5 <ow does one cali rate the gap etween o 8ecti'e 'ertigo and the need to e producti'e as a &lac" re'olutionary? What is the political significance of restoring alance to the inner ear? Is tyranny of closure the only outcome of such inter'entions or could restoration of the &lac" su 8ect>s inner ear, while failing at the le'el of conceptual framewor", pro'ide something necessary, though intangi le, at the le'el of lood and sweat political acti'ism? These unanswered @uestions haunt
performances6 were no less effecti'e at winning hearts and minds than candle light 'igils and .orderly0 protests. this article. Though I ha'e erred in this article on the side of paradigm as opposed to pra9is, and cautioned against

we are etter political thin"ersBif not actorsBas a result of what they did with their odies, e'en if we still don>t "now what to do with ours. _
assuming that we "now or can "now what the har'est of their sacrifice was, I elie'e

,N" !TF #EN&E


Simply adding race into their gender movement fails +roeck '' professor of American /tudies at the -ni'ersity of &remen. <er teaching and research focuses on the
intersections of race, class, gender and se9ualities, on lac" diaspora studies, on the theorization of sla'ery, and on the decolonial criti@ue of transatlantic modernity (/a ine, IDnsla'ement as Regime of Western =odernity: Re-reading 4ender /tudies Dpistemology Through &lac" )eminist $riti@ue,I 22C2MC22, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageC roec"Rsla'ery.modernity.pdf6CCA= Thistlewood, the &ritish sla'eholder who wrote an e9tensi'e and self-indulgent account of W his practice as an early modern owner of human eings on his plantation in ;amaica, here stands W in for the

masterful regime of 7ew World sla'ery in its insepara le connection to early modernW in'estments in white western ci'ilization, to wit, <artmanHs o9ymoronic con8unction of o scenityW and %atin, 'ia the tie-in of I rutalI. As a
cautionary tale, ThistlewoodHs recollection - though easilyW despica le - amounts to @uite a challenge for a white community of readers. &ecauseW Thistlewood, if read epistemologically, not ethnographically, or Hhistorically,HH calls

white readersW into a profound dis-identiScation with humanitiesH tra8ectories rooted in modern DnlightenmentHsW premises. ThistlewoodHs freedom to transgress against human eings turns out to
e @uiteW commensurate with modern notions of the so'ereign su 8ect - e'en though a olitionism duly used W his writing as the "ind of propagandistic pornography <artman also dissects. As <artman argues, W the sla'e arracoon must e loo"ed at not 8ust as a holding cell, ut more importantly, as aW modern episteme which controlled as well the practices of history, and collecti'e white memory,W creating a Isecond order of 'iolenceI which reached far into a olition. (!LLKCF, M6 )aced with theW regime of this episteme, <artmanHs,

/pillersH and =orrisonHs wor" , among others, urges 4enderW /tudies to mo'e away from ene'olently thin"ing a out race, as in Iadd raceI to postmodernW thin"ing a out the modern self, for the formation of which the gendering of su 8ects - male andW female- was essential. Instead, we need to discuss the modern gendered su 8ect as situated in aW ne9us of property 'ersus so'ereignlessness, to ta"e <artman and &estHs term, (as the sine @uaW non of lac" human eings6, of lac"ness as a 8ection outside all the deSning categories ofW modernity. Thus, <artmanHs @uestion ecomes: <ow does the recognition of the creation ofW
so'ereignlessness I etter ena le us to chart the relation etween pasts and presents, to thin"W a out the relation etween capitalism and sla'ery and the dilemmas of the presentI (!LLJ, 2!6?W That is to say, for me the founding difference of early modern Duro-American societies wasW su 8ect 'ersus a 8ect, of so'ereign self 'ersus so'ereignlessness, of thinged property 'ersus theW su 8ectA gender as modern category, comes to Sgure within that economy, that epistemology, as W precisely a category to negotiate, for white Duropean and -/ women, towards a status of W so'ereignty, su 8ecti'ity and property rights.

#ender criti;ues are inherently white and ignore and e*clude the struggles black women have faced +roeck '' professor of American /tudies at the -ni'ersity of &remen. <er teaching and research focuses on the
intersections of race, class, gender and se9ualities, on lac" diaspora studies, on the theorization of sla'ery, and on the decolonial criti@ue of transatlantic modernity (/a ine, IDnsla'ement as Regime of Western =odernity: Re-reading 4ender /tudies Dpistemology Through &lac" )eminist $riti@ue,I 22C2MC22, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageC roec"Rsla'ery.modernity.pdf6CCA= The point I want to ma"e is not that African societies did not organize themsel'es around different cultural social and economic interpellations for men and women, neither that in new world sla'ery, and colonial societies female eings were not su 8ected to particular politics and practices - most importantly - rape, and the theft of motherhood. <owe'er, as /pillers has argued, and as <artmanHs te9ts illuminate, ensla'ed

African-origin female eings ne'er @ualiSed as women ( ecause of their non-humanness, it followed logically6 in the DuroAmerican modern world, and therefore were not interpellated to parta"e in the ongoing social construction and contestation of gender. The point I do want to ma"e is that gender - a

category that would ha'e ena led a lac" female claim on social negotiations did not apply to HthingsH, to what was constructed as and treated as human hesh . =oreo'er, that 'ery category gender emerged in western transatlantic rhetoric precisely in the conte9t of creating a space for white women, who refused to e treated li"e sla'es, li"e things. =odern gender, with early modern
feminism, constituted itself discursi'ely precisely in the shift from 2Fth century female a olitionist $hristian empathy with the ensla'ed to the paradigmatic separation of women from sla'es, a process that repeated itself in the late 21th century American negotiations of, and etween, a olitionism and suffrage. The long history in the western transatlantic world - consistently

fact that lac" women ha'e - in their fought for an access to the category gender to e a le to occupy a space of articulation at all, most famously, of course, in 21th century /o8ourner TruthHs angrily su 'ersi'e e9clamation IAm I not a woman and a sister?I, does not alter the structural complicity of gender as a category with the formation of the so'ereign modern white self. That is to say to ha'e, or to e of female gender which could claim and deser'ed certain "inds of rights, and treatment, sta"ed the claim of white 2Fth century women to full human su 8ecti'ity, as opposed to thingness . The infamous and 'ery persistent use of the analogy of women and sla'es (&roec"6 pro'ided a spring oard for white women to egin theorizing a catalogue of their own demands for
an ac"nowledgement of modern, free su 8ecti'ity as antagonistic to ensla'ementA as a discursi'e construct, then,

modern gender ser'ed the differentiation of human from property. White )eminism and gender theory ha'e thus played acti'e roles in the constitution of modern societies as we "now them that need far more rehection in shaping and negotiating the e9pectations of how to do gender properly, e'en in its critical modes - roles that were claimed rather rarely in
con8unction with, or ased on an ac"nowledgment of lac" peopleHs agency. To me, the corruption inherent in this history demands a rac"eting of the category gender, a coupling of it to that history to lose its innocence. =a"ing this "ind of connection will also support 4ender /tudies to go eyond the epistemologically restricti'e gender-race analogy which Sred white female a olitionism - an ideological position that is untena le for gender studies in a de-colonial moment.

!n add0on approach toward race in gender movements fails to overcome anti0blackness4 instead adopting Gabolitionist benevolenceH which cant resolve our impacts +roeck '' professor of American /tudies at the -ni'ersity of &remen. <er teaching and research focuses on the
intersections of race, class, gender and se9ualities, on lac" diaspora studies, on the theorization of sla'ery, and on the decolonial criti@ue of transatlantic modernity (/a ine, IDnsla'ement as Regime of Western =odernity: Re-reading 4ender /tudies Dpistemology Through &lac" )eminist $riti@ue,I 22C2MC22, https:CCeee.uci.eduC2!wC!!MLLChomepageC roec"Rsla'ery.modernity.pdf6CCA= (White6 4ender

/tudies may decide to rehect self-critically on its own em eddedness in the Dnlightenment proposal of human freedom which strategically split a certain group of humans, namely ensla'ed African-origin people, from the constituti'e freedom to possess themsel'es and as such, from any access to su 8ecti'ity, which entailed, as <ortense /pillers a o'e all has argued, a splitting of African-origin women from gender. If, thus, the "nowledge of the sla'e trade and sla'ery
will ecome the site of a re-reading of Dnlightenment, modernity and postmodernity, a re'ised theoretical, and material approach to an epistemology of emancipation li"e 4ender /tudies will e possi le. 4ender

/tudies, too, li'es Iin the time of sla'ery,I in the Ifuture created y itI (<artman !LLK, 2EE6. It is the economic, cultural and
epistemic regime of human commodiScation, that transgressi'e ne9us of 'iolence, desire and property which Srst formed the horizon of the Duro-American modernity that -/ and Duropean intellectuals, including 4ender /tudies, ha'e "nown and claimed. The

DnlightenmentHs proposal of human su 8ecti'ity and rights which was in fact inscri ed into the world the sla'e trade and sla'ery had made (&lac" urn6, created a 'ertical structure of access claims to self-representation and social participation from which African-origin people, as hereditary commodities, were a priori a 8ected. It is on the asis of that a 8ection, that the category of woman, of gender as a framewor" to negotiate the

social, cultural and economic position of white Duropean women was created . To accept that
the 'ery constitution of gender as a term in Duropean early modernity was tied to a social, cultural and political system which constituti'ely pre-Sgured Iwasted li'es,I and an e9treme precariousness of what constitutes human e9istence, throws contemporary notions of gendered su 8ecti'ity into star" relief. <artmanHs wor", therefore, may e read as 8ust as a9iomatic as &aumanHs, &utlerHs or Agam enHs in measuring postmodern glo al challenges to critical theory. Dlaine /caryHs, /usan /ontagHs inter'entions on pain and 'oyeurism, and /pillersH or WoodHs considerations, more speciScally, on the se9ualized campaigns of Anglo-American a olition, ha'e compounded the challenge for an epistemology of sla'ery as a modern episteme not to recycle a olitionist titillation - the ris" to ecome part of a second order a olitionist discourse must, howe'er, e run. To

play an acti'e role in the pro8ect of decolonizing (post6modern critical theory, gender studies need to ac"nowledge and rec"on with lac" de-colonial feminist inter'entions eyond add-on approaches. Those inter'entions will ena le an epistemic turn away from the solipsistic @uasi uni'ersal presentism of much of contemporary theory, and ma"e it answera le to its own inde tedness to the history of early modern Durope, and the 7ew World. <artmanHs and /pillerHs te9ts, as well as =orrisonHs writing ecome something li"e deconstructi'e guides: we are eing as"ed to loo", and listen with lac" womenHs perspecti'es - ut at the same time the te9ts fold ac" on themsel'es, and thus on our readingA they disrupt a smooth appropriation of suffering, they derail us from a swift hate for the Thistlewoods (=other, J26. Those te9ts under scrutiny here do enact a "ind of self-conscious parasitism, forcing readers into complicity - ut they refuse to do it innocently, disrupting a renewed ta"e on sla'ery y way of a olitionist ene'olence. They teach readers that the oundaries of the archi'e cannot e
trespassed at will, and without conse@uenceA and they also teach us to respect what <artman calls, with )red =oten, I lac" noiseI (!LLF, 2!6.

,N" !TF

!"E $SNT ONTO%O#$"!%

Whiteness Supremacy is affectively and discursively produced . it circulates through an assumed grammar that produces +lackness as ontologically ab1ect.

8ancy 9: (4eorge, Associate *rofessor of *hilosophy at +u@uesne -ni'ersity and $oordinator of the
$ritical Race Theory /pea"er /eries, .Whiteness and the Return of the &lac" &ody0, The ;ournal of /peculati'e *hilosophy 21.G (!LLM6 !2M-!G2, Accessed 'ia *ro8ect =use, 3/456

The urden of the white gaze disrupts my first-person "nowledge, causing Idifficulties in the de'elopment of 3my5 odily schemaI (22L6. The white gaze constructs the &lac" ody into Ian o 8ect in
the midst of other o 8ectsI (2L16. The nonthreatening III of my normal, e'eryday ody schema ecomes the threatening IhimI of the 7egro "indCtype. -nder pressure, the corporeal schema collapses. It gi'es way to a racial epidermal schema.J I&elow the corporeal schema,I writes )anon, II had s"etched a historico-racial schema. The elements that I used had een pro'ided for me not y Hresidual sensations and perceptions of a primarily tactile, 'esti ular, "inesthetic, and 'isual character,H ut y the other, the white man 3woman5I (2226. In other words, )anon

egan to IseeI himself through the lens of a historico-racial schema. 7ote that there was nothing intrinsic to his physiology that forced his corporeal schema to collapseA it was the I&lac" odyI as always already named and made sense of within the conte9t of a larger semiotics of pri'ileged white odies that pro'ided him with the tools for self-hatred. <is Idar"ness,I a
naturally occurring phenomenon,K ecame historicized, residing within the pur'iew of the white gaze, a phenomenal space created and sustained y socioepistemic and semiotic communal constitutionality. On this score, the &lac" ody is placed within the space of constitutionality 'is-T-'is the racist white same, the One. Against the ac"drop of the s"etched historico-racial (racist6 scheme, )anonHs Idar"nessI returns to him, signifying a new genus, a new category of man: A 7egroQ (22J6. <e inha its a space of anonymity (he is e'ery 7egro6, and yet he feels a strange personal responsi ility for his ody. <e writes: I was responsi le at the same time for my ody, for my race, for my ancestors. I su 8ected myself to an o 8ecti'e e9amination, I disco'ered my lac"ness, my ethnic characteristicsA and I was attered down y tom-toms, canni alism, intellectual deficiency, fetishism, racial defects, sla'e-ships, and a o'e all else, a o'e all: IshoH good eatenH.I

the &lac" ody and how it can e changed, deformed, and made into an ontological pro lem 'is-T-'is the white gaze. +escri ing an encounter with a white
(22!6F 3Dnd *age !!!5 )anon writes a out woman and her son, )anon narrates that the young oy screams, I%oo" at the niggerQ . . . =ama, a 7egroQI (22E6.1 )anon: =y ody was gi'en ac" to me sprawled out, distorted, recolored, clad in mourning in that white winter day. The 7egro is an animal, the 7egro is ad, the 7egro is mean, the 7egro is uglyA loo", a 7egro, itHs cold, the 7egro is shi'ering ecause he is cold, the little oy is trem ling ecause he is afraid of the nigger, the nigger is shi'ering with cold, that cold that goes through your ones, the handsome oy is trem ling ecause he thin"s that the nigger is @ui'ering with rage, the little white oy throws himself into his motherHs arms: =ama, the niggerHs going to eat me up.. (22EV2G6 The white imagery of the &lac" as a sa'age east, a primiti'e and unci'ilized animal, is clearly e9pressed in the oyHs fear that he is to e eaten y the Icanni alisticI 7egro. IThe more that Duropeans dominated Africans, the more Hsa'ageH Africans came to seemA canni alism represented the nadir of sa'ageryI (&rantlinger 21FM, !LE6. *resuma ly, the young oy does not "now that his words will (or how they will6 negati'ely affect )anon. <owe'er, for )anon, the young white oy represents the

roader framewor" of white societyHs perception of the &lac". The oy turns to his white mother for protection from the impending &lac" doom. The young white oy, howe'er, is not simply operating at the affecti'e le'el, is operating oth at the affecti'e and the discursi'e le'el. <e says, I=ama, the niggerHs going to eat me up.I This locutionary act
he is not simply eing haunted, semi-consciously, y a 'ague feeling of an9iety. Rather, he carries a perlocutionary force of effecting a phenomenological return of )anon to himself as a canni alistic threat, as an o 8ect to e feared. )anon, of course, does not Iwant this re'ision, this thematization.I2L African-American philosopher Ro ert 4ooding-Williams notes: )or )anon, the oyHs 'iew of the 7egro (of )anon himself in this case6 as an o 8ect of fear is significant, as it suggests (26 that the image (racial epidermal schema6 of the 7egro posited y the oyHs 'er al performance has a narrati'e significance and (!6 that such images are a'aila le to the oy as elements of a socially shared stoc" of images that @ualify the historicity (the historical situatedness6 oth of the oy and of the 7egro he sees. (211E,

One is tempted to say that the young white oy sees )anonHs &lac" ody Ias if I it was canni al-li"e. The Iseeing as if,I howe'er, is collapsed into a Iseeing as is.I In )anonHs
2JM6 e9ample, within the li'ed phenomenological trans'ersal conte9t of white racist eha'ior, the Ias if I reads too much li"e a

process of Iconscious effort.I On my reading, Iyoungwhite oye9periencesniggerdar"- odycanni ale'o"estrepidationI

in the uninterrupted li'ed or phenomenological flow of the young white oyHs racist e9perience. There is no e9perience of the Ias if.I Indeed, the young white oyHs linguistic and nonlinguistic performance is indicati'e of a definiti'e structuring of his own self-in'isi ility as: Iwhiteinnocentselfinrelationshiptothedar"niggerself.I This definiti'e structuring is not so much remem ered or recollected as it is always present as the constituti'e imaginary ac"ground within which the white oy is oth the effect and the 'ehicle of white racismA indeed, he is the orientation of white epistemic practices, ways of I"nowingI a out oneHs (white6 identity 'is-T-'is the &lac" Other. The Icultural white orientationI is not an IentityI whose origin the white oy needs to grasp or recollect efore he performs whiteness. <e is not a ta ula rasa, one who sees the &lac" ody for the first time and instincti'ely says, I=ama, the niggerHs going to eat me up.I On this score, the oy does indeed undergo an e9perience of the dar" ody as frightening, ut there is no concealed meaning, as it were, inherent in the e9perience @ua e9perience of )anonHs ody as such. Rather, the fright that he e9periences 'is-T-'is )anonHs dar" ody is always already Iconstructed out of . . . social narrati'es and ideologiesI (<enze !LLL, !EF6. The oy is already discursi'ely and affecti'ely acculturated through micro-processes of IracializedI learning (short stories, lulla ies, childrenHs games,22 prelinguistic e9periences, and so forth6 to respond IappropriatelyI in the presence of a &lac" ody. The gap that opens up within the young white oyHs
3Dnd *age !!E5 is what appears perceptual field as he IseesI )anonHs &lac" ody has already een created while innocently sitting on his motherHs lap.2!

This point ac"nowledges the fundamental Iways the transactions etween a raced world and those who li'e in it racially constitute the 'ery eing of those eingsI (/ulli'an !LL2, F16. The association of &lac"ness with IniggerI and canni alism is no mean feat. <ence, on my 'iew, he is already attending to the world in a particular fashionA his affecti'e and discursi'e performances espea" the (ready-to-hand6 inherited white racist ac"ground according to which he is a le to ma"e IsenseI of the world. %i"e mo'ing my ody in
<is motherHs lap constitutes a IracedI zone of security. the direction of home, or only slightly loo"ing as I reach my hand to retrie'e my cup of hot tea that is to the left of my

the young white oy dwells withinCe9periencesCengages the world of white racist practices in such a way that the practices @ua racist practices ha'e ecome in'isi le. The young oyHs response is part and parcel of an implicit "nowledge of how he gets around in a =anichean world. &eing-in a racist world, a li'ed conte9t of historicity, the young oy does not IseeI the dar" ody as Idar"I and then thematically proceed to apply negati'e 'alue predicates to it, where concei'a ly the young oy would say, IOes, I HseeH the dar" ody
computer screen, as e9isting in space, and I recognize the fact that it is through my own actions and intentions that I predicate e'il of it.I IIn order e'en to act deli erately,I as philosopher <u ert %. +reyfus maintains, Iwe must orient oursel'es in a familiar worldI

a familiar white racist world of intelligi ility, one that has already IconcededI whiteness as IsuperiorI and &lac"ness as IinferiorI and Isa'age.I In'ol'ed within the white racist =anichean world, the young oy has
(2112, FM6. 3Dnd *age !!G5 =y point here is that the young white oy is situated within found his orientation, he has already ecome part and parcel of a constituted and constituting force within a constellation

he is o li'ious to the historicity and cultural conditionedness of these modes of eing. +espite the fact that IraceI neither e9ists as a naturally occurring "ind within the world nor cuts at the 8oints of reality, notice the e'ocati'e power of I eing &lac",I which actually points to the e'ocati'e power of eing white. The dar" ody, after all, would not ha'e e'o"ed the response that it did from the young white oy were it not for
of modes of eing that are deemed natural. <owe'er, the historical mythos of the white ody and the power of white normati'ity through which the white ody has een prereflecti'ely structured, resulting in forms of action that are as familiar and as @uotidian as my reaching for my cup of tea.

<is white racist performance is a form of e'eryday coping within the larger unthematized world of white social coping. On this score, one might say that the socio-ontological

structure that gi'es intelligi ility to the young white oyHs racist performance is prior to a set of eliefs of which he is reflecti'ely aware. 7otice that )anon undergoes the e9perience of ha'ing his ody Igi'en ac" to him.I Thus )anon undergoes a profound phenomenological e9perience of eing disconnected from his ody schema. )anon e9periences his ody as flattened out or sprawled out efore him. And, yet, )anonHs I ody,I its corporeality, is fore'er with him. It ne'er lea'es. /o, how can it e Igi'en ac"I? The physical ody that )anon hasCis remains in space and time. It does not somehow disappear and ma"e a return. And, yet, there is a profound sense in which his IcorporealityI

is

interwo'en with particular discursi'e practices. -nder the white gaze, )anonHs

ody is not simply the res e9tensa of $artesian dualism. Within the conte9t of white racist practices 'is-T-'is the I&lac"I ody, there is a lurring of oundaries etween what is IthereI as opposed to what has een Iplaced there.I <ence, the odyHs Icorporeality,I within the conte9t of li'ed history, is shaped through powerful cultural schemata. This does not mean that somehow the I odyI

it is my ody that forms the site of white oppression. To 8ettison all discourse regarding the ody as Ireal,I eing su 8ect to material forces, and such, in the name of the Ipostmodern ody,I is an idealism that would elie my own philosophical mo'e to theorize from the position of my real li'ed em odiment. The point here is that the I odyI
does not e9ist. After all, is ne'er gi'en as such, ut always Iappears thereI within the conte9t of some set of conditions of emergence (%aclau and =ouffe 21FM, 2LF6. The conditions of emergence for the phenomenological return of )anonHs ody @ua inferior or estial are grounded in the white social imaginary, its discursi'e and nondiscursi'e manifestations. <a'ing undergone a gestaltswitch in his ody image, his "nowledgeCconsciousness of his ody has ecome Isolely a negating acti'ity. It is a thirdperson 3Dnd *age !!M5 consciousness. The ody is surrounded y an atmosphere of certain uncertaintyI (21JK, 22LV226. %inda Alcoff discusses this phenomenological sense of eing dis8ointed as a form of Inear-incommensura ility etween first-person e9perience and historico-racial schema that disena les e@uili riumI (2111, !L6. What this points to is the

lac" alienation is not an indi'idual @uestionI (226. In other words, the distorted historico-racial schema that occludes e@uili rium ta"es place within the realm of sociality, a larger comple9 space of white social intersu 8ecti'e constitutionality Iof phenomena that human eings ha'e come to regard as HnaturalH in the physicalist sense of
IsociogenicI asis of the Icorporeal maledictionIe9perienced y &lac"s ()anon 21JK, 2226. On this score, Ithe manHs 3womanHs5 depending on physical natureI (4ordon 211K, EF6. Of course, within the conte9t of colonial or neocolonial white power,

the o 8ecti'e is to pass off what is historically contingent as that which is ahistorically gi'en.

,N" !TF %!T " $T


(ultiracialism is anti0black . it frames blackness as the undesirable position others compare themselves to icks '' doctoral student in *erformance /tudies at -$ &er"eley. <is wor" theorizes the performance of
lac" leadership in the !Lth century -/. <e earned his &.A. in <istory, his =.A. in -/ <istory, and his =.).A. in +rama. (Omar, I*laying 4ames with Race,I JCEC22, http:CCthefeministwire.comC!L22CLJCplaying-games-with-raceC6 =o'es li"e these might e easily ypassed, if they did not ear a close resem lance to a common trope within multiracial discourse. As analyzed y ;ared /e9ton in his oo" Amalgamation /chemes: Anti lac"ness and the $riti@ue of =ultiracialism, the

thing that unifies a di'erse (left, li eral, conser'ati'e, and right6 field of discourse around multiracial identity is the singular desire to achie'e distance from .certain figures of lac"ness0 that .resurface in each instance of multiracial discourse0 and .are generally made to ser'e as a foil for the contemporary 'alue of multiracialism 0 (/e9ton, !LLF6. It would
re@uire an e9cessi'e degree of naj'etd or willful disregard to ignore the same symptoms of thought in /aulny>s article series. In /e9ton>s words, .what

lends 3multiracial discourse5 its coherence 3...5 is its o durately unsophisticated understanding of race and se9uality and its conspicuously negati'e disposition toward what )anon (21JK6 terms Pthe li'ed e9perience of the lac">0 (/e9ton, !LLF6.W =ost essentially, then, in multiracial discourse, lac"ness stands in not as an identity or identification to e re8ected or wor"ed through ut, in the words of /e9ton, as a structural position .against which all other su 8ects ta"e their earings0 (/e9ton [ $opeland, !LLE6. In what might otherwise e an incomprehensi le world or a mo'ement without a cause, lac"ness is so ser'icea le that it can e used to stand in as that with which no ody wants to e associated, e'en y those who are partly lac".W D'en if multiracialism shifts us from the .one-drop rule0 to a more graduated mestiza8e model of racialization, this changes nothing for lac" people ecause lac"ness is still located at the .undesira le0 end of the continuumBor, more accurately, hierarchy. In my 'iew, it is necessary that we first understand the
sta ility of that unethical structural relation efore we can say that multiracialism challenges racism y in8ecting into the racist structure a .more fluid0 sense of identity. Rainier /pencer>s !LL1 $hronicle of <igher Dducation article(/pencer, !LL1, =ay 216, for e9ample, as"ed, .how

can multiracial identity deconstruct race when it needs the system of racial categorization to e'en announce itself ?0 *osing this @uestion as a statement would e to say that one needs for there to e a structure of race in order to call oneself multiracial. /mall wonder, then, that so many cele rations of multiracial identity sound anti lac". They are.

,N" !TF "O%O

+%$N&NESS

!cknowledging whiteness in debate creates a new anti0racist whiteness . ignoring these problems enables the proliferation of unconscious white privilege Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#* %i"e critical conser'ationists regarding whiteness, Royce "nows that he faces an uphill attle in con'incing many of his interlocutors of the 'alue of pro'incialism. *ut positi'ely, pro'incialism

tends to connote a healthy fondness for and pride in local traditions, interests, and customs. =ore negati'ely, it means
cultural-geographical place. In Royce>s

eing restricted and limited, stic"ing to the narrow ideas of a gi'en region or group and eing indifferent, perhaps e'en 'iolently hostile to the ways of outsiders. What connects these different meanings is their sense of eing rooted in a particular

definition, which emphasizes conscious awareness of this rootedness (an important point to which I will return6, a pro'ince is a domain that is .sufficiently unified to ha'e a
true consciousness of its own unity, to feel a pride in its own ideals and customs, and to possess a sense of its distinction from other3s5.0 And correspondingly, pro'incialism

is, first, the tendency for a group .to possess its own customs and idealsA secondly, the totality of these customs and ideals themsel'esA and thirdly the lo'e and pride which leads the inha itants of a pro'ince to cherish as their own these traditions, eliefs and
aspirations0 (J26. 3Dnd *age !EF5 Dmphasizing unity, lo'e, and pride, Royce>s definitions steer away from the negati'e connotations of pro'incialism. &ut in Royce>s dayBand not much has changed in this regardBit was the negati'e, or .false,0 form of pro'incialism that most often came to people>s minds when they thought a out the 'alue and effects of the concept. As Royce was writing in 21L!, the false pro'incialism, or .sectionalism,0 of the -nited /tates> $i'il War was a recent memory for many of his readers. In the $i'il War, stu orn commitment to one portion of the nation 'iolently opposed it to another portion and threatened to tear the nation apart. *ro'incialism, which appealed to regional 'alues to disunite, had to e condemned in the name of patriotism, which united in the name of a higher good. Royce>s rhetorical strategy is to ta"e the challenge of defending pro'incialism head-on: .=y main intention is to define the right form and the true office of pro'incialismBto portray what, if you please, we may call the <igher *ro'incialism, Bto portray it, and then to defend it, to e9tol it, and to counsel you to further 8ust such pro'incialism0 (JM6. Royce readily ac"nowledges that .against the e'il forms of sectionalism we shall always ha'e to contend0 (JG6. &ut he denies that pro'incialism must always e e'il. 4oing against the grain of most post-$i'il War thin"ing a out pro'incialism, Royce urges that the

present state of ci'ilization, oth in the world at large, and with us, in America, is such as to define a new social mission which the pro'ince alone, ut not the nation, is a le to fulfil 3sic5 . . . .3T5he modern world has reached a point where it needs, more than e'er efore, the 'igorous de'elopment of a highly organized pro'incial life. /uch a life , if wisely guided, will not mean disloyalty to the nation. (JG6 Wisely de'eloped, pro'incialism need not conflict with national loyalty. The two commitments canBand must, Royce insistsBflourish together. %i"ewise, whiteness need not conflict with mem ership in humanity as a whole. The two identities canBand mustBflourish together. The relationship etween pro'incialism and nationalism, as discussed y Royce, ser'es as a fruitful model for
the relationship of whiteness and humanity, and critical conser'ationists of whiteness should follow Royce>s lead y ta"ing head-on the challenge of critically defending whiteness. %i"e em racing pro'incialism, em

racing whiteness might seem to e a step ac"ward for the modern worldBtoward limitation and insularity that reed
ignorance, pre8udice, and hostility toward others who are different from oneself. %i"e ha'ing a national rather than pro'incial world'iew, seeing oneself as a mem er of humanity rather than of the white race seems to em ody an e9pansi'e, outward 3Dnd *age !E15 orientation that is open to others. &ut there

is a .new social mission0 with respect to racial 8ustice that whiteness, and not humanity as a whole, can fulfill. Race relations, especially in the -nited /tates, ha'e reached a point where humanity needs a .highly organized0 anti-racist whiteness, that is, an anti-racist whiteness that is consciously

de'eloped and em raced. <ow then can we (white people, in particular6 wisely guide the de'elopment of such
whiteness so that it does not result in disloyalty to other races and humanity as a whole? &efore addressing this @uestion, let me point out two important differences etween whiteness and pro'incialism as descri ed y Royce. )irst, while Royce calls for the de'elopment of a wise form of pro'incialism, he is a le to appeal to e9isting .wholesome0 forms of pro'incialism in his defense of the concept. <e addresses himself .in the most e9plicit terms, to men and women who, as I hope and presuppose, are and wish to e, in the wholesome sense, pro'incial,0 and his demand that .the man of the future . . . lo'e his pro'ince more than he does to-day0 recognizes a nugget of wise pro'incialism on which to uild (JM, JK6. The de'elopment of wise pro'incialism does not ha'e to e from scratch. In contrast, it is more difficult to pinpoint a nugget of .wholesome0 whiteness to use as a starting point for its transformation. Instances of white people who helped sla'es and resisted sla'ery in the -nited /tates, for e9ample, certainly can e foundBthe infamous ;ohn &rown is only one such e9ampleB ut such people often are seen as white race traitors who represent the a olition, not the transformation of whiteness.1 The tas" of critically conser'ing whiteness pro a ly will e more difficult than that of critically conser'ing pro'incialism since there is not a straightforward or o 'ious .right form and true office0 of whiteness to e9tol. /econd, true to his idealism, Royce descri es oth pro'incialism and its de'elopment as e9plicitly conscious phenomena. Royce notes the elasticity of the term .pro'ince0Bit can designate a small geographical area in contrast with the nation, or it can designate a large geographical, rural area in contrast with a city (MKVMF6B ut it always includes consciousness of the pro'ince>s unity and particular identity as this place and not another. *ut another way, pro a ly e'ery space, regardless of its size, is distincti'e in some way or another. What gi'es mem ers of a space a pro'incial attitude is their conscious awareness of, and resulting pride in, that space as the distincti'e place that it is. On Royce>s model, someone who is pro'incial "nows that she is, at least in some loose way. The tas" of de'eloping her pro'incialism, then, is to de'elop her rudimentary conscious awareness of her pro'ince, to ecome .more and not less self-conscious, well-esta lished, and earnest0 in her pro'incial outloo" (JK6. In contrastBand here lies the largest difference etween pro'incialism and whitenessBmany

white people today do not consciously thin" of themsel'es as mem ers of this (white6 race and not another, not e'en loosely. D9cepting mem ers of white militant groups such as the #u 3Dnd
*age !GL5 #lu9 #lan or the $reati'ity =o'ement, contemporary white people do not tend to ha'e a conscious sense of unity as fellow white people, nor do they consciously in'o"e or share special ideals, customs, or common memories as white people. They often are percei'ed and percei'e themsel'es as raceless , as mem ers of the human species at large rather than mem ers of a particular racial group. This does not eliminate their whiteness or their mem ership in a fairly unified group. ;ust the opposite: such

.racelessness0 is one of the mar"s and

pri'ileges of mem ership in whiteness, especially middle and upper class forms of whiteness. White people
can feel a pride in the ideals and customs of whiteness and possess a sense of distinction from people of other races without much, if any conscious awareness of their whiteness and without consciously identifying those ideals and customs as white. To ta"e one rief e9ample, styles and customs of communication in classrooms tend to e raced (as well as classed and gendered6, and white styles of discussion, hand-raising, and turn-ta"ing tend to e treated as appropriate while lac" styles are seen as inappropriate.2L White students often learn to feel proud and 'alidated y their teachers as good students when they participate in these styles, and this almost always happens without either students or teachers consciously identifying their style (or themsel'es6 as white. /uch students appear to elong and e9perience themsel'es as elonging merely to a group of smart, orderly, responsi le students, not to a racialized group. In the -nited /tates and Western world more roadly, unconscious ha its of whiteness and white pri'ilege ha'e tended to increase after the end of de 8ure racism.22 -nli"e pro'incialism as descri ed y Royce, whiteness

tends to operate more su - and unconsciously than consciously. &ut I do not thin" that this fact spoils wise pro'incialism as a fruitful model
for wise whiteness. )irst, and reflecting a asic philosophical disagreement that I ha'e with Royce>s idealism, I dou t that pro'incialism always functions as consciously as Royce suggests it does. The unity, pride, and lo'e that are the hallmar"s of pro'incialism could easily function in the form of unreflecti'e eliefs, ha its, preferences, and e'en odily comportment. In fact I would argue that many aspects of our pro'incial loyaltiesBwhate'er type of pro'ince is at issueB operate on su - or unconscious le'els. In that case, pro'incialism and whiteness would not e as dissimilar in their operation as Royce>s description implies. /econd, e'en if pro'incialism tends to consciously unify people while whiteness does not, Royce>s ad'ice that people should attempt to ecome more, rather than less self-conscious in their pro'incialism still applies to white people with respect to their whiteness. 4i'en

whiteness>s history as a racial category of 'iolent e9clusion and oppression, one might thin" that white people need to focus less on their whiteness, to distance themsel'es from it. &ut 8ust the opposite is the case. 4i'en 3Dnd *age !G25 that distance from racial identification tends to e the co'ert modus operandi for contemporary forms of white pri'ilege, white people who wish to fight racism need to ecome more intimately ac@uainted with their whiteness. Rather than ignore their whiteness, which allows unconscious ha its of white pri'ilege to proliferate unchec"ed, white people need to ring their whiteness to as much conscious awareness as possi le

(while also realizing that complete self-transparency is ne'er achie'a le6 so

that they can try to change what

it means. aciali/ing white spaces is critical to confront the implicit racism of social0 location. aceless living forces living in an abstraction where anti0 racism is impossible Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#* Royce>s elo@uent pleas on the ehalf of pro'incialism spea" to my point a out ringing whiteness to as much conscious awareness as possi le. As Royce appeals to his readers, he urges, .I hope and elie'e that you all intend to ha'e your community li'e its own life, and not the life of any other community, nor yet the life of a mere a straction called humanity in general0 (JK6. On the same theme, he later compares the pro lem of wise pro'incialism with the pro lem of any indi'idual acti'ity, which admittedly can ecome narrow and self-centered. Ac"nowledging this pro lem, Royce counters, &ut on the other hand, philanthropy

that is not founded upon a personal loyalty of the indi'idual to his own family and to his own personal duties is notoriously a worthless a straction. We lo'e the world etter when we cherish our own friends the more faithfully. We do not grow in grace y forgetting indi'idual duties in ehalf of remote social enterprises. *recisely so, the pro'ince will not ser'e the nation est y forgetting itself, ut y loyally emphasizing its own duty to the nation . . . . (1F6 The disappearance of the indi'idual does not well ser'e larger social enterprises. Those enterprises
thri'e only if the personal, passionate energies of indi'iduals are poured into them. %arge enterprises and institutions tend to ecome anemic a stractions if they are not rooted in felt indi'idual commitments. %i"ewise, properly understood, the nation need not e in a competiti'e relationship with the 'arious communities that it shelters. %oyalty to and lo'e for one>s more local connections can e a powerful source of meaningful loyalty to and lo'e for one>s nation. In oth cases, the same pattern can e detected: rich

ties to the smaller entityBthe indi'idual or the communityBare what sustain meaningful connections to the larger entityBthe philanthropic cause or the nation. The two are
not necessarily in conflict, as is often thought, and in fact the larger entity would suffer if ties to the smaller entity were cut off. It is useful to anti-racist struggle to thin" of a similar relationship holding etween particular races, including the white race, and humanity at large. While it might initially seem parado9ical, the

larger entity of humanity can est e ser'ed y people>s ties to smaller , more local entities such as their racial groups. A

person>s racial group is not the only smaller entity that pro'ides the rich e9istential ties of which Royce spea"sBhe rightly mentions family, and we could add entities such as one>s neigh orhood, one>s church, mos@ue or synagogue, and e'en 3Dnd *age !GE5 groups ased on one>s gender or se9ual orientation. &ut race also elongs in this list of sites of intimate connection that can and often do sustain indi'idual li'es and that can support rather than undermine the well eing of humanity. )orgetting

one>s duty to one>s particular race in the name of wor"ing for racial 8ustice, for e9ample, tends to turn that goal into a remote a straction. .Oou cannot e loyal to merely an impersonal a straction,0 Royce reminds us.2E Dffecti'ely ser'ing the goal of racial 8ustice is more li"ely to occur if one concretely e9plores how racial 8ustice could emerge out of loyalty to one>s particular race. This claim might not seem o 8ectiona le when considering racial groups that are not white. %oyalty to other mem ers of their race has een an important way for African Americans, for e9ample, to further the larger cause of racial 8ustice. &lac" sla'es who helped each other escape their white masters fought against sla'ery and thus helped humanity
as a whole. &ut the history of whiteness suggests that white people>s loyalty to their race not only would not help, ut in fact would undermine struggles for racial 8ustice. <ow could white people ser'e the larger interests of the human race y eing loyal to a race that has oppressed, colonized, and rutalized other races? What possi le duties or o ligations to their race could white people ha'e, responsi ilities that must e remem ered if racial 8ustice is to e a concrete, li'ed goal for white people to wor" toward? On the one hand, these @uestions can seem outrageous, e'en dangerous. Tal" of duty to the white race smac"s of militarist white supremacist mo'ements, and indeed the first of the $reati'ity =o'ement>s si9teen commandments in their .White =an>s &i le0 is that .it is the a'owed duty and holy responsi ility of each generation to assure and secure for all time the e9istence of the White Race upon the face of this planet,0 and the si9th is that .your first loyalty elongs to the White Race.02G 7oel Ignatie'>s concern a out the scholarly 'alidation of white supremacy through

the critical conser'ation of whiteness could not e etter placed than here. Temporarily setting aside the dangerous aspect of these @uestions, they also can seem nonsensical if they do not refer to the goals of white supremacist mo'ements. What anti-racist duties, we might as" with some sarcasm, do white people ha'e that must not e forgotten? African Americans and other non-white people might e a le to com ine loyalty to their racial group with loyalty to humanity, ut white people cannot. Their situations are too different to treat their relationships to their races as similar. Those relationships are asymmetrical, which means that white people>s loyalty to the human race, including racial 8ustice for all its mem ers, conflicts with loyalty to whiteness. %oyalty to humanity would seem to re@uire white people to e race traitors. On the other hand, these @uestions present a needed challenge to white people who care a out racial 8ustice. Rather than rhetorically or 3Dnd *age !GG5 sarcastically, the @uestions can e as"ed in the spirit of Royce>s call for each .community 3to5 li'e its own life, and not the life of any other community, nor yet the life of a mere a straction called humanity in general0 (JK6. )or

white people to fight white supremacy and white pri'ilege does not mean for them to attempt to shed their whiteness and ecome mem ers of the human species at large. Attempting to ecome raceless y li'ing the life of an a straction called humanity merely culti'ates a white person>s ignorance of how race, including whiteness, and racism inform her ha its, eliefs, desires, antipathies, and other aspects of her life . It
does not magically eliminate her white pri'ilege for e'en if she succeeds in thin"ing of herself as a raceless mem er of humanity, she li"ely will continue to e identified and treated as white, e'en if unreflecti'ely or unconsciously, y others.

&y allowing her white pri'ilege to go unchec"ed in this way, a white person>s li'ing the life of a stract humanity actually tends to increase, not reduce her racial pri'ilege . To increase
the chances of reducing her racial pri'ilege, she must resist the temptation to see herself as raceless and instead figure out what it could mean for her to li'e her own life as a racialized person. %i'ing

as a racialized, rather than a stract person does not mean attempting to ta"e on a different race. Attempting to ta"e on a different race implicitly ac"nowledges that whiteness is pro lematic, and it can seem to e an
e9pression of respect for non-white people. &ut it often is no etter a response to white pri'ilege than attempting to shed one>s whiteness. This

is ecause a white person>s ta"ing on the ha its, culture, and other aspects of another race often is an e9pression of ontological e9pansi'eness, which is a ha it of white pri'ileged people to treat all spacesBwhether geographical, e9istential, linguistic, cultural, or otherBas a'aila le for them to inha it at their choosing.2M Appropriating another race in this way thus is closer to imperialist colonialism than a gesture of respect . )or this reason, white people need to stop trying to flee the responsi ilities and duties that come with eing white and figure out how to li'e their own racialized life, not the life of another race. Once they no longer ignore or attempt to flee their whiteness, they can then as" how wor" for racial 8ustice fits with their duties and responsi ilities as a white person and how they might li'e their own anti-racist white life. 6ailing to embrace debates racial identity disrupts community leading to monotonous sameness and the mob spirit Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#* Royce lists three specific pro lems in modern American life that cannot e sol'ed without wise pro'incialism. <is discussion of these .e'ils,0 as Royce calls them, also illuminates .e'ils0 that a wise form of whiteness could help meliorate.

The first e'il is the neglect of and disruption to a community when people are only loosely associated with it and do not in'est in, care a out, or ha'e a significant history with it. Royce argues 3Dnd *age !GM5 that this pro lem is growing in fre@uency and significance as people are
increasingly mo ile, changing their residency multiple times o'er their lifetime and often mo'ing great distances from where they were orn and raised. This means that communities are increasingly dealing with a large num er of newcomers who do not (yet6 ha'e an intimate, caring connection to the new place they inha it. This

is .a source of

social danger, ecause the community needs well-"nit organization 0 (KE6. *ro'incialism helps
these newcomers care for their new home, and a wise pro'incialism does so without generating any hostility toward either

other pro'incial communities or larger social odies such as the nation. In a similar fashion, when

white people who care a out racial 8ustice ha'e 'irtually no conscious or deli erate affiliation with their whiteness, the meaning and effect of whiteness is left to happenstance or , more li"ely, is determined y white supremacist groups. Royce>s primary concern is the dissolution of communities
through neglect, and if well-intentioned white people do not care a out, in'est in, or ac"nowledge a significant history with their whiteness, then whiteness will e neglected. &ut unli"e pro'incial communities, whiteness

does not necessarily unra'el or wither away ecause of simple neglect y anti-racist white people. Its neglect y anti-racists whites instead lea'es it wide open for racist white groups to de'elop. %i"e a garden, whiteness can easily grow tough weeds of white supremacy if it is not wisely culti'ated. The e'il
of a andoning whiteness, allowing white supremacists to ma"e of it whate'er they will, can e mitigated y a wise form of whiteness. In practice, this means that white

people who care a out racial 8ustice need to educate newcomers to whitenessBnamely, white childrenBto e loyal to and care a out their race. While
Royce>s comments a out the pro lem of newcomers due to increased geographical mo ility do not apply directly to whiteness,2J white children can e thought of as newcomers to the community of whiteness who do not (yet6 ha'e an intimate connection to their race or "now how to culti'ate and care for it. <ere again is an instance in which white supremacists ha'e een allowed to corner the mar"et on whiteness: almost all e9plicit reflection and writing on how to raise white children as white has een underta"en y groups such as the #u #lu9 #lan, World $hurch of the $reator, and /tormfront.2K The association is so tight that the mere suggestion of educating white children in their whiteness is alarming to many people. &ut educating white children a out their whiteness need and should not mean educating them to e white supremacists. A wise form of whiteness would help train the de'eloping racial ha its of white children in antiracist ways.2F Royce calls the second pro lem addressed y pro'incialism that of .the le'eling tendency of recent ci'ilization0 (KG6, ut more accurate, I thin", would e to characterize the pro lem as one of monotonous 3Dnd *age !GJ5 sameness. Royce is concerned that the

increase of mass communication means that people all o'er the nation, indeed the glo e, are reading the same news stories, sharing the same ideas, fashions, and trends, and more and more imitating one another. The rich di'ersity of human"ind, the independence of the small manufacturer, and distincti'eness of the indi'idual are eing a sor ed into a 'ast, impersonal social order. A wise pro'incialism is not wholly opposed to these tendencies. There is
great 'alue in large groups of people coming to understand each other across their differences. &ut, Royce argues, there often also is great 'alue to e found in their differences, and those differences ought to e allowed to thri'e. A wise pro'incialism helps protect the 'ariety of different places and communities so that they are not forced to e identical with each other. In a similar way, wise

whiteness helps preser'e racial differences without treating people of 'arious races as wholly alien to each other and thus incapa le of understanding each other
across their differences. As %ucius Outlaw as"s, .Why is it, after thousands of years, that human eings are not all Plight "ha"i> instead of e9hi iting the 'ariety of s"in tones (and other features6 more or less characteristic of 'arious populations called races?021 The answer, according to Outlaw, is not merely that racism and in'idious ethnocentrism ha'e wor"ed to esta lish in'iola le oundaries etween white and non-white races. It also is that different

races are .the result of io-cultural group attachments and practices that are conduci'e to human sur'i'al and well- eing.0!L With W.D.&. +u &ois, Outlaw argues that racial differences can enrich e'eryone and that e'en if
racism disappeared tomorrow, we should want discerni ly distinct races to continue to e9ist.!2 The a y need not e thrown out with the athwater. The

rich 'ariety of human racial and ethnic cultures need not e eliminated to eliminate racism and in'idious ethnocentrism. A wise whiteness also would caution, howe'er,
that white people>s appreciation for racial di'ersity and 'ariety also can e an insidious form of whiteness in disguise. Too often, cele rations of multiculturalism and racial di'ersity function as a smorgas ord of racial difference offered up for (middle-to-upper class6 white people>s consumption and en8oyment. They do this y ac"nowledging some differences while simultaneously concealing others. It is 'ery easy for white people to recognize and e'en cele rate racial difference in the form of different food, dress, and cultural customs. It tends to e much more difficult for them to recognize racial difference in the form of economic, educational, and political ine@ualities. Royce>s criticism of the le'eling tendencies of modern culture does not e9plicitly depoliticize the issue, and he does mention that 'ariety is needed particularly to counter .the purely mechanical carrying-power of certain ruling social influences,0 an e9ample of which is the hegemony of white culture (KJ6. &ut gi'en the 3Dnd *age !GK5 tendency of white (middle-to-upper class, in particular6 people to see whiteness as cultureless and oring and thus want to spice it up y da ling in other, .e9otic0 cultures, care must e ta"en that appreciation of di'ersity is not sanitized through an a'oidance of the history and present of white pri'ilege. When that happens, appreciation of plurality and di'ersity tend to ecome a co'ert 'ehicle for white ontological e9pansi'eness.

In contrast, a wise

whiteness 'alues and thus transactionally conser'es different races , as Outlaw does, without depoliticizing the meaning of those differences. The third e'il discussed y Royce, the mo spirit, occurs when all indi'idual 8udgment has een gi'en up and a person ecomes totally a sor ed in a large social mass. Without discriminating indi'iduals, the crowd or mo is psychologically 'ulnera le to a strong leader, idea, or e'en a song that enflames emotions and leads people to act in ways they ordinarily would not act. This danger is closely
related to the one of sameness for ehind the two dangers lay the same phenomenon: that of wide, inclusi'e human sympathy (1!V1E6. Openness to and sharing in the li'es and the feelings of others is not always a positi'e e'ent, Royce cautions us. -ndiscriminating

sympathy can lend support to ase a surdities as easily as to no le "indness, and as such sympathy is more of a neutral ase for psychological de'elopment than an automatic good to e u i@uitously culti'ated. -nder certain conditionsBconditions that Royce thin"s are increasingly present in the modern worldwide, inclusi'e sympathy for others can ecome not only monotonous, ut also dangerous (1M6. %oss of the smallBthe particular, the local, the indi'idualBas it is a sor ed into the large is something to resist, and a wise pro'incialism helps pre'ent that loss. Royce>s concern a out the mo spirit does not directly spea" to
pro lems faced y a wise whiteness.!! &ut in this concern we can see the strea" of organic indi'idualism that runs through Royce>s wor", which can tell us something important a out the relationships of white indi'iduals to their race. Royce>s legendary concern for community does not sacrifice or dissol'e the indi'idual into the larger whole. ;ust as false forms of pro'incialism set up a false opposition etween pro'incialism and nationalism, false

forms of indi'idualism set up a false opposition etween indi'idualism and community or social causes. That "ind of indi'idualism fails ecause of its .failure to comprehend what it is that the ethical indi'idual needs,0 which is a cause greater than the indi'idual that she can
passionately ser'e (EF6. <ere is where Royce>s indi'idualism is distincti'e: it insists that real indi'iduality is found through personal choice of a larger cause that one loyally ser'es, not through endless insistence that one is a single indi'idual with personal initiati'e. This insistence is empty if ne'er acted upon, lea'ing the so-called autonomous indi'idual lost and floundering. .&e an indi'idual,0 Royce urges e9asperatedly, .3 5ut for <ea'en>s sa"e, set a out the tas".0!E 3Dnd *age !GF5 To

e a real indi'idual, a person needs something larger than herself to e a part of. And as communities of meaning, racial groups historically ha'e de'eloped as one of those things. In %ucius Outlaw>s words, racial and ethnic identification in part .de'elop3ed5 as responses to the need for life-sustaining and meaningful accepta le order of 'arious "inds (conceptual, social, political6.0!G <uman eings need to create conceptual, social, political and other structures, including indi'idual and social identities, to gi'e their li'es meaning and purpose. While Outlaw tal"s a out this need in terms of order and Royce spea"s of it in terms of a
cause to de'ote one>s self to, oth point to an e9istential need that racial identity, including whiteness, can ser'e and historically has ser'ed. And they oth suggest that a theory of racial 8ustice that ignores this need will not e effecti'e in practice.

We must hope . we are always in a process of becoming . make debate a place of wise whiteness that recogni/es the inherent values associated with non0whites Sullivan ? *rofessor *hilosophy, Women>s /tudies, and African and African American /tudies , *ennsyl'ania /tate
-ni'ersity (/hannon /ulli'an, /pring !LLF, .Whiteness as Wise *ro'incialism: Royce and the Reha ilitation of a Racial $ategory,0 Transactions of the $harles /. *eirce /ociety: A fuarterly ;ournal in American *hilosophy, :ol. GG, 7o. !, *ro8ect =use6CC#* <ow then, to @uote Outlaw, might we wor" to critically conser'e whiteness without letting it .go imperial?0!M Royce>s

a wise form of whiteness must always e considered an unachie'ed ideal , not a fait accompli. It should remain .much more a hope and an inspiration than it ecomes a present achie'ement0 (2L26. $onser'ing whiteness is not for the purpose of gi'ing white people
four-part ad'ice on how to culti'ate wise pro'incialism is instructi'e on this @uestion. )irst, li"e wise pro'incialism,

something to oast a out. 7or is its goal uilding white pride through uncritical glorification of the heritage of white people. $onsidering wise whiteness an unachie'ed ideal means that the critical process of creating an anti-racist white identity is ongoing. It also means that the process always can e impro'ed. The difference here is .the difference etween 'anity and self-respect0 (2L!6. Treating wise
whiteness as an inspiration for the future can gi'e white people a way to respect themsel'es as white people without succum ing to complacency and conceit. Royce>s second piece of ad'ice for culti'ating wise pro'incialism is to realize that de'eloping 'alues, ha its, and customs that are distincti'e to a particular pro'ince is not the same thing as thin"ing that those 'alues, ha its, and customs are possessed only y that pro'ince. =a"ing ideal 'alues one>s own is not necessarily e@ui'alent to denying those 'alues to others: .it is one thing to see" to ma"e ideal 'alues in some uni@ue sense our own, and it is @uite another thing to elie'e that if they are our own, other people cannot possess such ideal 'alues in their own e@ually uni@ue fashion0 (2L!6. *ossession need not function as e9clusi'ity, Royce tells us. One pro'ince can e eautiful in its own distincti'e way, for e9ample, without denying that other pro'inces are eautiful in their own uni@ue manner. This ad'ice is especially appropriate for the de'elopment of a wise form of whiteness since whiteness has a long history of oppressing through e9clusi'e possession. Analyzing the attempts of white nations 3Dnd *age !G15 in World War I to di'ide up and e9ploit .dar"er nations,0 for e9ample, +u &ois declares that whiteness is nothing less than .ownership of the earth.0!J White

people ha'e appropriated the gifts of African Americans, ignoring the economic, military, political, spiritual, and other contri utions that lac" people made to the uilding of the -nited /tates. They also ha'e usurped the land of 7ati'e Americans ecause of 7ati'e Americans> allegedly inappropriate use of (read: failure to appropriate6 it.!K D'en more to the point, whiteness has defined itself through e9clusi'e ownership of 'alues such as goodness, cleanliness, and eauty. Other races, y comparison, tend to e characterized as the opposite: ad,
dirty, and unattracti'e. Whiteness>s definition through opposition to a non-white other means that if whiteness possesses a particular 'alue, then other races cannot. A

wise form of whiteness would realize that de'eloping 'alues, ha its, and customs that are distincti'e to anti-racist white people does not mean that white people e9clusi'ely possess those 'alues, ha its and customs. +ifferent racial groups can
possess the 'alue of artistic and other forms of eauty, for e9ample, in uni@ue ways and without canceling out each other. In 21!E +u &ois argued for the physical eauty of lac" people, rhetorically as"ing .can there e any @uestion ut that as colors ronze, mahogany, coffee and gold are far lo'elier than pin", gray and mar le?0!F The distincti'e aesthetic 'alue of African American fiction, poetry, drama, and especially music is emphasized repeatedly in Alain %oc"e>s 21!M edited collection on The 7ew 7egro: :oices of the <arlem Renaissance.!1 And similar messages were at the heart of the .&lac" is &eautiful0 mo'ement of the 21JLs in the -nited /tates. &ut while rele'ant, eauty in any of its forms tends to e too easy an e9ample of different racial groups> sharing the same, yet distincti'e 'alues ecause the e9ample does not distur white confidence in its own 'alues. It lea'es whiteness fairly intact, ac"ing down from significantly transforming it. *ut another way, e9amples

of e9tending to non-white people ideal 'alues that white people and culture allegedly already possess ris" collapsing into an apolitical smorgas ord . White, lac", %atinoCa,
Asian, 7ati'eCa original, and so onBall cultures possess artistic and personal eauty in their own way, and appreciating the di'ersity of eauty is all that white people who oppose racism need do. While it is important for white people to realize that other racial groups possess ideal 'alues such as eauty, y itself this

realization can e a way of artificially flattening out une@ual racial terrain. D'en worse, it can increase rather than reduce white pri'ilege if recognizing the eauty of non-white cultures merely increases the amount of eauty in the world for white people to en8oy and consume. A more challenging application of Royce>s second piece of ad'ice to the de'elopment of wise whiteness would e to read the sharing of ideal 'alues in the opposite direction, from non-white to white people. 3Dnd *age !ML5 Rather than .generously0 ac"nowledging that non-white cultures possess their own distincti'e type of the eauty, what if white people saw themsel'es as sharing an ideal 'alue that tends to e thought of as the sole possession of non-white people? $onsider humility. This is a trait often considered an ideal 'alueA for
e9ample, it is one of the se'en holy 'irtues in the $hristian church. To e hum le is to e modest, unassuming, and respectful toward others. It can connote eing mee", e'en insignificant and su ser'ient, or more positi'ely, the willingness to gi'e credit where credit is due rather than unfairly e9alting oneself.

!TF

!"E ! #S

!6 O0O>T$($S( 2!TF SO"$!% &E!T=5


Their use of the concept of social death swings the pendulum of academia toward despair, o'ergeneralizes the e9perience of the slave4 and provides a mask to cover the underlying problems +rown4 -7 (:incent &rown, *rofessor of <istory and African and African-American /tudies at <ar'ard -ni'ersity, ./ocial +eath and *olitical %ife in the /tudy of /la'ery0, American <istorical Re'iew, +ecem er !LL1 http:CChistory.fas.har'ard.eduCpeopleCfacultyCdocumentsC rown-socialdeath.pdf CC"dh6
/la'ery and /ocial +eath was widely re'iewed and la'ishly praised for its erudition and conceptual rigor. As a result of its success,

social death has ecome a handy general definition of sla'ery, for many historians and nonhistorians ali"e. &ut it is often forgotten that the concept of social death is a distillation from *atterson>s reathta"ing sur'eyBa theoretical a straction that is meant not to descri e the li'ed e9periences of the ensla'ed so much as to reduce them to a least common denominator that could re'eal the essence of sla'ery in an ideal-type sla'e 4 shorn of meaningful heritage.J As a concept, it is what )rederic" $ooper has called an .agentless a straction0 that pro'ides a neat cultural logic ut ultimately does little to illuminate the social and political e9perience of ensla'ement and the struggles that produce historic transformations.K Indeed, it is difficult to use such a distillation to e9plain the actual eha'ior of sla'es, and yet in much of the scholarship that followed in the wa"e of /la'ery and /ocial +eath,
*atterson>s a stract distillates ha'e een used to e9plain the e9istential condition of the ensla'ed. <a'ing emerged from the discipline of sociology, .social

death0 fit comforta ly within a scholarly tradition that had generally een more alert to de'iations in patterns of lac" life from pre'ailing social norms than to the world'iews, strategies, and social tactics of people in lac" communities. Together with *atterson>s wor" on the distortions wrought y sla'ery on lac" families, .social death0
reflected sociology>s a iding concern with .social pathology0A the .pathological condition0 of twentieth-century lac" life could e seen as an outcome of the damage that lac" people had suffered during sla'ery. -ni'ersity of $hicago professor Ro ert *ar", the grand-pe\re of the social pathologists, set the terms in 2121: .the 7egro, when he landed in the -nited

*atterson>s distillation also conformed to the nomothetic imperati'e of social science, which has traditionally aimed to disco'er uni'ersal laws of operation that would e true regardless of time and place, ma"ing the synchronic study of social phenomena more tempting than more descripti'e studies of historical transformation . /la'ery and /ocial +eath too" shape during a
/tates, left ehind almost e'erything ut his dar" comple9ion and his tropical temperament.0F period when largely synchronic studies of ante ellum sla'ery in the -nited /tates dominated the scholarship on human

*atterson>s e9pansi'e 'iew was meant to situate -./. sla'ery in a road conte9t rather than to discuss changes as the institution de'eloped through time. Thus one might see .social death0 as an o solete product of its time and tradition, an academic
ondage, and artifact with limited purchase for contemporary scholarship, were it not for the concept>s reemergence in some important new studies of sla'ery.1 WI+D%O A$#7OW%D+4D+ A/ A=O74 the most onerous of social institutions, sla'ery has much to tell us a out the way human eings react to oppression. At the same time, the

e9treme nature of the institution naturally encourages a pessimistic 'iew of the capacity for collecti'e agency among su 8ugated people. As a result, trends in the study of sla'ery, as with the study of dominance more generally, often di'ide etween wor"s that emphasize the o'erwhelming power of the

institution and scholarship that focuses on the resistant efforts of the ensla'ed . In turn4 this di'ision frames a pro lem in the general understanding of political life, especially for the descendants of the powerless. It might e'en e said that these "inds of studies form different and opposing genresBhopeful stories of heroic su alterns 'ersus anatomies of doomBthat compete for ascendance. In recent years, if the in'ocation of *atterson>s .social death0 is any indication, the pendulum seems to ha'e swung decidedly toward despair. The logic of social death ignores the history of the slave and ignores the struggles that actual slaves endured +rown4 -7 (:incent &rown, *rofessor of <istory and African and African-American /tudies at <ar'ard -ni'ersity, ./ocial +eath and *olitical %ife in the /tudy of /la'ery0, American <istorical Re'iew, +ecem er !LL1 http:CChistory.fas.har'ard.eduCpeopleCfacultyCdocumentsC rown-socialdeath.pdf CC"dh6
&ut this was not the emphasis of *atterson>s argument. As a result, those he has inspired ha'e often conflated his

/een as a state of eing, the concept of social death is ultimately out of place in the political history of sla'ery. If studies of sla'ery would account for the outloo"s and maneu'ers of the ensla'ed as an important part of that history, scholars would do etter to "eep in 'iew the struggle against alienation rather than alienation itself. To see social death as a producti'e peril entails a su tle ut significant shift in perspecti'e, from seeing sla'ery as a condition to 'iewing ensla'ement as a predicament, in which ensla'ed Africans and their descendants ne'er ceased to pursue a politics of elonging, mourning, accounting, and regeneration. In part, the usefulness of social death as a concept depends on what scholars of sla'ery see" to e9plainB lac" pathology or lac" politics, resistance or attempts to rema"e social life? )or too long, de ates a out whether there were lac" families too" precedence o'er discussions
e9position of sla'eholding ideology with a description of the actual condition of the ensla'ed. of how such families were formedA disputes a out whether African culture had .sur'i'ed0 in the Americas o'erwhelmed discussions of how particular practices mediated sla'es> attempts to sur'i'eA and scholars felt compelled to prioritize the documentation of resistance o'er the e9amination of political strife in its myriad forms. &ut of course, ecause sla'es> social and political life grew directly out of the 'iolence and dislocation of Atlantic sla'ery, these are false choices. And we may not e'en ha'e to choose etween tragic and romantic modes of storytelling, for history tinged with romance may offer the truest ac"nowledgment of the tragedy confronted y the ensla'ed: it too" heroic effort for them to ma"e social li'es .

There is romance, too, in the tragic fact that although scholars may ne'er e a le to gi'e a satisfactory account of the human e9perience in sla'ery, they ne'ertheless continue to try. If scholars were to emphasize the efforts of the ensla'ed more than the condition of sla'ery, we might at least tell richer stories a out how the endea'ors of the wea"est and most a 8ect ha'e
at times reshaped the world. The history of their social and political li'es lies etween resistance and o li'ion, not in the nature of their condition ut in their continuous struggles to rema"e it.

Those struggles are sla'ery>s e@uest

to us.

The sla'e is not socially deadBlife can always impro'e V the term is totalizing and unsustaina le "ulbertson4 '- (%aura $ul ertson, I/la'es and <ouseholds in the 7ear DastI, The -ni'ersity of $hicago Oriental Institute /eminars, 7um er K, oi.uchicago.eduCpdfCoisK.pdf CC"dh6 The concept of social death is not without criticism, howe'er, much of which re8ects the totalizing, a stract, or generalizing nature of the concept or notes the unsustaina ility of this definition when

affi9ed to specific historical or political conte9ts, including those of the 7ew World. As the ensuing chapters in this 'olume demonstrate, ensla'ed people in 7ear Dastern conte9ts could engage in social maneu'ering and hierarchal ascension e'en within the confines of sla'ery and cannot e considered socially dead or dispossessed. =oreo'er, sla'e status could e terminated or transformed through a 'ariety of mechanisms (e.g., payments, court proceedings, religious con'ersion6, meaning that the formerly ensla'ed could return to their homes and families, not permanently displaced from their original social networ"s or irth entitlements as a result of ecoming a sla'e. Wildersons argument ignores multiple e*amples of black optimism and dooms the black body to a social death +a4 '' (/aer =aty &a, teaches film at *ortsmouth -ni'ersity, researches Prace>, the Ppostcolonial>, diaspora, the transnational and film Pgenre>, African and $ari ean cinemas and film festi'als, .The -/ +ecentred )rom &lac" /ocial +eath to $ultural Transformation0, $ultural /tudies Re'iew, 'olume 2K, num er !, /eptem er !L22, CC"dh6
A few pages into Red, White and &lac", I feared that it would 8ust e a matter of time efore

bla%=associaldeath idea and multiple attac"s on issues and (him; into (theoreti%al; trouble. This happens in chapter two,

scholars he

WildersonGs disagrees with run

PThe 7arcissistic /la'e>, where he criti@ues lac" film theorists and oo"s. )or e9ample, Wilderson declares that 4ladstone Oearwood>s &lac" )ilm as /ignifying *ractice (!LLL6 P etrays a "ind of conceptual an9iety with respect to the historical o 8ect of studyB ... it clings, an9iously, to the film aste9taslegitimate o 8ect of &lac" cinema.> (J!6 <e then @uotes from Oearwood>s oo" to highlight P8ust how 'ague the aesthetic foundation of Oearwood>s attempt to construct a e>. (JE6 And yet Wilderson>s highlighting is pro lematic ecause it o'erloo"s the P+iaspora> or PAfrican +iaspora>, a "ey component in Oearwood>s thesis that, crucially, neither na'el gazes (that is, at the -/ or lac" America6 nor pretends to properly engage with lac" film. )urthermore, Wilderson separates the different wa'es of lac" film theory and approaches them, only, in terms of how a most recent one might challenge its precedent. Again, his approach is pro lematic ecause it does not mention or emphasise the inter connecti'ity ofCin lac" film theory. As a case in point, Wilderson does not lin" Tommy %ott>s mo ilisation of Third $inema canon can for lac" film theory to Oearwood>s idea of African +iaspora. (JG6 Additionally, of course, Wilderson seems unaware that Third $inema itself has een fundamentally @uestioned since %ott>s 211Ls> theory of lac" film

another %onse?uen%e of ignoring the &fri%an Diaspora is that it e@poses WildersonGs %orpus of films as unable to %arry the weight of the transnational argument he attempts to advan%e . <ere, beyond the UScentricity or
was formulated. Oet Psocial and political specificity of 3his5 filmography>, (1M6 I am tal"ing a out Wilderson>s choice of films. )or e9ample, Antwone )isher (dir. +enzel Washington, !LL!6 is attac"ed unfairly for failing to ac"nowledge Pa grid of capti'ity across spatial dimensions of the &lac" . ody0, the &lac" .home0, and the &lac" .community0> (2226 while films li"e Alan and Al ert <ughes>s =enace II /ociety (211E6, o'erloo"ed, do ac"nowledge the same grid and, additionally, pro lematise /treet Terrorism Dnforcement and *re'ention Act (/TD*6 policing. The a o'e e9amples e9pose the fact of film.

Wilderson>s du ious and

@uestiona le conclusions

on lac"

7ed, White and -la%= is parti%ularly undermined by WildersonGs propensity for exaggeration and blinkeredness. In chapter nine, P./a'age0 7egropho ia>, he writes: The
philosophical an9iety of /"ins is all too aware that through the =iddle *assage, African culture ecame &lac" Pstyle> ... &lac"ness can e placed and displaced with limitless fre@uency and across untold territories, y whoe'er so chooses. =ost important, there is nothing real &lac" people can do to either chec" or direct this process ... Anyone can say Pnigger> ecause anyone can e a Pnigger>. (!EM6K /imilarly, in chapter ten, PA $risis in

the $ommons>, Wilderson addresses the issue of P&lac" time>. &lac" is irredeema le, he argues , ecause, at no time in history had it een deemed, or deemed through the right historical moment and place. In other words, the lac" moment and place are not right ecause they are Pthe ship hold of the =iddle *assage>: Pthe most coherent temporality e'er deemed as &lac" time> ut also Pthe .moment0 of no time at all on the map of no place at all>. (!K16 7ot only does *inho>s more mature analysis e9pose this point as preposterous (see elow 6,

I also wonder what Wilderson ma"es of the countless historians> and sociologists> wor"s on sla'e ships, ship oard insurrections andCduring the =iddle *assage,F or of ground rea"ing 8azzstudies oo"s on crosscultural dialogue li"e The Other /ide of 7owhere (!LLG6. 7owhere has another side, ut once Wilderson theorises lac"s as socially and ontologically dead while dismissing 8azz as P elonging nowhere and to no one, simply there for the ta"ing>, (!!M6 there seems to e no way ac". It is therefore hardly surprising that Wilderson duc"s the need to pro'ide a solution or alternati'e to oth his sustained ashing of lac"s and anti &lac"ness.1 %ast ut not least, Red, White and &lac" ends li"e a adly plugged
announcement of a ad <ollywood film>s adly planned se@uel: P<ow does one deconstruct life? Who would enefit from such an underta"ing? The coffle approaches with its answers in tow.> (EGL6

>rogress now solves social death 000 theres momentum away from a single4 socially dead black identity %awrence4 < (Aaron, .:ague measure of African-American progress,0 The Record, 22CELCLK, %LK, pro@uest, Tashma6 A *DW RD/DAR$< $enter sur'ey released last wee" produced a mind- oggling conclusion a out African-Americans. The report says EK percent of the AfricanAmericans sur'eyed felt that lac" Americans could no longer e thought of as a single race. Although ME percent drew the opposite conclusion that thereHs no need for separate la els the notion of reassigning
racial categories ased on loosely defined internal di'ersity is a startling concept. As the study measures perceptions of progress from the perspecti'e of lac"s and whites, what emerges is a picture of lac" respondents

having less and less in common with one another. The study suggests that respondents 'iew growing gaps in ideology, culture, wealth and spiritual 'alues separating middle- class and poor African-Americans as 8ustification for assigning new racial categories. $ould there
e such a wide range of differences in the lac" community that one end of the scale or the other feels racial secession is a solution? The @uestion itself is too flawed to reach such a conclusion.

!TF W$%&E SON


The time for conversation is over . only legislation can result in pragmatic change . recent movements prove no spill0over Sharpton <),,)'C (Al /harpton, !! ;uly !L2E, .We 7eed =ore Than ;ust a $on'ersation on RaceA We 7eed
%egislati'e Action,0 http:CCwww.huffingtonpost.comCre'-al-sharptonCwe-need-more-than-8ust-a-R REJEJ2G!.html? utmRhpRrefZ lac"-'oices6CC#* This past /aturday, we witnessed a historic moment across this country. In

2LL cities from coast-to-coast, people

rallied against H/tand Oour 4roundH laws and called on the +epartment of ;ustice to in'estigate whether the unarmed teenagerHs ci'il rights were 'iolated. With only days to organize, the 7ational Action 7etwor" (7A76 spearheaded these demonstrations that pro'ed how people were engaged, 'isi ly frustrated y in8ustice and most importantly, "new that nothing would change going forward without a demand for su stanti'e action. +iscussions a out race are good, we need that as well, ut unless those con'ersations are leading to legislati'e change, they arenHt doing much for us as a nation. =any thought organizing a 2LL-city 'igil in four days was unthin"a leA many simply didnHt elie'e we could do it. &ut we did. It was grassroots mo ilization that rought tens of thousands out on a /aturday where the weather ranged from pouring rain to sweltering
heat in different cities. We watched men, women, children, &lac", White, &rown, the elderly, the young and fol"s from all socio-economic ac"grounds 8oin together to rally on the side of truth, fairness and 8ustice. We

witnessed cele rities li"e &eyoncd and ;ay-g lend their support in places li"e 7ew Oor". And we saw peaceful protesters in these cities energized to ta"e the attle for e@uality to the ne9t le'el. 7ow we 8ust need the law to catch up There are those that try to pull the wool o'er peopleHs eyes. They try to twist and alter facts so that we
.

may not get a clear picture of reality. That may wor" sometimes. &ut sooner or later, the truth shall pre'ail. And sooner rather than later, the people will demand change. Tray'on =artin was an unarmed 2K-year-old. Tray'on =artin committed no crime. Tray'on =artin went to store to uy /"ittles and an iced tea. Tray'on =artin was shot dead y a ci'ilian who had no authority to stop him. Tray'on =artinHs "iller wasnHt arrested for wee"s until after the horri le incident. Those are facts. And facts cannot e denied no matter how they may e twisted or spun. In another case in the state of )lorida, an African-American mother y the name of =arissa Ale9ander fired a warning shot to scare off her a usi'e hus and. /he was denied the a ility to use H/tand Oour 4roundH in her defense and is currently ser'ing a !L-year sentence. <ow is that 8ustice? The man who "illed Tray'on, 4eorge gimmerman, gets to return to his old lifeA meanwhile, this mother of three who was protecting herself and her children is rotting in a prison cell. That sort of latant in8ustice cannot e hidden. *eople will see through the hypocrisy and they will accept nothing less than our laws ecoming modified so as to protect all of us e@ually. We cannot li'e in a society that continues to gi'e preferential treatment to some, while castigating and punishing others. That is not progressA that is where our wor" remains. Whene'er I spea" a out the fight for ci'il rights today, some try to attac" me and say this isnHt the 21JLs. Well on August !Gth, 7A7 and =artin %uther #ing III will actually e conducting a massi'e demonstration to commemorate the MLth anni'ersary of +r. =artin %uther #ing ;r.Hs H=arch on WashingtonH. As we pay homage to his 'ision, some try to argue that thereHs no need to rally anymore. To compare todayHs challenges to those of the HJLs is 8ust as disingenuous as comparing the HJLs to the days of sla'ery. D'en though sitting at the ac" of the us was etter than eing a sla'e, it did not mean that segregation should e accepted. /ure, times are much etter now o'erall ecause so many of us fought tirelessly to ma"e it that way, ut that does not mean that we ha'e arri'ed at a fully e@ual and fair society. Women today earn more than their grandmothers did, ut that doesnHt sol'e the pro lem of gender income

In the aftermath of the gimmerman 'erdict, weH'e seen a lot of tal". A discussion on the state of race in America is of course needed, ut to reduce the worth of our li'es into high row intellectual discourse is in itself profiling. When young men of color in places li"e 7ew Oor" $ity are disproportionately stopped and fris"ed y the police, we need more than 8ust tal". When a mother of three fires a warning shot to scare off an a usi'e hus and (whom she had a protecti'e order against6 gets !L years in prison, we need more than 8ust tal". When our prisons and courtrooms are o'erwhelmingly filled with minorities, we need more than 8ust tal". And when a young oy li"e Tray'on =artin can e shot to death while simply heading home from the store, the time for tal" is o'er. 7owHs the time for legislati'e action.
disparity. D'ery generation ma"es progress, ut e'ery generation must continue the 8ourney. Our ne9t step is ma"ing sure we all recei'e e@ual protection under the law.

Our approach to the aff creates a system of hope that>s etter than the alt- positi'ism fuels progressi'e engagement and rethin"ing of power relations, and spurs possi ilities for future change #irou*4 ,--B <enry, (When <ope is /u 'ersi'e, 7o'em er 2, !LLG. Ti""un :ol. 21, 7o. J, http:CCwww.henryagirou9.comConlineRarticlesCTi""unU!Lpiece.pdf5 6

Is it possi le to imagine hope for 8ustice and h,umanity after the torture of Ira@i detainees (including some 8ust in their teens6 y American soldiers at A u 4hrai prison? What does hope mean when the -nited /tates is 'irtually unchallenged as it incarcerates unprecedented num ers of young people of color? What does hope teach us at a time in which go'ernment lies and deception are e9posed on a daily asis in the media and yet appear to ha'e little effect on *resident &ush>s popular support? What resources and 'isions does hope offer in a society where greed is considered 'enera le and profit is the most important measure of personal achie'ement and social ad'ance? What is the rele'ance of hope at a time when most attempts to interrupt the operations of an incipient fascism appear to fuel a growing cynicism rather than promote widespread indi'idual and collecti'e acts of resistance? It is hard not to elie'e that politics in American life has ecome corrupt, that progressi'e social change is a distan memory, or that hope is the last refuge of deluded romantics. $i'ic engagement seems irrele'ant in light of the growing power of multinational corporations to pri'atize pu lic space and time. We ha'e less timeBand fewer ci'ic spacesBfor e9periencing oursel'es as political agents. =ar"et 'alues replace social 'alues. *ower has ecome disconnected from issues of e@uity, social 8ustice, and ci'ic responsi ility. *eople with the education and means appear more and more willing to retreat into the safe, pri'atized encla'es of the family, religion, and consumption. Those without the lu9ury of such choices pay a terri le price in what gygmunt &auman, in his oo" 4lo alization, has called the .hard currency of human suffering. 0 4i'en these social conditions, some theorists ha'e suggested that democratic politics as a site of contestation, critical e9change, and engagement has come to an end. We must not gi'e up so easily. +emocracy has to e struggled o'er, e'en in the face of a most appalling crisis of educational opportunity and political agency. $ynicism reeds apathyBnot the re'erse. The current depressing state of our politics and the an"ruptcy of our political language issues a challenge to us to formulate a new language and 'ision that can reframe @uestions of agency, ethics, and meaning for a su stanti'e democracy. $rafting such a new political language will re@uire what I call .educated hope.0 <ope is the precondition for indi'idual and social struggle. Rather than seeing it as an indi'idual procli'ity, we must see hope as part of a roader politics that ac"nowledges those social, economic, spiritual, and cultural conditions in the present that ma"e certain "inds of agency and democratic politics possi le. With this understanding, hope ecomes not merely a wistful attempt to loo" eyond the horizon of the gi'en, ut what Andrew &en8amin, in *resent <ope, calls .a structural condition of the present.0 The philosopher Drnst &loch pro'ides essential theoretical insights on the importance of hope. <e argues that hope must e concrete, a spar" that not only reaches out eyond the surrounding emptiness of capitalist relations, anticipating a etter world in the future, ut a spar" that also spea"s to us in the world we li'e in now y presenting tas"s ased on the challenges of the present time. In The -topian )unction of Art and %iterature, &loch argues that hope cannot e remo'ed from the world. <ope is not .something li"e nonsense or a solute fancyA rather it is not yet in the sense of a possi ilityA that it could e there if we could only do something for it.0 In this 'iew, hope ecomes a discourse of criti@ue and social transformation. <ope ma"es the leap for us etween critical education, which tells us what must e changedA political agency, which

gi'es us the means to ma"e changeA and the concrete struggles through which change happens. <ope, in short, gi'es su stance to the recognition that e'ery present is incomplete. )or theorists such as &loch and his more contemporary counterparts li"e =ichael %erner, $ornel West, and Ro in +.4. #elley, hope is anticipatory rather than messianic, mo ilizing rather than therapeutic. -nderstood this way, the longing for a more humane society does not collapse into a retreat from the world ut ecomes a means to engage with present eha'iors, institutional formations, and e'eryday practices. <ope in this conte9t does not ignore the worst dimensions of human suffering, e9ploitation, and social relationsA on the contrary, as Thomas +unn writes, it ac"nowledges the need to sustain the .capacity to see the worst and offer more than that for our consideration0 (in :ocations of *olitical Theory, edited y ;ason A. )ran" and ;ohn Tam ornino6. <ence, hope is more than a politics, it is also a pedagogical and performati'e practice that pro'ides the foundation for ena ling human eings to learn a out their potential as moral and ci'ic agents. <ope is the outcome of those educational practices and struggles that tap into memory and li'ed e9periences while at the same time lin"ing indi'idual re-sponsi ility with a progressi'e sense of social change. As a form of utopian longing, educated hope opens up horizons of comparison y e'o"ing not 8ust different histories ut different futures. Dducated hope is a su 'ersi'e force when it pluralizes politics y opening up a space for dissent, ma"ing authority accounta le, and ecoming an acti'ating presence in promoting social transformation. There is a long history in the -nited /tates of hope as a su 'ersi'e force. D9amples are e'ident in the struggles of the $i'il Rights and feminist mo'ements in the 21MLs and 21JLs against racism, po'erty, se9ism, and the war in :ietnam. =ore recent e9amples can e found among young people demonstrating against multinational corporations and the World Trade Organization in cities as di'erse as =el ourne, /eattle, and 4enoa. <ope was on full display among organized la or, intellectuals, students, and wor"ers protesting together in the streets of 7ew Oor" $ity against &ush>s policies and his followers at the Repu lican 7ational $on'ention. This is not to say that a politics and pedagogy of hope is a lueprint for the future: it is not. What hope offers is the elief, simply, that different futures are possi le. In this way, hope can ecome a su 'ersi'e force, pluralizing politics y opening up a space for dissent, contingency, indeterminancy. .)or me,0 writes ;udith &utler, .there is more hope in the world when we can @uestion what is ta"en for granted, especially a out what it is to e human0 (cited y 4ary Olson and %ynn Worsham in ;A$!L:G6. gygmunt &auman in a con'ersation with #eith Tester (in $on'ersations with gygmunt &auman6 goes further, arguing that the resurrection of any 'ia le notion of political and social agency is dependent upon a culture of @uestioning, the purpose of which, as he puts it, is to ."eep the fore'er une9hausted and unfulfilled human potential open, fighting ac" all attempts to foreclose and pre-empt the further unra'elling of human possi ilities, prodding human society to go on @uestioning itself and pre'enting that @uestioning from e'er stalling or eing declared Snished.0 The goal of educated hope is not to li erate the indi'idual from the socialVa central tenet of neoli eralismB ut to ta"e seriously the notion that the indi'idual can only e li erated through the social. Dducated hope as a su 'ersi'e, defiant practice should pro'ide a lin", howe'er transient, pro'isional, and conte9tual, etween 'ision and criti@ue on the one hand, and engagement and transformation on

the other. That is, for hope to e conse@uential it has to e grounded in a pro8ect that has some hold on the present. <ope ecomes meaningful to the degree that it identifies agencies and processes, offers alternati'es to an age of profound pessimism, reclaims an ethic of compassion and 8ustice, and struggles for those institutions in which e@uality, freedom, and 8ustice hourish as part of the ongoing struggle for a glo al democracy. !nd4 your civil society links are wrong0 black positionality and civil society arent always already defined by antagonism. The idea that civil society is corrupt ignores black agency throughout history (alc/ewski '' ;oan =alczews"i ,Assistant *rofessor of <istory and /ocial /tudies in the +epartment of <umanities and the /ocial /ciences in the *rofessions at the /teinhardt /chool of $ulture, Dducation and <uman +e'elopment, 7ew Oor" -ni'ersity. Journal of Policy History :olume !E, 7um er E, !L22
While progress was significantly slower in the +eep /outh, the

;eanes teachers there still promoted centralization and networ"s that could open opportunities for participation in policy de'elopment. A state networ" of 4eorgia ;eanes teachers issued monthly reports in order to share accomplishments and news with other teachers across the state , ut also with the state di'ision
and with philanthropic agents, and the teacher in +ooley reported that a district teachers> association meeting was held with representati'es from se'en counties present.22M In 21EM, <elen Whiting was appointed the 4eorgia /tate /uper'isor of $olored Dlementary /chools in the +i'ision of 7egro Dducation, and egan to administer reading achie'ement tests throughout the state y the end of her first year.22J /he issued regular .itinerary reports0 a out her wor" in the field, including suggestions to teachers that would promote centralization, such as adopting the /tate Reading *rogram in counties and see"ing assistance from the county super'isor.22K The 4eorgia state agent, reflecting upon a decade of progress, noted that .the /tate Agents for 7egro /chools, unli"e the other state school super'isors, are free to mo'e in and out among oth white and 7egro groups without considering the political implications of e'ery step ta"en . . . the counties in 4eorgia now pro'ide secondary schools for 7egroes at pu lic e9pense . . ., 3which5 has een accomplished y 'isiting the 'arious counties and outlining a program with the stimulus of state and philanthropic funds.022F =uch

credit has een gi'en to the lac" churches in the /outh for their role in community organizing, and where the church was administrati'ely part of a roader national or state organization, it could ha'e a profound role in connecting the community outward . <owe'er, the schools also had this a ility through their connection to northern philanthropists, state and local political systems, and, as an institution that was largely ignored, as a site for mo ilization . Teachers there were a le to encourage institutional inno'ation at the local le'el. As society ecame more interdependent, this was a crucial lin" to the social and political structure that disenfranchisement "ept out of reach, and an important institutional site for participating in the de'elopment of policy. ;ac"son +a'is, acting as field agent for the 4D&, was as"ed to descri e the accomplishments of the ;eanes teachers. .They succeeded in organizing the people into school community associations and ringing to ear the united sentiment of the community in fa'or of etter school uildings , longer terms and more practical wor" in the schools y
introducing simple industries. . . . The schools lost their isolation.0221 *u lic-pri'ate colla oration was essential to education de'elopment in the /outh and ultimately resulted in a stronger centralized school system. The 3Dnd *age EGJ5 concept of .agency0 can e defined along a continuum that includes anything from su tle forms of resistance to group

lac" teachers were a le to engage with colla orati'e relationships, and in doing so e9ercised agency more roadly defined, helped to esta lish centralized administrati'e capacity in the lower tiers of go'ernment, and undermined the strength of sectional interests. It is not possi le truly to understand lac" agency in the /outh without understanding the institutional 'enues in which it operated. /chooling helped to ma"e political opportunity structures more permea le. In addition to people
insurgency.2!L <owe'er,

li"e Annie <olland and <elen Whiting, pu

lic-pri'ate colla oration and centralization also

pro'ided 'enues for lac"s li"e W. T. &. Williams, who ser'ed as a field agent for the ;eanes )und, and <ollis )rissel as principal of the Tus"egee Institute, to ha'e significant influence on policy decision that affected rural communities. The actions of indi'idual reformers were important, ut it is essential also to understand the roader dynamic of interest groups and institutions that challenged the political structure. /chooling pro'ided an institutional 'enue for rural lac"s to mo ilize, and it should e placed more centrally in the reform dynamic as an early institutional site for the mo ilization of lac"s. Rural lac" reformers recognized the 'alue of promoting an education system not 8ust as an end in itself, especially gi'en the 'alue placed on it as the antithesis to sla'ery, ut also as a means to create a'enues for greater participation in the
political and social structure. They participated in the e9pansion of go'ernment at the local le'el through their efforts to create organizational capacity, and promoted 'oluntary organizations that created a common culture within and eyond local communities and roadened frames of support for their own agenda.2!2 In this regard, oth conceptually and institutionally, .education0

ecame the central meeting point for reformers, and the place in which organizational forms, parallel structures, and new identities were created ultimately to o'ercome southern opposition to educational ad'ancement . &oth of these ideals
con'erged in the form of schooling, which ecame a unifying organizational 'enue. %ocal school- ased organizations ecame central to the creation of a more ureaucratic state y facilitating the institutionalism of reforms at the local le'el and pro'iding lin"s to policy initiati'es that emerged from philanthropists and their agents outside the community. It would e o'erstating it to ma"e the claim that the lac" community mo ilized etween 21L1 and 21EM as an organized interest group in the /outh, or to claim that it had a formally defined role in policy de'elopment. <owe'er, education reformers were a le to mo ilize the community through 3Dnd *age EGK5 schooling in a more organized manner than has een recognized. /chools helped to promote e9panding political opportunities, organizational strength, and shared cognitions in the community.2!! The lac" community, especially through the wor" of the ;eanes teachers, was a le to utilize the organizational repertoires of schooling to connect local institutions to the political structures outside rural communities, creating political inno'ation and promoting reform. /outhern

lac"s did indeed ha'e an

instrument for constructing new collecti'e identities A schooling ser'ed as a lin" to alternati'e models
of political organization and participation far earlier than what has typically een attri uted to the community. Through schools, teachers were a le to e9ploit and e'en initiate the pu lic-pri'ate colla orations that de'eloped etween philanthropists and state and local go'ernments in order to institutionalize reforms, especially through state centralization. The insurgency that de'eloped in later decades is inde ted to the organizational structures and community mo ilization that occurred through schooling.

The premise of their 3 is wrong0 blacks do not start from the position of social death0 their evidence is flawed (aty +a '' /aer *rofessor of )ilm /tudies at *ortsmouth -ni'ersity in the -#, researches race, postcolonialism, diaspora, the transnational and film Pgenre>, African and $arri ean $inemas and )ilm )esti'als.( .The -/ +ecentred: )rom &lac" /ocial +eath to $ultural Transformation,0 $ultural /tudies Re'iew 2K:!, /eptem er,6 Red, White and &lac" is particularly undermined y Wilderson>s propensity for e9aggeration and lin"eredness. In chapter nine, P./a'age0 7egropho ia>, he writes: The philosophical an9iety of /"ins is all too aware that through the =iddle *assage, African culture ecame &lac" Pstyle> ... &lac"ness can e placed and displaced with limitless fre@uency and across untold territories, y whoe'er so chooses. =ost important, there is nothing real &lac" people can do to either chec" or direct this process ... Anyone can
say Pnigger> ecause anyone can e a Pnigger>. (!EM6K /imilarly, in chapter ten, PA $risis in the $ommons>, Wilderson addresses the issue of P&lac" time>. &lac" is irredeema le, he argues, ecause, at no time in history had it een deemed, or deemed through the right historical moment and place. In other words, the lac" moment and place are not right ecause they are Pthe ship hold of the =iddle *assage>: Pthe most coherent temporality e'er deemed as &lac" time> ut also Pthe .moment0 of no time at all on the map of no place at all>. (!K16 7ot only does *inho>s more mature analysis e9pose this point as preposterous (see elow6, I

also wonder what Wilderson ma"es of the countless historians> and sociologists> wor"s on sla'e ships, ship oard insurrections andCduring the =iddle *assage,F or of ground rea"ing 8azzstudies oo"s on crosscultural dialogue li"e The

Other /ide of 7owhere (!LLG6. 7owhere has another side, ut once Wilderson theorises lac"s as socially and ontologically dead while dismissing 8azz as P elonging nowhere and to no one, simply there for the ta"ing>, (!!M6 there seems to e no way ac" . It is therefore hardly surprising that Wilderson duc"s the need to pro'ide a solution or alternati'e to oth his sustained ashing of lac"s and anti &lac"ness.1 %ast ut not least, Red, White and &lac" ends li"e a
adly plugged announcement of a ad <ollywood film>s adly planned se@uel: P<ow does one deconstruct life? Who would enefit from such an underta"ing? The coffle approaches with its answers in tow.>

Wilderson is wrong4 reductionist4 and essentialist Ellison '' =ary, *h+, )ellow, African American and Indian American history and culture, #eele -ni'ersity, (.Re'iew of: Red, White and &lac": cinema and the structure of -/ antagonisms0http:CCrac.sagepu .comCcontentCMEC!C2LL.full.pdf^html?rssZ2, Acc: FCMC2!6CC=odermatt These are two illuminating, ut frustratingly flawed oo"s. Their approaches are different, although oth fre@uently @uote )rantz )anon and ;ac@ues %acan. )ran" Wilderson utilises the iconic theoreticians within the conte9t of a study that concentrates on a conceptual ideology that, he claims, is ased on a fusion of =ar9ism, feminism, postcolonialism and psychology. <e uses a small num er of independent films to illustrate his theories. $harlene Regester has a more practical framewor". /he di'ides her oo" into nine chapters de'oted to indi'idual female actors and then wea'es her ideological concepts into these specific chapters. &oth ha'e a pro lem with clarity. Regester uses less comple9 language than Wilderson, ut still manages to e o tuse at times. Wilderson starts from a position of using ontology and grammar as his main tools, ut manages to consistently misuse or misappropriate terms li"e fungi le or fungi ility. Wilderson writes as an intelligent and challenging author, ut is often frustrating. Although his language is complicated, his concepts are often o'ersimplified. <e en'isions e'ery lac" person in film as a sla'e who is suffering from irrepara le alienation from any meaningful sense of cultural identity. <e elie'es that filmma"ers, including lac" filmma"ers, are 'ictims of a depri'ation of meaning that has een condensed y ;ac@ues %acan as a Pwall of language> as well as an ina ility to create a clear 'oice in the face of gratuitous 'iolence. <e cites )rantz )anon, Orlando *atterson and <ortense /piller as eing among those theorists who effecti'ely in'estigate the issues of lac" structural non-communica ility. <is own attempts to define Pwhat is lac"?>, Pa su 8ect?>, Pan o 8ect?>, Pa sla'e?>, seem ound up with limiting preconceptions, and he e'aluates neither lac"ness nor the Pred> that is part of his title in any truly meaningful way.

!lt recreates racial divisions0 leaves no interspace for those who dont meet defined categories of !frican !merican0 Se*ton '- ;ared (.*roprieties of $oalition: &lac"s, Asians, and the *olitics of *olicing0. http:CCwww.scri d.comCdocCJGEE1GFGC/e9ton-proprieties-of-$oalition $rit /ocial !L2L EJ: FK6CC=odermatt

<owe'er, the notion of an Pendemic> lac"-white model of racial thought is something of a social fiction V one might say a misreading V that depends upon a reduction of the sophistication of the paradigm in @uestion. Once that reduction is performed, the fiction can e deployed for a range of political and intellectual purposes (#im !LLJ6. In addressing the call to displace the lac"-white paradigm, we may recognize that its purported institutionalization indicates more a out the enduring force of anti- lac"ness (4ordon 211M, 211F6 than the insistence of lac" scholars, acti'ists or communities more generally.1 When roaching the Pe9planatory difficulty> (Omi andWinant 211E: 2226 of present-day racial politics, then, one wonders e9actly who and what is addressed y the demand to go P eyond lac" and white>. One finds a litany of complicating factors and neglected su 8ects, ut it is accompanied y a

failure to account cogently for the implications of this newfound comple9ity. The recently appointed +ean of the Wayne /tate -ni'ersity %aw /chool, )ran" Wu, has written: P. eyond lac" and white0 is an oppositional slogan N it names itself ironically against the pre'ailing traditionNIt is easy enough to argue that society needs a new paradigm, ut it is much harder to e9plain how such an approach would wor" in actual practice.> (Wu !LLJ: 9i6 It is harder still to e9plain why such an
approach should e adopted. In fact, the implementation of the Pnew paradigm> of racial theory seems unfeasi le ecause it does not V and perhaps cannot V de'elop a coherent ethical 8ustification as an attempt to analyze and contest racism. Ta"en together, these am iguities eg a "ey @uestion: what economy of enunciation, what rhetorical distri ution of sanctioned spea"ing positions and claims to legitimacy are produced y the in8unction to end P iracial theorizing> (Omi and Winant 211G: 2MG6? In pursuing this @uestion, consider the following pro'ocation y another noted legal scholar, =ari=atsuda (!LL!6, offered at a 211K symposium on critical race theory at the Oale %aw /chool: When we say we need to mo'e eyond &lac" and white, this is what a whole lot of people say or feel or thin": PThan" goodness we can get off that paradigm, ecause those &lac" people made me feel so uncomforta le. I "now all a out &lac"s, ut I really don>t "now anything a out Asians, and while we>re deconstructing that &lac"-white paradigm, we also need to reconsider the category of race altogether, since race, as you "now, is a constructed category, and than" god I don>t ha'e to ta"e those angry lac" people seriously anymore> (=atsuda !LL!: E1M6. It is important to note that this contention, li"e those of Ture and <amilton and Wu a o'e, is not issued against progressi'e political coalition, ut rather is drawn from a sympathetic meditation on the need for more ade@uate models of racial analysis and strategies of multiracial alliance- uilding in and eyond the -/ conte9t.What =atsuda polemically identifies are dangers attendant to the une9amined desire for new analyses and the an9ious dri'e for alliance, namely, the tendency to gloss o'er discrepant histories, minimize ine@ualities orn of di'ergent structural positions, and disa'ow the historical centrality and uni@ueness of anti- lac"ness for the operations of Pglo al white supremacy> (=ills 211F6. =atsuda urges the refusal of what historian +a'id<ollinger (!LLE6

&y calling to @uestion the moti'e force of a nominally critical inter'ention on the lac"-white paradigm, =atsuda traces a fault line in the field formation of Asian American /tudies that mar"s an opening for the present in@uiry. It seems that the @uestion of anti- lac" racism trou les contemporary efforts at mediation among the non-white V etween lac" and non- lac" communities of color V and interpolates PAsian American panethnicity> (Dspiritu
has coined the Pone-hate rule> or the presumption of Pthe monolithic character of white racism>. 211!6 in ways that e9ceed e'en the immanent criti@ue of that conceptual touchstone and principle of organization (%owe 211JA Ono 211M6. If one of the enefits of a reconstructed racial theory addressing Pthe increasing comple9ity of racial politics and racial identity today> (Omi and Winant 211G: 2M!6 is its capacity to grasp Pantagonisms and alliances among racially defined minority groups> (211G: 2MG6, that political-intellectual enterprise is not without hazard.2L

Turn0 the very act of starting with slavery effaces the violence committed against the Native !mericans4 allows the continuation of colonialist violence against them and makes sovereignty impossible0 impact is case (oreton0 obinson ?, Aileen, fueensland -ni'ersity *rof of Indigenous /tudies,
(.Transnational Whiteness =atters>, http:CC oo"s.google.comC oo"s? idZD8tr&R<sEff$[pgZ*A1L[lpgZ*A1L[d@Ztheorizing^a out^whiteness^does^not^ egin^with^nor^center^the^ap propriation^of^Indigenous^peoplesH^lands^and^the^continuing^so'ereignty^struggles^with^the^-/^nation^state.[s ourceZ l[otsZ+KJ)9ToO8g[sigZ&$;7gLRA@@g8cd8 =rTzta''arD[hlZen[saZX[eiZcE'M-f%yAsKR@A4foG+fAw['edZ L$$FfJADwAAe'Zonepage[@ZtheorizingU!La outU!LwhitenessU!LdoesU!LnotU!L eginU!LwithU!Lnor U!LcenterU!LtheU!LappropriationU!LofU!LIndigenousU!LpeoplesHU!LlandsU!LandU!LtheU!Lcontinuing U!Lso'ereigntyU!LstrugglesU!LwithU!LtheU!L-/U!LnationU!Lstate.[fZfalse6 CC=odermatt

+espite the colonial history of the -nited /tates and racializing 7ati'e Americans in popular culture, as the em odiment of H redness,H the whiteness literature ma"es a racial demarcation etween African Americans and 7ati'e Americans. That is y ma"ing lac"ness synonymous with HraceH African Americans are placed in a reified position within the literature. This inary understanding of HraceH places the literature in one sense fut of colonial history. That is the theorizing

a out whiteness does not egin with nor center the appropriation of Indigenous peoplesH lands and the continuing so'ereignty struggles with the -/ nation state. They are, ut they are marginalized within the theories of race and whiteness offered y whiteness studies despite its political commitment to and epistemological engagement with white race pri'ilege and power. The conceptual lin"s etween the pri'ileges and enefits that flow from American citizenship to 7ati'e American dispossession remains in'isi le. Instead sla'ery, war and migration are the narrati'es y which the historically contingent positionality of whiteness unfolds. This reflects a failure to address the sociodiscursi'e way that white possession functions to produce racism. The racism attending the sociodiscursi'e nature of white
possession informed the esta lishment of the Ad'isory &oard of Race in 211K. *resident $linton esta lished this &oard to counsel and inform him a out race and racial reconciliation couching the terms of reference within a ci'il rights framewor".GG 7o 7ati'e American representati'e was appointed to the &oard e'en though they are the only racial group re@uired to carry a lood @uantum card as proof of tri al mem ership.GM This e9clusion was the catalyst for numerous protests y different 7ati'e American groups. They stated that while 7ati'e Americans shared with other racial groups the need for impro'ing their socioeconomic and legal conditions, there were other conditions not shared. They argued that their position within the -/A was uni@ue ecause of their so'ereignties and treating with the 7ation /tate. The racism that they e9perience is predicated on this relationship. 7ati'e American so'ereignty is constantly under threat y the 7ation /tate and its 'arious mechanisms of go'ernance such as the *lenary *owers of the -nited /tates $ongress. Within their daily li'es they e9perience the effects of ro"en treaties, loss of land and cultural rights, genocide and reaches of fiduciary duty. They are confronted y the constant attle with $ongressmen and /tate 4o'ernors who wish to diminish their rights y framing Ithe economic and political empowerment of Indigenous tri es as e'idence of a threatening tri al mo'ement to transgress the temporal and spatial oundaries of colonial rule, consume American property and colonise the American political system.IGJ Resisting and diminishing 7ati'e American so'ereignties also includes tactics such as positioning their claims outside racism which ser'es to protect and reinscri e possessi'e in'estments in the nation as a white possession. /ome twel'e months after its esta lishment, *resident $linton was in'ited to discuss his Race Ad'isory &oard with a panel of eight people on a *&/ roadcast. One mem er of the panel was 7ati'e American /herman Ale9ie. The panel discussed with $linton a num er of race issues including affirmati'e action. +uring the show $linton did not address 7ati'e American so'ereignty claims ut tried to connect with Ale9ie y informing him that his grandmother was one-@uarter $hero"ee. %ater in the program Ale9ie was as"ed if he was often engaged y others in discussions a out race to which he replied that a dialogue often ta"es place when he is approached y people who Itell me theyHre $hero"ee.IG2 In other words people do not tal" a out racism to Ale9ie unless they claim some form of Indigeneity. Ale9ieHs comment ser'es to illustrate how $linton tries to capitalize on a 7ati'e American ancestry y sta"ing a possessi'e claim to a su 8ect position that is not purely white in order to connect with his nati'e rother while ha'ing e9cluded 7ati'e Americans from the Race $ommittee. $linton can sta"e a possessi'e claim to $hero"ee descent ecause there is no threat to his in'estment in his white identity, which carries a great deal of cultural capital ena ling him to ma"e the claim on iological grounds outside of $hero"ee so'ereignty. What $linton was also signifying to the audience was that race does not matter: e'en a person of $hero"ee descent can e *resident of the -nited /tates ecause this is the land of freedom, li erty and e@uality. A similar rhetorical strategy was also deployed in =arch !LLF y &arac" O ama in his speech on race in *hiladelphia, which was framed y the lac"Cwhite inary operationalizing narrati'es of sla'ery and migration. O ama declared that sla'ery was the original sin in the ma"ing of the nation and it is the African American e9perience that dominates his speech though he ac"nowledges %atinos, <ispanics and refers to 7ati'e Americans once. <is narrati'e on migration is reser'ed for white wor"ing and middle class people who he says feel they ha'e not een pri'ileged y their race, they ha'e wor"ed hard to uild their dream ut are now 'ictims of glo alization. O

ama sta"es a possessi'e claim to whiteness throughout this speech y discursi'ely operationalizing an American dream which is eyond race. <e stages this through an appeal to $hristian principles, ci'il rights, patnotlsm, citizenship,
li erty, freedom and e@uality noting that the +eclaration of Independence was de'eloped y men who Itra'elled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution.IGF The tyranny and persecution inflicted upon 7ati'e Americans and sla'es y white male possessors who framed the constitution is disa'owed y O ama, who epitomizes them as the earers of freedom and li erty. $lintonHs e9ecuti'e and personal actions and O

amaHs speech ser'e3s5 to negate 7ati'e American claims that race and racism were operating, when Indigenous peoples

were dispossessed, and they continue to mar" their e'eryday li'es and so'ereignty claims. The genealogy of racism
toward 7ati'e Americans can e traced ac" to I4ree" and Roman myths of warli"e, ar arian tri es and i lical accounts of wild men cursed y 4odI which informed renaissance-era tra'el narrati'es descri ing them as the em odiment of primiti'e human sa'agery.G1 Dnlightenment theorists such as %oc"e and <o es de'eloped their ideas of the state of nature utilizing the American Indian as the @uintessential e9ample of Ihumanity li'ing in its pure, unadulterated sa'age state.I These ideas operated discursi'ely to inform theories a out the rights of man within the conte9t of the rise of democracy relegating Indigenous people to a state of nature without any so'ereign rights. They continue to circulate pre'enting Indigenous so'ereignties from gaining recognition as rele'ant and alternati'e 'isions of differently constituted modemities and glo al futures.

The e9clusion of 7ati'e Americans from the Race $ommittee correlates with their in'isi ility within the whiteness literature. 7ati'e Americans are located outside HracismH ecause -nited /tatesH status as a former colony and its current mode of colonization is separated from its historical narrati'e as eing the land of li erty, freedom and e@uality. $O7$%-/IO7 I ha'e shown that white possession operates discursi'ely within the whiteness literature shaping analyses a out its social construction and morphology which are di'orced from its colonial history and colonizing present. Tropes of migration and sla'ery ecome the dominant narrati'es that inform analyses. The historical amnesia within the literature is tied to what white possession promises - migrants can ecome
white and lac"s can achie'e racial e@uality. The selecti'e historical amnesia mitigates the fear of opening oneself up epistemologically and onto logically to eing a disoriented, displaced and diasporic racialized su 8ect whose e9istence

Instead it is the lac"Cwhite inary that ecomes the parameter for the constitution of whiteness y operationalizing lac"ness as an epistemological possession . Indigenous so'ereignties within
within the nation state is predicated on the continuing di'estment of Indigenous peopleHs so'ereign rights. the -/A are e9cluded from the whiteness literature ecause analyses of HraceH and H whitenessH are sociodiscursi'ely constituted y the racial contract and white possession which ena le, constrain and discipline su 8ects in 'arious ways within and outside the academy. White possession sets the limits of "nowledge a out the lac"Cwhite inary disappearing

practices of "nowledge production wor" to deny Indigenous so'ereignties as they reinforce the power, control and authority of the nation as a white possession . The wor" produced in the field of
whiteness studies within the -nited /tates of America is written on and yet o'er the so'ereign ground of 7ati'e Americans and Indigenous people from its other territories. While this literature does produce "nowledge a out whiteness and racism, there are powerful 'ested interests in not "nowing Indigenous so'ereignties and continuing to "now Indigeneity in ways that confine it to a specialist domain of ethnographic e9pertise. The

eyond or ehind the in'ention of this "nowledge mediated through the racial contract. These

failure of this literature to address the e9plicit colonial and continuing imperialism of the nation state results in the writing off of Indigenous so'ereignties in the ser'ice of white possession. This ser'icing produces a particular way of eing racialized within the -nited /tates of America and is fundamental oth to its esta lishment and to its continued e9istence . &efense0 speaking about race in a white symbolic economy like the debate community assures false adoptionE1udges and debaters will talk the talk in debate rounds to feed their moral e;uilibriums without actually causing change. >itcher < V&en professor of sociology at -ni'ersity of Westminster.(. The *olitics of =ulticulturalism0,
khttp:CCwww.worldcat.orgCtitleCpolitics-of-multiculturalism-race-and-racism-in-contemporaryritainCoclcCE2FJKGEJ!6CC=odermatt What is particularly interesting a out these modern-day morality plays is the particular status of the the pu lic response it engenders. The former always

ra%ist a%t and

constitutes a great .reudian slip of ethical propriety: it is, of course, ne'er Preally meant>. ;ade 4oody, *atric" =ercer, e'en the policeman eating the shit out of Toni $omer V all of them are @uic" to deny they really are racists. They were caught off-

guard, unawares, misconstrued. The amplification of their error across media platforms reminds us of ;eremy
&eadle>s old-fashioned reality T:: they had, indeed, een framed. $ompare this, then, to the popular response, where racism comes to e identified and named. This

theatre of mass disappro'al is not, in the main,

disingenuous. When Ofcom came to

e incorporated into the &ig &rother drama as an alternati'e site for the registration of telephone 'otes, this was an organic manifestation of the popular politics of reality T:. It was a protest

The point to ma"e here is not to challenge the sincerity of the reaction, ut rather to consider the conditions under which such instances of impecca le anti-racism come to e e9pressed. All pu lic discussion of race is today articulated from an anti-racist position. Indeed, it is in fact the only position from which to spea": it is not possi le to mention the su 8ect without stressing one>s anti-racist credentials . All this is of course well and good: it should indeed e impossi le to eg to differ. Oet it is at the same time still worth noting that this ethical in8unction on racist reference ma"es the anti-racist response a n oddly hollow act, for if to spea" a out race immediately places one in a superior position of 8udgment , then to do so is to simultaneously remo'e oneself from the field of racist practice: it e9cuses one from the possi ility of eing 8udged. We are as a result operating a%%ording to a so%ial logi% where racism only e9ists to e condemned: the rapidly censored spillages from the racist unconscious channelled y the Pmisunderstood> 'ictims of reality T: ha'e a single purpose, and that purpose is to feed our disappro ation. The popular spirit of anti-racism is not interested in much eyond these spectacular slips,
that was V at least in its origins V @uite unorchestrated y the newspapers or other peripheral media. for the sustained, longstanding and institutional facts of racist &ritain cannot e ooed off with a te9t 'ote to Ofcom. They are not amena le to the armchair acti'ism that has seen anti-racism transformed into a cause for a twenty-first century green-in" rigade, treated as e'idence of a lapse in pu lic morality that might, in pruder times, ha'e ran"ed alongside the display of nudity or the 'ocalization of a rude word. And so, eyond the e9citement and pu lic spectacle that appeared to in'alidate &audrillard>s neat pessimism, we are witness to its confirmation in this strangely empty form of 'irtual reality racism. The racist act or incident is entirely incidental, though it is V as in the case of &ig &rother V always etter if it ta"es place in a controlled en'ironment. It is racism reduced to a resource, a material which feeds our popular ethics of anti-racism$

+he ideal form of virtual ra%ism is a ra%ism that seems to have had an essential property emptied out of it/ it is a ra%ism where nobody appears to get hurt$ 6ur popular %ulture is on %onstant alert for this pre%ious substan%e, always on its tantaliHing trail$ We latch onto incidents upon which it can e hoo"ed, temporarily pinned up for our audience, so that we can hold it efore us and admonish it with full 'igour.

Their argument elevates white supremacy to an all0pervasive forceEthis conceptual e*pansion hides the actual practice of racism and makes breaking it down more difficult !ndersen C . =argaret %. Andersen, *rofessor of /ociology and WomenHs /tudies and :ice *ro'ost for
Academic Affairs at the -ni'ersity of +elaware, !LLE, (.Whitewashing Race: A $ritical *erspecti'e on Whiteness,0 in White Out: The $ontinuing /ignificance of Racism, ed +oane [ &onilla-/il'a, p. !F6 $onceptually, one

of the ma8or pro lems in the whiteness literature is the reification of whiteness as a concept, as an e9perience, and as an identity. This practice not only leads to conceptual o fuscation ut also impedes the possi ility for empirical analysis . In this literature, IwhitenessI comes to mean 8ust a out e'erything associated with racial domination. As such, whiteness ecomes a slippery and elusi'e concept. Whiteness is presented as any or all of the following: identity, self-understanding, social practices, group eliefs, ideology, and a system of domination. As one critic writes, I If historical actors are said to ha'e eha'ed the way they did mainly ecause they were

white, then thereHs little room left for more nuanced analysis of their moti'es and meaningsI (/towe 211J:KK6. And Alastair &onnett points out that whiteness Iemerges from this criti@ue as an omnipresent and all-powerful historical force. Whiteness is seen to e responsi le for the failure of socialism to de'elop in America, for racism, for the impo'erishment of humanity. With the H lameH comes a new "ind of centering: Whiteness, and White people, are turned into the "ey agents of historical change, the shapers of contemporary America I (211J :2ME6.+espite noting that there is differentiation among whites and warning against using whiteness as a monolithic category, most of the literature still proceeds to do so, re'ealing a reductionist tendency. D'en claiming to show its multiple forms, most writers essentialize and reify whiteness as something that directs most of Western history (4allagher !LLL6. <ence while trying to Ideconstruct0 whiteness and see the u i@uitousness of whiteness , the literature at the same time reasserts and reinstates it (/towe 211J:KK6. )or e9ample, =ichael Dric +yson suggests that whiteness is identity, ideology, and institution (+yson, @uoted in $hennault 211F:ELL6. &ut if it is all these things, it ecomes an analytically useless concept . $hristine $lar"
and ;ames OH+onnell write: Ito reference it reifies it, to refrain from referencing it o scures the persistent, per'asi'e, and seemingly permanent reality of racismI (2111:!6. Dmpirical

in'estigation re@uires eing a le to identify and measure a conceptB or at the 'ery least to ha'e a clear definitionB ut since whiteness has come to mean 8ust a out e'erything, it ends up meaning hardly anything. They assume that anti0black animus arises from nothingness but its caught up in a broader web of historical power relationships like $slamophobia and nativism "haroenying ? (citing 7elson =aldonado-Torres, *rof of Dthnic /tudies, -$ &er"eley6 (Timothy, Islamopho ia [ Anti-&lac"ness: A 4enealogical Approach, http:CCcrg. er"eley.eduCcontentCislamopho ia-anti- lac"ness-genealogical-approach6
The year 2G1!

mar"ed a ma8or

turning point in the tra8ectory of Western $i'ilization. Dlementary age children are

taught this as the year $olum us famously crossed the Atlantic. An e@ually significant e'ent that year, was

the

/panish con@uest of al-AndalusVa =oorish pro'ince on the southern I


scholars ha'e argued that these two

erian peninsula esta lished eight centuries earlierVand more importantly, the last ma8or =uslim stronghold on the Duropean continent. $ritical race

e'ents would not only shift the geopolitical alance of power from the Orient to the Occident, ut fundamentally alter conceptions a out religious and racial identity. According to 7elson =aldonado-Torres, of the -ni'ersity of $alifornia, &er"eley, the e9pulsion of the
=oors from continental Durope mar"ed a transition from an age of imperial relations etween $hristian and =uslim empires, to an age of Duropean colonial e9pansion throughout the "nown world. The .disco'ery0 of .godless0 nati'es in the Americas would also inspire the great de ates etween %as $asas and /epll'eda in 2MML on the nature of the human soul. /uch

a geopolitical and philosophical shift, =aldonado-Torres argues, would lead to a Durocentric, re-categorization of humanity ased upon religousBand ultimately racialB differences. =aldonado-Torres has proposed that anti- lac" racism is not simply an e9tension of some historical ias against lac"s, ut rather, is an amalgam of old-world Islamopho ia lin"ed to the history of the I erian peninsula, and to the notion of souless eings em odied in popular conceptions a out the indigenous nati'es of the Americas. These eliefs would contri ute to an ideological asis for, and 8ustification of, colonial con@uests in the name of cultural and religious con'ersion, as well as pa'e the way for the ensla'ement and human traffic"ing of su -/aharan Africans .

Wilderson essentiali/es and limits . turning the emancipation they seek. Ellison '' 2+r =ary Dllison V -ni'ersity $ollege of A erystwyth V Re'iew of: Red, White and &lac": cinema and the structure of -/ antagonisms &y )RA7# &. WI%+DR/O7 III (+urham, 7$, +u"e -ni'ersity *ress, !L2L6, EFF pp. *aper m2M.11 V Race U!J $lass ME(!6 V Octo er-+ec V !L22 V /age *u s V also a re'iew of African American Actresses: the struggle for 'isi ility 21LLV21JL &y $<AR%D7D RD4D/TDR (&loomington, Indiana -ni'ersity *ress, !L2L6, GLF pp. *aper U!G!K.1M. http:CCrac.sagepu .com.pro9y2.cl.msu.eduCcontentCMEC!C2LL.full.pdf^html6
These are two illuminating, ut frustratingly flawed oo"s. Their approaches are different, although oth fre@uently @uote )rantz )anon and ;ac@ues %acan. )ran" Wilderson

utilises the iconic theoreticians within the conte9t of a study that concentrates on a conceptual ideology that, he claims, is ased on a fusion of =ar9ism, feminism, postcolonialism and psychology . <e uses a small num er of independent films to illustrate his theories. $harlene Regester has a more practical framewor". /he
di'ides her oo" into nine chapters de'oted to indi'idual female actors and then wea'es her ideological concepts into these specific chapters. &oth ha'e a pro lem with clarity. Regester uses less comple9 language than Wilderson, ut still manages to e o tuse at times. Wilderson starts from a position of using ontology and grammar as his main tools, ut manages to consistently misuse or misappropriate terms li"e fungi le or fungi ility. Wilderson writes as an intelligent and challenging author, ut is often frustrating. Although his

language is complicated, his concepts are often o'ersimplified. <e en'isions e'ery lac" person in film as a sla'e who is suffering from irrepara le alienation from any meaningful sense of cultural identity. <e elie'es that
filmma"ers, including lac" filmma"ers, are 'ictims of a depri'ation of meaning that has een condensed y ;ac@ues %acan as a Pwall of language> as well as an ina ility to create a clear 'oice in the face of gratuitous 'iolence. <e cites )rantz )anon, Orlando *atterson and <ortense /piller as eing among those theorists who effecti'ely in'estigate the issues of

own attempts to define Pwhat is lac"?>, Pa su 8ect?>, Pan o 8ect?>, Pa sla'e?>, seem ound up with limiting preconceptions , and he e'aluates neither lac"ness nor the Pred> that is part of his title in any truly meaningful way.

lac" structural non-communica ility. <is

$f their arg is so anti0State that we cant use fiat to rip0down the State4 then thats overly0pessimistic and silly. This specifically solves their slavery args. James 97 V Assistant *rofessor in the *hilosophy +epartment at the -ni'ersity of 7orth $arolina at $harlotte (Ro in =, Autonomy, -ni'ersality, and *laying the 4uitar: On the *olitics and Aesthetics of $ontemporary )eminist +eployments of the .=asterHs Tools0, April 2G, +OI: 2L.2222C8.2M!K-!LL2.!LL1.L2LEE.96 In these two instances of successful reappropriation of the masterHs tools BautonomyCuni'ersality and the guitarBthe particular, real-world ad'antages offered y this techni@ue might e'en re@uire its adoption in instances where nothing else can .do0 what it .does .0 Indeed, to re@uire that we categorically a andon the masterHs tools seems itself to e an o'erly a stract .ideal0 that o'erloo"s the often contradictory, historically o'erdetermined realworld conte9ts in which all ideas are made meaningful and in which actions unfold . In this world, the stage is already set in certain ways, and sometimes the est or only way to maneu'er through its 'arious o stacles re@uires the repurposing of what we find inCon this stage. If,

as $oatesHs discussion demonstrates, power functions not only at the le'el of ideology, ut also at the le'el of desire, then feminists cannot a'oid engaging dominant structures of feeling and affecti'e con'entions (such as those at wor" in tonal harmony andCor roc" music6, ecause these cannot e persuaded or altered y .facts0 or arguments (that is, ideological criti@ue or demystification6. Reading &utler and *eaches from the perspecti'e of non-ideal theory demonstrates that a

reappropriation of the .masterHs tools0 is successful not only when it is more effecti'e or affecti'e than anything else, ut also when its use of these tools pro lematizes or 'oids the masterCsla'e or insiderCoutsider hierarchy itself. -nder these conditions, the masterHs tools (for e9ample, .autonomy,0.uni'ersality,0 and playing the guitar6 can indeed ring down the masterHs house.

!fro0pessimism is inaccurate and is used to 1ustify white supremacism >atterson 7? (The Ordeal Of Integration: *rogress And Resentment In AmericaHs IRacialI $risis, Orlando *atterson is a ;amaican- orn American historical and cultural sociologist "nown for his wor" regarding issues of race in the -nited /tates, as well as the sociology of de'elopment6
In the attempt to understand and come to terms with the pro lems of Afro-Americans and of their interethnic relations,

the country has een ill ser'ed y its intellectuals, policy ad'ocates, and leaders in recent years. At present, dogmatic ethnic ad'ocates and e9tremists appear to dominate discours e on the su 8ect, drowning out oth moderate and other dissenting 'oices. A strange con'ergence has emerged etween these e9tremists. On the left, the nation is misled y an endless stream of tracts and studies that deny any meaningful change in AmericaHs ITwo 7ations,I decry IThe =yth of
&lac" *rogress,I mourn IThe +ream +eferred,I dismiss AfroAmerican middle-class status as I:olunteer /la'ery,I pronounce AfroAmerican men an IDndangered /pecies,I and apocalyptically announce IThe $oming Race War.I On

the right is complete agreement with this dismal portrait in which we are fast I%osing 4round,I e9cept that the road to IracialI hell, according to conser'ati'es, has een pa'ed y the 'ery
pflicies intended to help sol'e the pro lem, a etted y IThe +ream and the 7ightmareI of cultural changes in the si9ties and y the o'er reeding and educational integration of inferior Afro-Americans and 'ery policies intended to help sol'e the pro lem, a etted y IThe +ream and the 7ightmareI of cultural changes in the si9ties and y the o'er reeding and educational integration of inferior Afro-Americans and lower-class Duro-Americans genetically situated on the wrong tail of the If I&ell $ur'e.I If it is true that a

Iracial crisisI persists in America, this crisis is as much one of perception and interpretation as of actual socioeconomic and interethnic realities . +y any measure4 the record of the past half century has been one of great achievement, thanks in good part to the suecess of the government policies now being maligned by the left for not ha'ing gone far enough and by the right for ha'ing oth failed and gone too far. At the same time, there is still no room for complacency : ecause our starting point half a century ago was so deplora ly ac"ward, we still ha'e some way to go efore approaching anything li"e a
resolution.

!fro0pessimism is the flip side of right0wing discourses about black pathologyEthey lock in an impoverished view of +lackness as an ontology of lack where sociality is impossible. The alternatives fatalistic reliance on Ge*planationH alone accepts in advance the ideological coordinates of whiteness. (oten ? ()red, Dnglish *rofessor at +u"e -ni'ersity, .The $ase of &lac"ness,0 $riticism, ML.!, =-/D6 The cultural and political discourse on lac" pathology has een so per'asi'e that it could e said to constitute the ac"ground against which all representations of lac"s, lac"ness, or (the color6 lac" ta"e place. Its manifestations ha'e changed o'er the years, though it has always een
poised etween the realms of the pseudo-social scientific, the irth of new sciences, and the normati'e impulse that is at the heart ofB ut that strains againstBthe lac" radicalism that strains against it. )rom

the origins of the critical philosophy in the assertion of its e9tra-rational foundations in teleological principle A to the ad'ent and solidification of empiricist human iology that mo'es out of the con'ergence of phrenology, criminology, and eugenicsA to the maturation of (American6 sociology in the oscillation etween good-and ad-faith attendance to Ithe negro pro lemIA to the analysis of and discourse on psychopathology and the deployment of these in oth colonial oppression and anticolonial resistanceA to the regulatory metaphysics that undergirds interloc"ing notions of sound and color in aesthetic theory: lac"ness has een associated with a certain sense of decay, e'en when that decay is in'o"ed in the name of a certain (fetishization of6 'itality. &lac" radical discourse has often ta"en up, and held itself within, the stance of the pathologist. 4oing ac" to +a'id Wal"er, at least, lac" radicalism is animated y the @uestion, WhatHs wrong with lac" fol"? The e9tent to which radicalism (here understood as the performance of a general criti@ue of the proper6 is a fundamental and enduring force in the lac" pu lic sphereBso much so that e'en lac" Iconser'ati'esI are always constrained to egin y defining themsel'es in relation to itBis all ut self-e'ident. %ess self-e'ident is the normati'e stri'ing against the grain of the 'ery radicalism from which the desire for norms is deri'ed. /uch stri'ing is directed toward those li'ed e9periences of lac"ness that are , on the one hand, aligned with what has een called radical and , on the other hand, 3Dnd *age 2KK5 aligned not so much with a "ind of eing-toward-death ut with something that has een understood as a deathly or death-dri'en non eing. This strife etween normati'ity and the deconstruction of norms is essential
not only to contemporary lac" academic discourse ut also to the discourses of the ar ershop, the eauty shop, and the oo"store. IHll egin with a thought that doesnHt come from any of these zones, though itHs felt in them, strangely, since it posits the eing of, and eing in, these zones as an ensem le of specific impossi ilities: As long as the lac" man is among his own, he will ha'e no occasion, e9cept in minor internal conflicts, to e9perience his eing through others. There of which <egel spea"s,

is of course the moment of I eing for others,I ut e'ery ontology is made unattaina le in a colonized and ci'ilized
een gi'en enough attention y those who ha'e discussed the @uestion. In

society. It would seem that this fact has not

theWeltanschauung of a colonized people there is an impurity, a flaw, that outlaws [interdit any ontological e9planation. /omeone

may o 8ect that this is the case with e'ery indi'idual, ut such an o 8ection merely conceals a asic pro lem. OntologyBonce it is finally admitted as lea'ing e9istence y the waysideBdoes not permit us to understand the eing of the lac" man. )or not only must the lac" man e lac"A he must e lac" in relation to the white man. /ome critics will ta"e it upon themsel'es to remind us that the proposition has a con'erse. I say that this is false. The lac" man has no ontological resistance in the eyes of the white man. This passage, and the ontological (a sence of6 drama it represents, leads us to a set of fundamental @uestions. <ow do we thin" the possi ility and the law of outlawed, impossi le things? And if, as )rantz )anon suggests, the lac" cannot e an other for another lac", if the lac"
2

can only e an other for a white, then is there e'er anything called lac" social life? Is the
designation of this or that thing as lawless, and the assertion that such lawlessness is a function of an already e9tant flaw, something more than that trying, e'en neurotic, oscillation etween the e9posure and the replication of a regulatory maneu'er whose force is held precisely in the assumption that it comes efore what it would contain? WhatHs the relation etween e9planation and resistance? Who

ears

the responsi ility of disco'ering an ontology of, or of disco'ering for ontology, the ensem le of political, aesthetic, 3Dnd *age 2KF5 and philosophical derangements that comprise the eing that is neither for itself nor for the other? What form of life ma"es such disco'ery possi le as well as necessary? Would we "now it y its flaws, its impurities? What might an impurity in a world'iew actually e? Impurity implies a "ind of non-completeness, if not a sence, of a world'iew. *erhaps that non-completeness signals an originarily criminal refusal of the interplay of framing and grasping, ta"ing and "eepingBa certain reticence at the ongoing ad'ent of the age of the world picture. *erhaps it is the reticence of the grasped, the enframed, the ta"en, the "eptBor, more precisely, the reluctance that disrupts grasping and framing, ta"ing and "eepingBas epistemological stance as well as accumulati'e acti'ity. *erhaps this is the flaw that attends essential, anoriginal impurityBthe flaw that accompanies impossi le origins and de'iant translations. WhatHs at sta"e is fugiti'e mo'ement in and out of the frame, ar, or whate'er e9ternally imposed social logicBa mo'ement of escape, the stealth of the stolen that can e said, since it inheres in e'ery closed circle, to rea" e'ery enclosure. This fugiti'e mo'ement is stolen life, and its relation to law is reduci le neither to simple interdiction nor are transgression. *art of what can e attained in this zone of unattaina ility, to which the eminently attaina le ones ha'e een
!

relegated, which they occupy ut cannot (and refuse to6 own, is some sense of the fugiti'e law of mo'ement that ma"es lac" social life ungo'erna le, that demands a para-ontological disruption of the supposed connection etween e9planation and resistance. E This

e9change etween matters 8uridical and matters sociological is gi'en in the mi9ture of phenomenology and psychopathology that dri'es )anonHs wor", his slow approach to an encounter with impossi le lac" social life poised or posed in the rea", in a certain intransiti'e e'asion of crossing, in the wary mood or fugiti'e case that ensues etween the fact of lac"ness and the li'ed e9perience of the lac" and as a slippage enacted y the meaningBor, perhaps too Itrans-literally,I the (plain3-sung56 senseBof things when su 8ects are engaged in the representation of o 8ects. The title of this essay, IThe $ase of &lac"ness,I is a spin
on the title of the fifth chapter of )anonHs !lac" #"ins$ White %as"s, infamously mistranslated as Ithe fact of lac"ness.I IThe li'ed e9perience of the lac"I is more literalBIe9perienceI ears a 4erman trace, translates as &rlebnis rather than Tatsache, and there y places )anon within a group of postwar )ranco-phone thin"ers encountering phenomenology that includes ;ean-*aul /artre, =aurice =erleau*onty, Dmmanuel %e'inas, and Tran +uc Thao.G The phrasing indicates )anonHs 'eering off from an analytic engagement with the world as a set of facts that are a'aila le to the natural scientific attitude, so itHs possi le to feel the 'e9ation of certain commentators with what might 3Dnd *age 2K15 e mista"en for a flirtation with positi'ism. <owe'er, I want to linger in, rather than @uic"ly 8ump o'er, the gap etween fact and li'ed e9perience in order to consider the word IcaseI as a "ind of ro"en ridge or cut suspension etween the two. IHm interested in how the trou led, illicit commerce etween fact and li'ed e9perience is ound up with that etween lac"ness and the lac", a difference that is often concealed, one that plays itself out not y way of the @uestion of accuracy or ade@uation ut y way of the shadowed emergence of the ontological difference etween eing and eings. Attunement to that difference and its modalities must e fine. *erhaps certain recali rations of )anonBmade possi le y insights to which )anon is oth gi'en and lindBwill allow us to show the necessity and possi ility of another understanding of the ontological difference. In such an understanding, the political phonochoreography of eingHs words ears a content that cannot e left y the wayside e'en if it is pac"aged in the pathologization of lac"s and lac"ness in the discourse of the human and natural sciences and in the corollary emergence of e9pertise as the defining epistemological register of the modern su 8ect who is in that he "nows, regulates, ut cannot e lac". This might turn out to ha'e much to do with the constitution of that locale in which Iontological e9planationI is precisely insofar as it is against the law. One

way to in'estigate the li'ed e9perience of the lac" is to consider what it is to e the dangerousB ecause one is, ecause we are (Who? We?
Who is this we? Who 'olunteers for this already gi'en imposition? Who elects this imposed affinity? The one who is homelessly, hopefully, less and more?6 the

constituti'eBsupplement. What is it to

e an irreduci ly disordering, deformational force while at the

same time eing a solutely indispensa le to normati'e order, normati'e form? This

is not the same as, though it does pro a ly follow from, the trou led realization that one is an o 8ect in the midst of other o 8ects, as )anon would ha'e it. In their introduction to a rich and important collection of articles that announce and enact a new deployment of )anon in lac" studiesH encounter with 'isual studies, ;ared /e9ton and <uey

$opeland inde9 )anonHs formulation in order to consider what it is to e Ithe thing against which all other su 8ects ta"e their earing.I &ut something is left unattended in their in'ocation of )anon, in their mo'e toward e@uating o 8ecthood with Ithe domain of non-e9istenceI or the interstitial space etween life and death, something to e understood in its difference from and relation to what 4iorgio Agam en calls na"ed life, something they call raw life, that mo'esBor more precisely cannot mo'eBin its forgetful non-relation to that @uic"ening, forgeti'e force that Agam en calls the form of life.
M J

(ilitantly oppositional black resistance generates backlash from the right and the left000it materially reverses efforts towards racial 1ustice S=E%+8 < V Tommie /hel y, *rofessor of African and African American /tudies and of *hilosophy at <ar'ard,
!LLK, We Who Are +ar": The *hilosophical )oundations of &lac" /olidarity

D'en if it were possi le lo effecti'ely mo ilize a multicorporatist +lack >ower program without running afoul of democratic 'alues or compromising roader egalitarian concerns, this form of lac" solidarity may not be pragmatically desirable ecause of factors that are e9ogenous to lac" communities. Thus far I ha'e discussed this program without much consideration for how other ethnoracial groups would e li"ely to respond to its institutional realization. It is reasona le to assume that &lac" *ower politics would engender a counter mobili/ation on the part of non lac"s, and not Just whites, see"ing to protect their own interests. Indeed, if $armichael and <amilton were correct a out the essentially ethnic asis of American politics, we should fully e*pect this kind of resistance . With increased political centralization and organizational autonomy, openly aimed at ad'ancing lac" interests, we would also li"ely see a rise in white nationalism, where some whites increase their collective power through greater group self-organization and solidarity , as they ha'e often
done in the past and, to some e9tent, continue to do e'en now. /uch resistance would not come solely from racists, howe'er. /ome potential

allies would also e alienated y this nationalist program and may conse@uently ecome (further6 disillusioned with the ideal of racial integration, indifferent to lac" pro lems, or disaffected from lac" people. 7on lac"s would naturally 'iew their relegation to Isupporting rolesI within lac" political organizations as a sign that their help in the struggle for racial 8ustice is unneeded or unwanted A that their commitment to racial 8ustice is in @uestionA that lac"s are more concerned with ad'ancing their group interests than with fighting in8usticeA or that lac"s do not see" a racially integrated society. =oreo'er, ecause those who ha'e status and e9ercise power within institutions generally ha'e a stake in preserving these institutional structures4 e'en if they no longer ser'e the goals for which they were initially esta lished, non lac"s ha'e well-founded reasons to worry that lac" political organizations may, through sheer inertia or opportunism, ecome ends in themselves. Thus, although institutional autonomy might increase the organizational independence of lac"s, the overall power of the group could e reduced ecause of isolation from other progressive forces. This situation would e particularly
disastrous for lac"s who li'e in minority- lac" electoral districts, for they cannot elect effecti'e political representation without the support of li"e-minded non lac" citizens.

Their destruction of !merica as an embodiment of white supremacy would spark an intense right0wing backlash movement Winant 7< V <oward Winant, *rofessor of /ociology and +irector of the $enter for 7ew racial /tudies at -$ /anta &ar ara, /eptem er-Octo er 211K, .&ehind &lue Dyes: $ontemporary White Racial *olitics,0 online: http:CCwww.soc.ucs .eduCfacultyCwinantCwhitness.html
Indeed, for

the -/ to come to terms in the mid-!Lth century with its own history of con@uest and ensla'ement would ha'e in'ol'ed at a minimum a deep national reckoning. It would ha'e severely threatened the foundations of the nation-state. The conse@uences of this
agonizing self-appraisal would necessarily ha'e included massi'e economic redistri ution and the "ind of atonement for white supremacy which was later to e associated with demands for compensatory programs such as Iaffirmati'e actionI -- or more properly, reparations. Thus the psychic -- to

threat posed y the lac" mo'ement -- material, political, and the key institutions of the >a* !mericana, not to mention the ma8ority of the -/ population, the white ma8ority, was profound. In opposition to this threat , uilding upon the foundation laid down y Wallace, the new right de'eloped a political orientation that was nationalist4 populist, and authoritarian. This position, of course, has numerous precedents in earlier historical moments. It see"s y co'ert means to legitimate the Ipsychological wageI that +u &ois argued was an essential enefit allocated to whites y white supremacy (+u &ois 21KK 321EM56. It continues the racist legacy of southern populism, which in the past red the li"es of &en Tillman and
Theodore &il o (Woodward 21KE6. And it associates whiteness with a range of capitalist 'irtues: producti'ity, thrift, o edience to law, self-denial, and se9ual repression. This in turn permits the crucial articulation of corporate and white wor"ing class interests -- the cross-class racial alliance -- which endows new right positions with such strategic ad'antage today. %i"e the far right, the new right see"s to present itself as the tri une of disenfranchised whites. &ut the

new

right is distinguished -- if not always sharply -- from the far right y se'eral factors. )irst, rather than espouse racism and white supremacy, it prefers to present these themes su te9tually: the familiar Icode-wordI phenomenon. /econd, it wholeheartedly em races mainstream political acti'ity, rather than a 8uring it or loo"ing at it suspiciously. Third, it can accept a measure of nonwhite social and political participation, and e'en mem ership (thin" of Alan #eyes, for instance6, so long as this is pursued on a Icolor- lindI asis and adheres to the rest of the authoritarian, nationalist formula . )or the far right in general, Icolor- lindnessI is race mi9ing and
therefore 'er oten. )or the new right, suita ly authoritarian 'ersions of Icolor- lindnessI are fine. The new right di'erges from neoconser'atism (discussed elow6, in its willingness to practice racial politics su te9tually, through coding, manipulation of racial fears, etc. +e facto, it recognizes the persistence of racial difference in -nited /tates society.

The

new right understands perfectly well that its mass ase is white, and that its political success depends on its a ility to interpret white identity in positi'e political terms. *recisely ecause of its willingness to e*ploit racial fears and employ racially manipulative practices, the new right has een effective in achie'ing much of its agenda for political and cultural reaction and social structural recomposition. These were crucial to the new rightHs a ility to pro'ide a solid ase of
electoral and financial support for the Repu lican *arty and the Reagan Ire'olution.I The demagoguery employed y 4eorge &ush in the 21FF Willie <orton campaign ads, or y *ete Wilson or *hil 4ramm in their contemporary attac"s on immigrants and affirmati'e action, shows this strategy is far from e*hausted. 7eoconser'atism has not, and could not, deli'er such tangi le political enefits, and in fact lac"s an e@ui'alent mass political ase. That is why the neoconser'ati'es are seen as a unch of Ipointy-headed intellectualsI y many on the new right.

Their argument elevates white supremacy to an all0pervasive force that e*plains nearly all global oppression000this conceptual e*pansion hides the actual practice of racism and makes breaking it down more difficult !N&E SEN C V =argaret %. Andersen, *rofessor of /ociology and WomenHs /tudies and :ice *ro'ost for
Academic Affairs at the -ni'ersity of +elaware, !LLE, .Whitewashing Race: A $ritical *erspecti'e on Whiteness,0 in White Out: The $ontinuing /ignificance of Racism, ed +oane [ &onilla-/il'a, p. !F $onceptually, one

of the ma8or pro lems in the whiteness literature is the reification of whiteness as a concept, as an e9perience, and as an identity . This practice not only leads to conceptual obfuscation ut also impedes the possi- ility for empirical analysis. In this literature, IwhitenessI comes to mean 8ust a out e'erything associated with racial domination. As such, whiteness ecomes a slippery and elusi'e concept. Whiteness is
presented as any or all of the following: identity, self-understanding, social practices, group eliefs, ideology, and a system of domination. As one critic writes, IIf

historical actors are said to ha'e eha'ed the way they did mainly ecause they were white, then thereHs little room left for more nuanced analysis of their moti'es and meaningsI (/towe 211J:KK6. And Alastair &onnett points out that whiteness
Iemerges from this criti@ue as an omnipresent and all-powerful historical force. Whiteness is seen to e responsi le for

With the H lameH comes a new kind of centeringF Whiteness, and White people, are turned into the "ey agents of historical change, the shapers of contemporary AmericaI (211J :IME6. +espite noting that there is differentiation among whites and warning against using whiteness as a monolithic category, most of the literature still proceeds to do so4 re'ealing a reductionist tendency. Even claiming to show its multiple forms, most writers essentiali/e and reify whiteness as something that directs most of Western history (4allagher !LLL6. <ence while trying to IdeconstructI whiteness and see the u i@uitousness of whiteness, the literature at the same time reasserts and reinstates it (/towe 211J:KK6. )or e9ample, =ichael Dric +yson suggests that whiteness is identity, ideology, and institution (+yson, @uoted in $hennault 211F:ELL6. &ut if it is all these things, it ecomes an analytically useless concept. $hristine $lar" and ;ames OH+onnell write: Ito reference it
the failure of socialism to de'elop in America, for racism, for the impo'erishment of humanity. reifies it, to refrain from referencing it o scures the persistent, per'asi'e, and seemingly permanent reality of racismI (2111:!6. Dmpirical

in'estigation re@uires eing a le to identify and measure a concept B or ut since whiteness has come to mean 8ust a out e'erything, it ends up meaning hardly anything.
at the 'ery least to ha'e a clear definitionB

6ocusing upon the traumatic elements of black sub1ectivity denies the agency present within black attempts at thwarting white supremacy and domination Walker ', V 4raduate of *sychosocial studies (Tracey, 4raduate of *sychosocial /tudies at &ir ec" -ni'ersity of %ondon, 4raduate ;ournal of /ocial /cience ;uly !L2!, :ol. 1, Issue !, I The )uture of /la'ery: )rom $ultural Trauma to Dthical Remem ranceI pg. 2JM-2JK, http:CCg8ss.orgCimagesCstoriesC'olumesC1C!CWal"erU!LArticle.pdf6 To argue that there is more to the popular conception of sla'es as 'ictims who e9perienced social death within the a usi'e regime of transatlantic sla'ery is not to say that these su 8ecti'ities did

not e9ist. When considering the institution of sla'ery we can @uite confidently rely on the assumption that it did indeed destroy the self-hood and the li'es of millions of Africans. /cholar :incent &rown (!LL16 howe'er, has criticised Orlando *atterson>s (21F!6 seminal oo" /la'ery and /ocial +eath for positioning the sla'e as a su 8ect without agency and maintains that those who managed to dislocate from the nightmare of plantation life Pwere not in fact the li'ing dead>, ut Pthe mothers of gasping new societies>
(&rown !LL1, 2!G26.W The ;amaican =aroons were one such disparate group of Africans who managed to and together and flee the ;amaican plantations in order to create a new mode of li'ing under their own rule. These Prunaways> were in fact Pferocious fighters and master strategists>, uilding towns and military ases which ena led them to fight and successfully win the war against the &ritish army after !LL years of attle (4otlie !LLL,2J6. In addition, the story of the Windward ;amaican =aroons disrupts the phallocentricism inherent within the story of the sla'e Phero> y the 'ery re'elation that their leader, Pfueen 7anny> was a woman (4otlie !LLL6. As a leader, she was often ignored y early white historians who dismissed her as an Pold hagg> or Po eah> woman (possessor of e'il magic powers6 (4otlie !LLL, 9'i6. Oet, despite these negati'e descriptors, 7anny presents an interesting image of an African woman in the time of sla'ery who culti'ated an e9ceptional army and used psychological as well as military force against the Dnglish despite not owning sophisticated weapons (4otlie !LLL6. As an oral tale, her story spea"s to post-sla'ery generations through its representation of a figure whose gender defying acts challenged the patriarchal fantasies of the Durocentric imaginary and as such Pthe study of her e9periences might change the li'es of people li'ing under paternalistic, racist, classist and gender

death> is re8ected here on the grounds that it is a narrati'e which is positioned from the 'antage point of a Duropean hegemonic ideology. Against the social sym olic and its gaze, lac" sla'es were indeed regarded as non-humans since their li'es
were stunted, diminished and deemed less 'alua le in comparison to the Duropeans. <owe'er, )anon>s (21JK6 assertion that Pnot only must the lac" man e lac"A he must e lac" in relation to the white man> ()anon 21JK, 22L6 helps us to understand that this classification can only ha'e meaning relati'e to the sym olic which represents the ali'e W ness of whiteness against the ac"drop of the dead lac" sla'e (+yer 211K6. &utler (!LLM6 ma"es it clear that the Pdeath> one suffers relati'e to the social sym olic is im ued with the fantasy that ha'ing constructed the Other and interpellated her into Plife>, one now holds the so'ereignty of determining the su 8ect>s right to li'e or die: W this death, if it is a death, is only the death of a certain "ind of su 8ect, one that was ne'er possi le to egin with, the death of the fantasy of impossi le mastery, and so a loss of what one ne'er had, in other words it is a necessary grief (&utler !LLM, JM6. W The point to ma"e here is that although

ased oppression> (4otlie !LLL, FG6.W The la el of Psocial

the concept of social death has pro'ed useful for theorists to descri e the metaphysical e9perience of those who li'e antagonistically in relation to the social sym olic, it is ne'ertheless a colonial narrati'e within which the sla'es are confined to a one dimensional story of terror. In "eeping with 4ilroy>s (211E 6 argument that the memory of sla'ery must e
constructed from the sla'es> point of 'iew, we might instead concentrate, not on the way in which the sla'es are figured

We might therefore find some 'alue in studying a group li"e the =aroons who not only managed to create an autonomous world outside of the hegemonic discourse which negated them, ut also, due to their uni@ue circumstances, were forced to create new modes of communication which would include a myriad of African cultures, languages and creeds (4ottlie !LLL6. This creati'e and resisti'e energy of sla'e su 8ecti'ity not only disrupts the colonial paradigm of socially dead sla'es, ut also implies the ethical tropes of creation, renewal and mutual recognition. W In contrast, the
within the Duropean social imaginary, ut on how they negotiated their own ideas a out self and identity. passi'e sla'e pro'ed to feature hea'ily in the !LLK icentenary commemorations causing 8ournalist Toyin Ag etu to interrupt the official speeches and e9claim that it had turned into a discourse of freedom engineered mostly y whites with stories of lac" agency e9cludedF. Ooung>s argument that Pone of the damaging side effects of the focus on white people>s role in a olition is that Africans are represented as eing passi'e in the face of oppression>, appears to echo the eha'iour in the -# today gi'en that a recent research poll re'eals that the lac" 'ote turnout is significantly lower than for the white ma8ority electorate and that forty percent of second generation Pimmigrants> elie'e that 'oting Pdoesn>t matter>.1 Oet, 4ilroy (211Ea6 argues that this political passi'ity may not simply e a self fulfilling prophecy, ut might allude to the Pli'ed contradiction> of eing lac" and Dnglish which affects one>s confidence a out whether opinions will e 'alidated in W a

Without considering the sla'es> capacity for sur'i'al and their fundamental role in o'erthrowing the Duropean regime of sla'ery, we limit the useV'alue of the memory and ris" ecoming o'erly attached to singular sla'e su 8ecti'ities seeped in death and passi'ity. The =aroons story howe'er, ena les sla'e consciousness to rise a o'e the mire of sla'ery>s a 8ect 'ictims and
society that, at its core, still holds on to the fantasy of Duropean superiority (4ilroy 211Ea6.

esta lishes an ethical relation with our ancestors who li'ed and sur'i'ed in the time of sla'ery.

Their ontological framing of blackness dooms the alternative. >lacing +lackness as oppositional denies it any e*istence independent of white supremacy and makes identity reliant on oppression >inn B V =acalester $ollege *rofessor of Religious /tudies (Anthony, +ialog: A ;ournal of Theology, :olume GE, 7um er 2, /pring !LLG, HPP&lac" Is, &lac" Ain>t>>: :ictor Anderson, African American Theological Thought, and IdentityH, pg.MK-MF, Wiley online %i rary6
This connection etween ontological lac"ness and religion is natural ecause: PP ontological

lac"ness signifies

the totality of lac" e9istence, a

inding together of lac" life and e9perience. In its root, religio, religion denotes tying together, fastening ehind, and inding together. Ontological lac"ness renders lac" life and e9perience a totality.>>2E According to Anderson, &lac" theological discussions are entangled in ontological lac"ness. And accordingly,

discussions of lac" life re'ol'e around a theological understanding of &lac" e9perience limited to suffering and sur'i'al in a racist system. The goal of this theology is to find the PPmeaning of
lac" faith>> in the merger of lac" cultural consciousness, icons of genius, and post-World War II &lac" defiance. An admira le goal to e sure, ut here is the ru : &lac" theologians spea", according to Anderson, in opposition to ontological whiteness when they are actually dependent upon whiteness for the legitimacy of their agenda. )urthermore,

ontological lac"ness>s strong ties to suffering and sur'i'al result in lac"ness eing dependent on suffering, and as a result social transformation rings into @uestion what it means to e lac" and
religious. %i erati'e outcomes ultimately force an identity crisis, a crisis of legitimation and utility. In Anderson>s words:

Tal" a out li eration ecomes hard to 8ustify where freedom appears as nothing more than defiant self-assertion of a re'olutionary racial consciousness that re@uires for its legitimacy the opposition of white racism. Where there e9ists no possi ility of transcending the lac"ness
that whiteness created, African American theologies of li eration must e seen not only as crisis theologiesA they remain theologies in a crisis of legitimation.2G This con'ersation ecomes more PPrefined>> as new cultural resources are unpac"ed and 'arious religious alternati'es ac"nowledged. Oet the ottom line remains racialization of issues and agendas, life and lo'e. )alsehood

is perpetuated through the PPhermeneutic of return,>> y which ontological lac"ness is the paradigm of &lac" e9istence and there y sets the agenda of &lac" li eration within the PPpostre'olutionary conte9t>> of present day -/A. One e'er finds the traces of the &lac" aesthetic which pushes for a dwarfed understanding of &lac" life and a sacrifice of indi'iduality for the sa"e of a unified &lac" Pfaith>. Oet differing e9periences of racial oppression (the stuff of ontological lac"ness6 com ined with 'arying e9periences of class, gender and se9ual oppression call into @uestion the 'alue of their racialized formulations. Implicit in all of this is a crisis of faith, an unwillingness to address oth the glory and guts of &lac" e9istenceBnihilistic tendencies that, unless held in tension with claims of transcendence, ha'e the potential to o'erwhelm and to suffocate. At the heart of this dilemma is friction etween ontological lac"ness and PPcontemporary postmodern lac" life>>Bissues, for e9ample related to PPselecting marriage partners, e9ercising freedom of mo'ement, acting on gay and les ian preferences, or choosing political parties.>>2M <ow does one foster alance while em racing difference as positi'e? Anderson loo"s to 7ietzsche. Duropean genius, complete with its heroic epic, met its match
in the aesthetic categories of tragedy and the grotes@ue genius re'i'ed and espoused y )riedreich 7ietzsche. The grotes@ue genius ser'ed as an effecti'e counter-discourse y em racing oth the Plight> and Pdar"> aspects of life, and holding in tension oppositional sensationsBpleasure and pain, freedom and oppression.2J -tilizing 7ietzsche>s wor", Anderson as": PPwhat should African American cultural and religious criticism loo" li"e when they are no longer romantic in inspiration and the cult of heroic genius is displaced y the grotes@ueryBfull range of e9pression, actions, attitudes,

eha'iors e'erything found in African American lifeBof contemporary lac" e9pressi'e culture and pu lic life?>>2K

Applied to African Americans, the grotes@ue em odies the full range of African American lifeBall e9pressions, actions, attitudes, and eha'ior. With a hermeneutic of the grotes@ue as the foci, religio-cultural criticism is free from the totalizing nature of racial apologetics and the classical &lac" aesthetic. &y e9tension, &lac" theology is a le to address oth issues of
sur'i'al (Anderson sees their importance.6 and the larger goal of cultural fulfillment, Anderson>s 'ersion of li eration. That is to say, placing

PP lac"ness>> along side other indicators of identity allows African Americans to define themsel'es in a plethora of ways while maintaining their community status. This encourages African Americans to see themsel'es as they areB comple9 and di'ersifiedBno longer needing to surrender personal interests for the sa"e of monolithic collecti'e status. !bolishing social death via complete transformation is impossible 000 small reforms are the only way to actuali/e change =einer4 C (&rady, Assistant *rofessor of *hilosophy, $alifornia /tate -ni'eristy at )ullerton, ./ocial +eath and the Relationship &etween A olition and Reform,0 /ocial ;ustice, :olume EL, Issue !, pg. 1F-2L2, 8stor, Tashma6 The element that ultimately distinguishes a radical (a olitionist6 agenda from a li eral (reformist6 one resides in the totality of its approach. The fundamental aim of a radical mo'ement is total (systemic6 transformation. )or that to e effected, positi'e, constructi'e measures must e continually accompanied (and, in many cases, preceded6 y negati'e, destructi'e ones. That is to say, an a olitionist mo'ement ac"nowledges that the prison-industrial comple9 (and the capitalist state-form that sustains it6 must e completely dismantled for democracy to e actualized. )or, as long as our li'es in present society are determined y and founded upon the social and
physical death of the incarcerated, we are not truly free. 7o reformation of the current system will lead to this total transformation. Reformist mo'ements fail to recognize that social and physical death are essential to the functioning of the present social system. $onse@uently, reformist mo'e? ments refuse to ac"nowledge that destructi'e actions are necessary in the struggle for li eration. We must

concentrate on the structures and institutions that we need to destroy 8ust as much as we focus on the practices and formations we must construct to e free. We must eliminate enforced
social death entirely for us to e a le to constitute alternati'e social organizations that truly pro'ide for democratic freedom. In addition, we must hold this systemic transformation in mind as we engage in our

'arious local struggles. )or, without this total 'ision ? what Rodriguez calls an a

olitionist Ipolitical fantasyI ? our local successes will e doomed to mere reform. <owe'er, we must ac"nowledge that the line etween reformist practices and a olitionist practices is not a definiti'e one. )or e9ample, though the ultimate goal of an a olitionist mo'ement is the total negation of the capitalist state-form, this

long-term o 8ecti'e must not pre'ent us from engaging in a host of immediate struggles to secure the sur'i'al and @uality of life of those currently imprisoned. We must not allow our e9pansi'e 'ision to lind us to the immediate struggles of those presently loc"ed down y the system. A mo'ement that fails to engage in these types of struggles is at odds
with the interests of those on the inside ? those for whom these immediate struggles are of utmost urgency.! A properly radicalC a olitionist mo'ement must wor" incessantly to suture the di'ide ( oth actual and 'irtual6 etween the inside and the outside of the prison, and, more generally, etween the local and the glo al

"!>$T!%$S(

'N" . "!>$T!%$S(
acism is created by the material power relations under capitalism . their strategy inevitably fails . the alternative is to re1ect capitalism as a means of solving social e*clusion Taylor '' *h.+. candidate in African American /tudies at 7orthwestern -ni'ersity (#eenga-Oamahtta Taylor, G
;anuary !L22, .Race, class and =ar9ism,0 http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L22CL2CLGCrace-class-and-mar9ism6CC#* )OR RD:O%-TIO7ARO =ar9ists, there is an ine9trica le lin" etween racism and capitalism. $apitalism

is dependant on racism as oth a source of profiteering, ut more importantly as a means to di'ide and rule. Racism is necessary to dri'e a wedge etween wor"ers who otherwise ha'e
e'erything in common and e'ery reason to ally and organize together, ut who are perpetually dri'en apart to the enefit of the ruling class. Thus, any

serious discussion a out &lac" li eration has to ta"e up not only a criti@ue of capitalism, ut also a credi le strategy for ending it. )or =ar9ists, that strategy hinges on the re'olutionary potential of a unified, multiracial and multi-ethnic wor"ingclass uphea'al against capitalism. =ar9ists elie'e that the potential for that "ind of unity is dependant on
attles and struggles against racism today. Without a commitment y re'olutionary organizations in the here and now to the fight against racism, wor"ing-class unity will ne'er e achie'ed and the re'olutionary potential of the wor"ing class will ne'er e realized. Oet despite all the e'idence of this commitment to fighting racism o'er many decades, =ar9ism has een maligned as, at est, I lindI
to com ating racism and, at worst, Iincapa leI of it. )or e9ample, in an article pu lished last summer, popular commentator and self-descri ed Ianti-racistI Tim Wise summarized the criti@ue of Ileft acti'istsI that he later defines as =ar9ists. <e writes: 3%5eft acti'ists often marginalize people of color y operating from a framewor" of e9treme class reductionism, which holds that the IrealI issue is class, not race, that Ithe only color that matters is green,I and that issues li"e racism are mere Iidentity politics,I which should ta"e a ac"seat to promoting class- ased uni'ersalism and programs to help wor"ing people. This reductionism, y ignoring the way that e'en middle class and affluent people of color face racism and color- ased discrimination (and y presuming that low-income fol"s of color and low-income whites are e@ually oppressed, despite a wealth of e'idence to the contrary6 reinforces white denial, pri'ileges white perspecti'ism and dismisses the li'ed reality of people of color. D'en more, as weHll see, it ignores perhaps the most important political lesson regarding the interplay of race and class: namely, that the iggest reason why there is so little wor"ing-class consciousness and unity in the -ntied /tates (and thus, why class- ased programs to uplift all in need are so much wea"er here than in the rest of the industrialized world6, is precisely ecause of racism and the way that white racism has een deli erately inculcated among white wor"ing fol"s. Only y confronting that directly (rather than sidestepping it as class reductionists see" to do6 can we e'er hope to uild cross-racial, class ased coalitions. In other words, for the policies fa'ored y the class reductionist to wor"-- e they social democrats or =ar9ists--or e'en to come into eing, racism and white supremacy must e challenged directly. <ere, Wise accuses =ar9ism of: Ie9treme class reductionism,I meaning that =ar9ists allegedly thin" that class is more important than raceA reducing struggles against racism to Imere identity politicsIA and re@uiring that struggles against racism should Ita"e a ac" seatI to struggles o'er economic issues. Wise also accuses so-called Ileft acti'istsI of reinforcing Iwhite denialI and Idismiss3ing5 the li'ed reality of people of colorI--which, of course, presumes %eft acti'ists and =ar9ists to all e white. What

do =ar9ists actually say? =ar9ists argue that

capitalism is a system that is ased on the e9ploitation of the many y the few. &ecause it is a system ased on gross ine@uality, it re@uires 'arious tools to di'ide the ma8ority --racism and all oppressions under capitalism ser'e this purpose. =oreo'er, oppression is used to 8ustify and Ie9plainI une@ual relationships in society that enrich the minority that li'e off the ma8orityHs la or. Thus, racism
de'eloped initially to e9plain and 8ustify the ensla'ement of Africans-- ecause they were less than human and undeser'ing of li erty and freedom. D'eryone accepts the idea that the oppression of sla'es was rooted in the class relations of e9ploitation under that system. )ewer recognize that under

capitalism, wage sla'ery is the pi'ot around which all other ine@ualities and oppressions turn. $apitalism used racism to 8ustify plunder, con@uest
and sla'ery, ut as #arl =ar9 pointed out, it also used racism to di'ide and rule--to pit one section of the wor"ing class against another and there y lunt class consciousness. To

claim, as =ar9ists do, that racism is a product of capitalism is not to deny or diminish its importance or impact in American society. It is simply to e9plain its origins and the reasons for its perpetuation. =any on the left today tal" a out class as if it is one of many
oppressions, often descri ing it as Iclassism.I What people are really referring to as IclassismI is elitism or sno ery, and not the fundamental organization of society under capitalism. =oreo'er, it is popular today to tal" a out 'arious oppressions, including class, as intersecting. While

it is true that oppressions can reinforce and compound each other, they are orn out of the material relations shaped y capitalism and the economic e9ploitation that is at the heart of capitalist society. In other words, it is the material and
economic structure of society that ga'e rise to a range of ideas and ideologies to 8ustify, e9plain and help perpetuate that order. In the -nited /tates, racism is the most important of those ideologies.

! united !nti0"apitalist revolutionary strategy is needed for emancipation and liberation Taylor '' *h.+. candidate in African American /tudies at 7orthwestern -ni'ersity (#eenga-Oamahtta Taylor, G
;anuary !L22, .Race, class and =ar9ism,0 http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L22CL2CLGCrace-class-and-mar9ism6CC#* Today, the

need for a re'olutionary alternati'e to the failures of capitalism has ne'er een greater. The election of &arac" O ama came GL years after the passage of the 21JF $i'il Rights Act, the last piece of ci'il rights legislation from the ci'il rights era of the 21JLs. +espite the enormous shift in racial attitudes sym olized y the election of a &lac" president in a country uilt in large part on the ensla'ement of &lac" people, the condition of the 'ast ma8ority of African Americans today is perilous. )or almost two years, &lac" unemployment has fluctuated etween 2M and 2K percent . Almost !L percent
of African Americans under the age of JM are without health insurance compared to 2M percent for the rest of the population. According to the $enter for Responsi le %ending, a home owned y an African American or %atino family is KJ percent more li"ely to e foreclosed upon than a white-owned home. The wipeout of home ownership among African Americans threatens to widen e'en more the gap in median family net worth. In !LLK, the a'erage white family had a net worth of more than Y2K2,LLL compared to less than Y!1,LLL for African American and %atino families. =ore than !M percent of &lac"s and %atinos languish elow the official po'erty line, and more than a third of &lac" and %atino children li'e in po'erty. The

distressing num ers that document the full impact of racism and discrimination in the -nited /tates ha'e no end. &ut while conditions across &lac" America threaten to wipe out the economic gains made possi le y the ci'il rights mo'ement, millions of white wor"ers are meeting their &lac" rothers and sisters on the way down. Tens of millions of white wor"ers are stuc" in long-term 8o lessness, without health insurance and waiting for their homes to e foreclosed upon. Thus, the @uestion of &lac", %atino and white unity is not a stract or academic, ut must e a concrete discussion a out how to collecti'ely go forward. )or most of the !Lth century, legal racism
oth 7orth and /outh created a tension-filled cross-class alliance in the African American community that was focused on freedom and e@ual treatment. The legislati'e fruition of that in the form of legal ci'il rights remo'ed the arriers to ad'ance for a small section of &lac" America. To e sure, the I&lac" middle classI is tenuous, fragile and, for many, a paychec" or two away from o li'ion, ut a more sta le and am itious &lac" elite most definitely e9ists, and their o 8ecti'es and aspirations are anathema to the future of the mass of &lac" people. 7o serious =ar9ist organization demands that &lac" and %atino wor"ers put their struggles on the ac" urner while some mythical class struggle is waged eforehand. This impossi le formulation rests on the ridiculous notion that the wor"ing class is white and male, and thus incapa le of ta"ing up issues of race, class and gender. In fact, the

American wor"ing class is female, immigrant, &lac" and white. Immigrant issues, gender issues and anti-racism are wor"ing-class issues and to miss this is to e operating with a completely anachronistic idea of the wor"ing class. 4enuine =ar9ist organizations understand that the only way of achie'ing unity in the wor"ing class o'er time is to fight for unity today and e'ery day. Wor"ers will
ne'er unite to fight for state power if they cannot unite to fight for wor"place demands today. If white wor"ers are not won to anti-racism today, they will ne'er unite with &lac" wor"ers for a re'olution tomorrow. If &lac" wor"ers are not won to eing against anti-immigrant racism today, they will ne'er unite with %atino wor"ers for a re'olution tomorrow. This is why %enin said that a

re'olutionary party ased on =ar9ism must e a Itri une of the oppressed,I willing to fight against the oppression of any group of people , regardless of the class of those affected. And this is why, despite the anti-=ar9ist slurs from academics and e'en some who consider themsel'es part of the left, the idea that =ar9ism has een on the outside of the struggle against racism in the -./. and around the world defies history and the legacy of &lac" re'olutionaries who understood =ar9ism as a strategy for emancipation and li eration. The challenge today is to ma"e re'olutionary =ar9ism, once again, a part of the discussion of how to end the social catastrophe that is unfolding in &lac" communities across the -nited /tates.

AN$@AENESS . "!> "O%%!>SE NOW


"apitalism is collapsing all around us . embracing the "ommunist =ori/on is the only hope for survive global catastrophe &ean ', *rofessor of *olitical /cience at <o art and William /mith $olleges (;odi +ean, .The $ommunist <orizon,0
pages GJ-ME6CC#* /la'o8 gize" argues that the ruling ideology wants us to thin" that radical change is impossi This ideology, he says, tells us that itHs impossi le to a olish capitalism. *erpetually repeating its message of no alternati'e, the

le .

dominant ideology attempts to Irender in'isi le the impossi le-real of the antagonism that cuts across capitalist societies .I! gize">s description might ha'e wor"ed a decade or so ago, ut not anymore, The end of the first decade of the twenty-first century has rought with it massi'e uprisings, demonstrations, stri"es, occupations, and re'olutions throughout the =iddle Dast, D-, -#, and -/. In the -/, mainstream media remind 'iewers daily that radical change is possi le, and incite us to fear it. The Right, e'en the center, regularly in'o"es the possi ility of radical change, and it associates that change with communism . Why
communism? &ecause the gross ine@uality ushered in y the e9treme capitalism of neoli eral state policy and desperate financialism is 'isi le, undenia le, and glo al. Increasing in industrialized countries o'er the last three decades, income ine@uality is particularly se'ere in $hile, =e9ico, Tur"ey, and the -/, the four industrialized countries with the largest income gaps (*ortugal, the -#, and Italy also ma"e the top ten6.I Ine@uality in the -/ is so e9treme that its 4ini coeffitrient (GM6 ma"es it more compara le to $ameroon (GG,J6 and ;amaica (GM.M6 than to 4ermany (EL.G6 and the -# The antagonism that cuts across capitalist countries is so apparent that dominant ideological forces can\t o scure it. The -/ typically positions e9treme ine@uality, inde tedness, and decay elsewhere, offshore. The se'ere glo al economic recession, collapse in the housing and morgage mar"ets, increase in permanent in'oluntary unemployment, trillion-dollar an" ailouts, and e9tensi'e cuts to federal, state, and local udgets, howe'er, ha'e made what we thought was the third world into our world. $ontra gize", the di'ision

cutting across the capitalist societies is more 'isi le, more palpa le in the -/ and -# now than it>s een since at least the 21!L>sC We learn that more of our children li'e in po'erty that at any time in recent history (!o percent of children in the -/ as of !L2L6, that the wealth of the 'ery, 'ery rich-the top 2 percent-has dramatically increase while income for the rest of us has remained stagnant or declined, that many of the foreclosures the an"s force on homeowners are meaningless,
illegal acts of e9propriation (the an"s can>t document who owns what so they lac" the paper necessary to 8ustify foreclosure proceedings6 . We

read of corporations sitting on piles of cash instead of hiring ac" their laid-off wor"force. -nder neoli eralism, they la'ishly en8oy their profits rather than put
them ac" into production-what 4erard +umenil and +omini@ue %e'y call an e9plicit strategy of .disaccumulation.0 In fact, we read that the middle class is asically finished . Ad Age, the primary trade 8ournal for the ad'ertising industry, pu lished a ma8or report declaring the end of mass affluence. As if it were descri ing an emerging confrontation etween two great hostile classes, the report notes the stagnation of wor"ing class income and the e9ponential growth of upper class income: most consumer spending comes from the top 2L percent of households . )or ad'ertisers, the only consumers worth reaching are the Ismall plutocracy of wealthy elitesI with Ioutsize purchasing influence,I an influence that creates Ian increasingly concentrated mar"et in lu9ury goods.I Admittedly, popular

media in the -/ rarely refer to the super rich as the ourgeoisie and the rest of us as the proletariat. They are more li"ely to use terms li"e IWall /treetI 'ersus I=ain /treetI-which is one of the reasons Occupy Wall /treet too" hold as a mo'ement A people were already
accustomed to hearing a out all that had een done to sa'e the an"s. /ometimes, -/ popular media a'oids a direct contrast etween the 2 percent and the 11 percent, instead 8u9taposing e9ecuti'e pay with strapped consumers loo"ing for argains or cutting ac" on spending. In !L2L, median pay for the top e9ecuti'es increased !E percentA the $DO of :iacom, *hilippe *. +auman, made FG.M million dollars. $DOs from top an"s en8oyed a EJ percent increase, with ;amie +imon from ;* =organ $hase and %loyd &lan"fein from 4oldman /achs topping the list.I D'en $DOs of companies e9periencing ma8or losses and declines ha'e een getting e9treme onuses: 4eneral Dlectric\s $DO, ;effrey R. Immelt, recei'ed an a'erage of 2! million dollars a year o'er a /i9-year period while the company had a K percent decline in

returnsA 4regg %, Dngles, $DO of +ean )oods, too" away an a'erage of !L.G million dollars a year o'er si9 years while the company declined 22 percent,I /uper high pay doesn>t reward performance. -s a form of theft through which the 'ery rich ser'e themsel'es, estowing a largesse that "eeps money within their class. In a setting li"e the -/ where the mantra for o'er fifty years has een Iwhats good for usiness is good for America,0 the current undenia ility of di'ision is significant.

Ine@uality is appearing as a factor, a force, e'en a crime. D'ery sector of -/ society 'iews class conflict as the primary conflict in the country. 7o wonder we are hearing the name .communism0 again-the antagonism cutting across capitalist societies is palpa le, pressing. The right positions communism as a threat ecause communism names the defeat of and alternati'e to capitalism. It recognizes the crisis in capitalism: o'eraccumulation lea'es the rich sitting on piles of cash they can>t in'estA industrial capacity remains unused and wor"ers remain unemployedA glo al
interconnections ma"e unneeded s"yscrapers, fi er-optic ca les, malls, and housing de'elopments as much a part of $hina as the -/. At the same time, scores

of significant pro lems-whether lin"ed to food shortages resulting from climate change, energy shortages resulting from oil dependence, or drug shortages resulting from the failure of pri'ate pharmaceutical companies to ris" their own capital-remain unmet ecause they re@uire the "inds of large-scale planning and cooperation that capitalism, particularly in its contemporary finance- and communications-dri'en incarnation, su 'erts. +a'id <ar'ey e9plains that capitalists these days construe a healthy economy as one that grow a out E percent a year. The li"elihood of continued E percent annual growth in the world economy howe'er, is small. This is in part ecause of the difficulty of rea sor ing surplus capital. &y !LEL it would e necessary to find in'estment opportunities for three trillion dollars , roughly twice what was needed in !L2L.I The future of capitalism is thus highly uncertain-and, for capitalists, grim. 7eoli erals and neoconser'ati'es e'o"e the threat of communism ecause they sense the mortality of capitalism. We shouldn>t let the media screen decei'e us. We shouldn>t thin" that the charge that O ama is a communist
and peace is communist fool us into thin"ing that communism is 8ust an image co'ering up and distorting the more serious politics of glo al finance, trade, and currency regulation. That politics is hopeless, a farce, the attempt of financial and economic elites to come to some temporary arrangements conduci'e to their continued e9ploitation of the wor" of the rest of us.

!%T . SO%DEN"8
Only our politics of truth can solve for the social e*clusion they outline &ean : *rofessor of *olitical /cience at <o art and William /mith $olleges (;odi +ean, ;une !LLM, .gize" against
+emocracy,0 %aw, $ulture and the <umanities, :ol. 2 7o. !, /age ;ournals6CC#* This right-wing detour, then, emphasizes gize">s notion of uni'ersal partisan Truth, a political Truth. According to gize", what democrats,

multiculturalists, and .re orn pseudo-7ietzscheans0 foreclose is a .politics of truth.0 7one of these positions is willing to ta"e a side, to assert and claim that there is a truth of a situation. Instead, they em race a multiplicity of narrati'es and of forms of political engagement, all the while limiting engagement to resistance, as if this resistance were not itself already allowed for in the hegemonic framewor". )or gize", the failure of such an approach is that radical political practice itself is concei'ed of as an unending process which can desta ilize, displace , and so on, the power structure, without e'er eing a le to undermine it effecti'ely Bthe ultimate goal of radical politics is ultimately to displace the limit of social e9clusions, empowering the e9cluded agents (se9ual and ethnic minorities6 y creating marginal spaces in which they can articulate and @uestion their identity . . . there are no final 'ictories and ultimate demarcations. /o, not only do such approaches to radical politics lea'e the o'erarching political-economic frame intact, ut the 'ery political tactics chosen are those conduci'e to the deterritorializing flows of glo al capital. &ictatorship of the proletariat solves &ean ', *rofessor of *olitical /cience at <o art and William /mith $olleges (;odi +ean, .The $ommunist <orizon,0
pages KL-K!6CC#* When the

people are the su 8ect of communism, their so'ereignty is not that of the dispersed indi'iduals of li eral democracy. Rather, the so'ereignty of the people corresponds to the political form =ar9ist theory refers to as the dictatorship of the proletariat. The direct and fearsome rule of the collecti'e people o'er those who would oppress and e9ploit them, o'er those who would ta"e for themsel'es what elongs to all in common. As %enin descri es it in /tate and Re'olution, the dictatorship of the proletariat is an organization of the oppressed for the purpose of suppressing the oppressor. =ore than a mere e9pansion of democracy, more than the inclusion of more people within democracy>s pur'iew, the dictatorship of the proletariat puts into practice the purpose and end of democracy, ma"ing it ser'e the many and not the .money- ags .0 $onse@uently and necessarily, the dictatorship of the proletariat imposes restrictions : it restricts the freedom of capitalists, e9ploiters, and oppressors. They are not free to do as they will ut are go'erned, controlled, and limited y the rest of us. In time, this go'ernance , control, and limitation effecti'ely eliminate the capitalist class, &ut until the ine@uality that ena les capitalism has een eliminated, the organized power of a state ser'es as the instrument through which the people not only go'ern, ut insure that go'ernance is carried out for the enefit of the collecti'e rather than the few. An ad'antage of the =ar9ist 'iew of the proletariat as the su 8ect of communism is its lin"age of an essential role in production to an essential role in politics. The proletariat has een a name for the uni'ersal class, the su 8ect-o 8ect of history, ecause its emancipation emancipates us all, dissol'ing the class and property relations at the asis of capitalist power. The proletarian is not 8ust the wor"erA the proletarian is the wor"er radicalized, the wor"er politicized . %enin, for e9ample, em raced the
Imerger narrati'e,0 the idea (originally ela orated y #arl #auts"y6 that =ar9>s uni@ue achie'ement was merging two

pre'iously separate political elements-wor"ing class struggle and socialism-into a single narrati'e that ma"es esta lishing socialism the goal of the wor"ers> struggle, in fact, into the historical mission of the wor"ing class.E

6idelity to the $dea of "ommunism means subordination of all other goals and the incorporation of all other agendas. 8ou should view the ballot as a referendum on communism. +adiou '- *rofessor at Duropean 4raduate /chool (Alain &adiou, .The Idea of $ommunism,0 pages !GM-!JL6CC#*
/o we can now return to our su 8ect, the communist Idea. If, for an indi'idual, an

Idea is the su 8ecti'e operation where y a specific real truth is imaginarily pro8ected into the sym olic mo'ement of a <istory, we can say that an Idea presents the truth as if it were a fact . In other words, the Idea presents certain facts as sym ols of the real of truth . This was how the Idea of
communism allowed re'olutionary politics and its parties to e inscri ed in the representation of a meaning of <istory the ine'ita le outcome of which was communism. Or how it ecame possi le to spea" of a Hhomeland of socialismH, which amounted to sym olizing the creation of a possi ility - which is fragile y definition - through the magnitude of a power.

The Idea, which is an operati'e mediation

etween the real and the sym olic, always presents the indi'idual with something that is located etween the e'ent and the fact. That is why the endless de ates a out the real status of the communist Idea are irresol'a le. Is it a @uestion of a regulati'e Idea, in #antHs sense of the term, ha'ing no real efficacy ut a le to set reasona le goals for our understanding? Or is it an agenda that must e carried out o'er time through a new post-re'olutionary /tateHs action on the world? Is it a utopia, if not a plainly dangerous, and e'en criminal, one? Or is it the name of Reason in <istory? This type of de ate can ne'er e concluded for the simple reason that the su 8ecti'e operation of the Idea is not simple ut comple9. It in'ol'es real se@uences of emancipatory politics as its essential real

It does not claim (as this would amount to su 8ecting the truth procedure to the laws of the /tate6 that the e'ent and its organized political conse@uences are reduci le to facts. &ut neither does it claim that the facts are unsuita le for any historical trans-scription (to ma"e a %acanian sort of play on words6 of the distincti'e characters of a truth. The Idea is a historical anchoring of e'erything elusi'e, slippery and
condition, ut it also presupposes marshalling a whole range of historical facts suita le for sym olization. e'anescent in the ecoming of a truth. &ut it can only e so if it admits as its OItn real this aleatory, elusi'e, slippery, e'anescent dimension. That is why it is incum ent upon the communist Idea to respond to the @uestion HWhere do correct ideas come from?H the way =ao did: , Hcorrect

ideasH (and

y this I mean what constitutes the path of a truth in a

situation6 come from practice. H*racticeH should o 'iously e understood as the materialist name of the real. It would thus e appropriate to say that the Idea that sym olizes the ecoming Hin truthH of correct (political6 ideas in <istory, that is to say, the

Idea of communism, therefore comes itself from the idea of practice

(from the e9perience of the real6 in the final analysis ut can ne'ertheless not e reduced to it. This is ecause it is the protocol not of the e9istence ut rather of the e9posure of a truth in action. All of the foregoing e9plains, and to a certain e9tent 8ustifies, why

it was ultimately possi le to go to the e9treme of e9posing the truths of emancipatory politics in the guise of their opposite , that is to say, in the guise of a /tate. /ince it is a @uestion of an (imaginary6 ideological relationship etween a truth procedure and historical facts,
why hesitate to push this relationship to its limit? Why not say that it is a matter of a relationship etween e'ent and /tate? /tate and Re'olution: that is the title of one of %eninHs most famous te9ts. And the /tate and the D'ent are indeed what are at sta"e in it. 7e'ertheless, %enin, following =ar9 in this regard, is careful to say that the /tate in @uestion after the Re'olution will ha'e to e the /tate of the withering away of the /tate, the /tate as organizer of the transition to the non-/tate. /o letHs say the following: The

Idea of communism can pro8ect the real of a politics, su tracted as e'er from the power of the /tate, into the figure of Hanother /tateH, pro'ided
that the su traction lies within this su 8ecti'ating operation, in the sense that the Hother /tateH is also su tracted from the power of the /tate, hence from its own power, in so far as it is a /tate whose essence is to wither away. It is in this conte9t that it

is necessary to thin" and endorse the 'ital importance of proper names in all re'olutionary politics. Their importance is indeed oth spectacular and parado9ical. On the one hand, in effect, emancipatory politics is essentially the politics of the anonymous masses A it is the 'ictory of those with no names,2L of those who are held in a state of colossal insignificance y the /tate. On the other hand,

it is distinguished all along the way y proper names, which define it historically, which represent it,
much more forcefully than is the case for other "inds of politics. Why is there this long series of proper names? Why this glorious *antheon of re'olutionary heroes? Why /partacus, Thomas =untzer, Ro espierre, Toussaint %ou'erture, &lan@ui, =ar9, %enin, Rosa %u9em urg, =ao, $he 4ue'ara and so many others? The reason is that all these proper names sym olize historically - in the guise of an indi'idual, of a pure singularity of ody and thought the rare and precious networ" of ephemeral se@uences of politics as truth. The elusi'e formalism of odies-of-truth is legi le here as empirical e9istence. In these proper names, the ordinary indi'idual disco'ers glorious, distincti'e indi'iduals as the mediation for his or her own indi'iduality, as the proof that he or she can force its finitude. The anonymous action of millions of militants, re els, fighters, unrepresenta le as such, is com ined and counted as one in the simple, powerful sym ol of the proper name. Thus, proper names are in'ol'ed in the operation of the Idea, and the ones I 8ust mentioned are elements of the Idea of communism at its 'arious different stages. /o let us not hesitate to say that #hrushche'Hs condemnation of Hthe cult of personalityH, apropos /talin, was misguided, and that, under the pretense of democracy, it heralded the decline of the Idea of communism that we witnessed in the ensuing decades. The political criti@ue of /talin and his terrorist 'ision of the /tate needed to e underta"en in a rigorous way, from the perspecti'e of re'olutionary politics itself, and =ao had egun to do as much in a num er of his writings.22 Whereas #hrushche', who was in fact defending the group that had led the /talinist /tate, made no inroads whatsoe'er as regards this issue and, when it came to spea"ing of the Terror carried out under /talin, merely offered an a stract criti@ue of the role of proper names in political su 8ecti'ation. <e himself there y pa'ed the way for the Hnew philosophersH of reactionary humanism a decade later. Whence a 'ery precious lesson:

e'en though retroacti'e political actions may re@uire that a gi'en name e stripped of its sym olic function, this function as such cannot e eliminated for all that. )or the Idea - and the communist Idea in particular, ecause it refers directly to the infinity of the people needs the finitude of proper names. %etHs recapitulate as simply as possi le. A truth is the political real. <istory, e'en as a reser'oir of proper names, is a sym olic place . The ideological operation of the Idea of communism is the imaginary pro8ection of the political real into the sym olic fiction of <istory, including in its guise as a representation of the action of innumera le masses 'ia the One of a proper name. The role of this Idea is to support the indi'idualHs incorporation into the discipline of a truth procedure, to authorize the indi'idual, in his or her own eyes, to go eyond the /tatist constraints of mere
sur'i'al y ecoming a part of the ody-of-truth, or the su 8ecti'iza le ody. We will now as": why is it necessary to resort to this am iguous operation? Why do the e'ent and its conse@uences also ha'e to e e9posed in the guise of a fact - often a 'iolent one that I/ accompanied y different 'ersions of the Hcult of personalityH? What is the reason for this historical appropriation of emancipatory politics? The simplest reason is that ordinary history, the history

of indi'idual

li'es, is confined within the /tate. The history of a life, with neither decision nor choice, is in itself a part of the
history of the /tate, whose con'entional mediations are the family, wor", the homeland, property, religion, customs and so forth.

of an e9ception to all the a o'e - as is a truth procedure - also aims at eing shared with e'eryone elseA it aims to show itself to e not only an e9ception ut also a possi ility that e'eryone can share from now on. And that is one of the IdeaHs functions: to pro8ect the
e9ception into the ordinary life of indi'iduals, to fill what merely e9ists with a certain measure of the e9traordinary. To con'ince my own immediate circle - hus and or wife, neigh ours and friends, colleagues - that the fantastic e9ception of truths in the ma"ing also e9ists, that we are not doomed to li'es programmed y the constraints of the /tate. 7aturally, in the final analysis, only

The heroic,

ut indi'idual, pro8ection

the raw, or militant, e9perience of the truth procedure will compel one person or anotherHs entry into the ody of- truth. &ut to ta"e him or her to the place where this e9perience is to
e found - to ma"e him or her a spectator of, and therefore partly a participant in, what is important for a truth the mediation of the Idea, the sharing of the Idea, are almost always re@uired. The Idea of communism (regardless of what name it might otherwise e gi'en, which hardly matters: no Idea is defina le y its name6 is what ena les a truth procedure to e spo"en in the impure language of the /tate and there y for the lines of force y 'irtue of which the /tate prescri es what is possi le and what is impossi le to e shifted for a time. In this 'iew of things, the most ordinary action is to ta"e someone to a real political meeting, far from their home, far from their predetermined e9istential parameters, in a hostel of wor"ers from =ali, for e9ample, or at the gates of a factory. Once they ha'e come to the place where politics is occurring, they will ma"e a decision a out whether to incorporate or withdraw. &ut in order for them to come to that place, the Idea and for two centuries, or perhaps since *lato, it has een the Idea of communism - must ha'e already shifted them in the order of representations, of <istory and of the /tate. The sym ol must imaginarily come to the aid of the creati'e flight from the real. Allegorical facts must ideologize and historicize the fragility of truth. A anal yet crucial discussion with four wor"ers and a student in an ill-lit room must momentarily e enlarged to the dimensions of $ommunism and thus e oth what it is and what it will ha'e een as a moment in the local construction of the True. Through the enlargement of the sym ol, it must ecome 'isi le that H8ust ideasH come from this practically in'isi le

practice. The fi'eperson meeting in an out-of-the-way su ur must e eternal in the 'ery e9pression of its precariousness. That is why the real must e e9posed in a fictional structure. The second reason is that e'ery e'ent is a surprise. If this were not the case, it would mean that it Icould ha'e een predicta le as a fact, and so would e inscri ed in the <istory of the /tate, which is a contradiction in terms. The pro lem can thus e formulated in the following way:

how can we

prepare oursel'es for such surprises? And this time the pro
deployment of new possi ilities. <owe'er, the us, into

lem really e9ists, e'en if we are already currently militants of a pre'ious e'entHs conse@uences, e'en if we are included in a ody of- truth. 4ranted, we are proposing the

e'ent to come will tum what is still impossi le , e'en for a possi ility. In order to anticipate, at least ideologically, or intellectually, the creation of new possi ilities, we must ha'e an Idea. An Idea that of course in'ol'es the newness of the possi ilities that
the truth procedure of which we are the militants has rought to light, which are real-possi ilities, ut an Idea that also in'ol'es the formal possi ility of other possi ilities, ones as yet unsuspected y us. An Idea is always the assertion that a new truth is historically possi le. And since the forcing of the impossi le into the possi le occurs 'ia su traction from the power of the /tate, an Idea can e said to assert that this su tracti'e process is infinite: it is always formally possi le that

the di'iding line drawn y the /tate etween the possi le and the impossi le may once again e shifted, howe'er radical its pre'ious shifts - including the one in which we as militants are currently ta"ing
part - may ha'e een. That is why one of the contents of the communist Idea today as opposed to the theme of communism as a goal to e attained through the wor" of a new /tate - is that the withering away of the /tate, while undou tedly a principle that must e apparent in any political action (which is e9pressed y the formula Hpolitics at a distance from the /tateH as an o ligatory refusal of any direct inclusion in the /tate, of any re@uest for funding from the /tate, of any participation in elections, etc.6, is also an infinite tas", since the creation of new political truths will always shift the di'iding line etween /tatist, hence historical, facts and the eternal conse@uences of an e'ent. With this in mind, I will now conclude y turning to the contemporary inflections of the Idea of communism.2! In "eeping with the current reassessment of the Idea of communism, as I mentioned, the wordHs function can no longer e that of an ad8ecti'e, as in H$ommunist *artyH, or Hcommunist regimesH. The *arty-form, li"e that of the /ocialist /tate, is no longer suita le for pro'iding real support for the Idea. This pro lem moreo'er first found negati'e e9pression in two crucial e'ents of the HJLs and HKLs of the last century: the $ultural Re'olution in $hina and the amorphous entity called H=ay HJFH in )rance. %ater, new political forms, all of which are of the order of politics without a party, were - and are still eing tried out.2E O'erall, howe'er, the

modern, so-called HdemocraticH form of the ourgeois /tate, of which glo alized capitalism is the cornerstone, can oast of ha'ing no ri'als in the ideological field. )or three decades now, the word HcommunismH has een either totally forgotten or practically e@uated with criminal enterprises. That is why the su 8ecti'e situation of politics has e'erywhere ecome so incoherent. %ac"ing the Idea, the popular masses> confusion is inescapa le. 7e'ertheless, there are many signs suggesting that this reactionary period is coming to an end. The historical parado9 is that, in a certain way, we are closer
to pro lems in'estigated in the first half of the nineteenth century than we are to those we ha'e inherited from the twentieth. ;ust as in around 2FGL, today we are faced with an utterly cynical capitalism , which is certain that it is the only possi le option for a rational organization of society. D'erywhere it is implied that the poor are to lame for their own plight, that =ricans are ac"ward, and that the future elongs either to the Hci'ilizedH ourgeoisies of the Western world or to those who, li"e the ;apanese, choose to follow the same path. Today, 8ust as ac" then, 'ery e9tensi'e areas of e9treme po'erty can e found e'en in the rich countries. There

are outrageous, widening ine@ualities etween countries, as well as etween social classes. The su 8ecti'e, political gulf
etween Third World farmers, the unemployed and poor wage earners in our so-called Hde'elopedH countries, on the one hand, and the HWesternH middle classes on the other, is a solutely un ridgea le and tainted with a sort of indifference ordering on hatred. =ore than e'er, political Hrescue the organized, road sectors of wor"ing-class youth ha'e fallen prey to nihilistic despair, the 'ast ma8ority of intellectuals are ser'ile. In contrast to all this, as isolated as =ar9 and his friends were at the time when the retrospecti'ely famous =anifesto of the $ommunist *arty came out in 2FGK, there

power, as the current economic crisis with its one single slogan of an"sH clearly pro'es, is merely an agent of capitalism. Re'olutionaries are di'ided and only wea"ly

are nonetheless more and more of us in'ol'ed in organizing new types of political processes among the poor and wor"ing masses and in
trying to find e'ery possi le way to support the re-emergent forms of the communist Idea in reality. ;ust as at the eginning of the nineteenth century, the 'ictory of the communist Idea is not at issue, as it would later e, far too dangerously and dogmatically, for a whole stretch of the twentieth century. What matters first and foremost is its e9istence and the terms in which it is formulated. In the first place, to

pro'ide a 'igorous su 8ecti'e e9istence to the communist hypothesis is the tas" those of us gathered here today are

attempting to accomplish in our own way. And it I insist, a thrilling tas". &y com ining intellectual constructs, which are always glo al and uni'ersal, with e9periments of fragments of truths, which are local and singular, yet uni'ersally transmitta le, we can gi'e new life to the communist hypothesis, or rather to the Idea of communism, in indi'idual consciousnesses. We can usher in the third era of this IdeaHs e9istence. We can, so we must.

6 !($N# . ET=$"S
Every ethical decision should be infused with all of the significance of humanitys destiny. The ;uestion regarding the plan is Kdoes it confirm or contradict the communist hypothesis.K $f we win a link4 re1ect them because they reduce life to a barbaric rat race and stand opposed to universal emancipation. +adiou ? *rofessor at Duropean 4raduate /chool (Alain &adiou, .The =eaning of /ar"ozy,0 pages 1K-2LE6CC#*
I would li"e to situate the /ar"ozy episode, which is not an impressi'e page in )rench history, in a roader horizon. I %et us picture a "ind of <egelian fresco of recent world history - y which I do not, li"e our 8ournalists, mean the triad =itterrand-$hirac-/ar"ozy, ut rather the de'elopment of the politics of wor"ing-class and popular emancipation o'er nearly two centuries. /ince

the )rench Re'olution and its gradually uni'ersal echo, since the most radically egalitarian de'elopments of that re'olution, the decrees of Ro espierreHs $ommittee of *u lic /afety on the Hma9imumH and &a eufHs theorizations, we "now (when I say HweH, I mean humanity in the a stract, and the "nowledge in @uestion is uni'ersally a'aila le on the paths of emancipation6 that communism is the right hypothesis. Indeed, there is no other, or at least I am not aware of one. All those who a andon this hypothesis immediately resign themsel'es to the mar"et economy, to parliamentary democracy - the form of state suited to capitalism - and to the ine'ita le and HnaturalH character of the most monstrous ine@ualities . What do we mean y HcommunismH? As =ar9
argued in the 2FGG =anuscript, communism is an idea regarding the destiny of the human species. This use of the word must e completely distinguished from the meaning of the ad8ecti'e HcommunistH that is so worn-out today, in such e9pressions as Hcommunist partiesH, Hcommunist statesH or Hcommunist worldH - ne'er mind that Hcommunist stateH is an o9ymoron, to which the o scure coinage Hsocialist stateH has wisely een preferred. D'en if, as we shall see, these uses of the word elong to a time when the hypothesis was still coming-to- e. In its generic sense, HcommunistH of all, in a negati'e sense - as we can read in its canonical te9t The $ommunist =anifesto - that

means first the logic of classes, of the fundamental su ordination of people who actually wor" for a dominant class, can e o'ercome. This arrangement, which has een that of history e'er since anti@uity, is not ine'ita le.
$onse@uently, the oligarchic power of those who possess wealth and organize its circulation, crystallized in the might of states, is not inescapa le. The communist hypothesis is that

a different collecti'e organization is practica le, one that will eliminate the ine@uality of wealth and e'en the di'ision of la our: e'ery
indi'idual will e a Hmulti-purpose wor"erH, and in particular people will circulate etween manual and intellectual wor", as well as etween town and country. The

pri'ate appropriation of monstrous fortunes and their transmission y inheritance will disappear. The e9istence of a coerci'e state separate from ci'il society, with its military and police, will no longer seem a self-e'ident necessity. There will e, =ar9 tells us - and he saw this point as his ma8or contri ution - after a rief se@uence of Hproletarian dictatorshipH charged with destroying the remains of the old world, a long se@uence of reorganization on the asis of a Hfree associationH of producers and creators, which will ma"e possi le a Hwithering awayH of the state. H$ommunismH as such only denotes this 'ery general set of intellectual representations. This set is the
horizon of any initiati'e, howe'er local and limited in time it may e, that rea"s with the order of esta lished opinions the necessity of ine@ualities and the state instrument for protecting these - and composes a fragment of a politics of emancipation. In other words, communism is what #ant called an HIdeaH, with a regulatory function, rather than a programme. It is a surd to characterize communist principles in the sense I ha'e defined them here as utopian, as is so often done. They are intellectual patterns, always actualized in a different fashion, that ser'e to produce lines of demarcation etween different forms of politics. &y and large, a particular political se@uence is either compati le with these principles or opposed to them, in which case it is reactionary. H$ommunismH, in this sense, is a heuristic hypothesis that is 'ery fre@uently used in political argument, e'en if the word itself does not appear. If it is still true, as /artre said, that He'ery anti-communist is a swineH, it is ecause any political se@uence that, in its principles or lac" of them, stands in formal contradiction with the communist hypothesis in its generic sense, has to e 8udged as opposed to the emancipation

of the whole of humanity, and thus to the properly human destiny of humanity. Whoe'er

does not illuminate

the coming-to- e of humanity with the communist hypothesis - whate'er words they use, as such words matter little - reduces humanity, as far as its collecti'e ecoming is concerned, to animality. As we "now, the contemporary - that is, the capitalist name of this animality - is HcompetitionH . The war dictated y
self-interest, and nothing more. As a pure Idea of e@uality, the communist hypothesis has no dou t e9isted in a practical state since the eginnings of the e9istence of the state. As soon as mass action opposes state coercion in the name of egalitarian 8ustice, we ha'e the appearance of rudiments or fragments of the communist hypothesis. This is why, in a pamphlet titled +e lH-;eologie, which I wrote in colla oration with the late lamented )rancois &almes and was pu lished in 21KJ, we proposed to identity Hcommunist in'ariantsHf *opular re'olts, such as that of the sla'es led y /partacus, or that of the 4erman peasants led y Thomas =unzer, are e9amples of this practical e9istence of communist in'ariants. <owe'er, in

the e9plicit form that it was gi'en y certain thin"ers and acti'ists of the )rench Re'olution, the communist hypothesis inaugurates political modernity . It was this
that laid low the mental structures of the ancient regime, yet without eing tied to those HdemocraticH political forms that the ourgeoisie would ma"e the instrument for its own pursuit of power. This point is essential: from

the eginning, the communist hypothesis in no way coincided with the HdemocraticH hypothesis that would lead to present-day parliamentarism . It su sumes a different history and
different e'ents. What seems important and creati'e when illuminated y the communist hypothesis is different in "ind from what ourgeois-democratic historiography selects. That is indeed why =ar9, gi'ing materialist foundations to the first effecti'e great se@uence of the modern politics of emancipation, oth too" o'er the word HcommunismH and distanced himself from any "ind of democratic HpoliticismH y maintaining, after the lesson of the *aris $ommune, that the ourgeois state, no matter how democratic, must e destroyed. Well, I lea'e it to you to 8udge what is important or not, to 8udge the points whose conse@uences you choose to assume against the horizon of the communist hypothesis. Once again, it is the right hypothesis, and we can appeal to its principles, whate'er the declensions or 'ariations that these undergo in different conte9ts. /artre said in an inter'iew, which I paraphrase: If

the communist hypothesis is not right, if it is not practica le, well, that means that humanity is not a thing in itself, not 'ery different from ants or termites. What did he mean y that? If competition, the Hfree mar"etH, the sum of little pleasures, and the walls that protect you from the desire of the wea", are the alpha and omega of all collecti'e and pri'ate e9istence, then the human animal is not worth a cent. And it is this
worthlessness to which &ush with his aggressi'e conser'atism and crusader spirit, &lair the *ious with his militarist rhetoric, and /ar"ozy with his Hwor", family, countryH discipline, want to reduce the e9istence of the immense ma8ority of li'ing indi'iduals. And the H%eftH is still worse, simply 8u9taposing to this 'acant 'iolence a 'ague spirit of charity. To mor id competition, the paste oard 'ictories of daddyHs oys and girls, the ridiculous supermen of unleashed finance, the co"ed-up heroes of the planetary stoc" e9change, this %eft can only oppose the same actors with a it of social politeness, a little walnut oil in the wheels, crum s of holy wafer for the disinherited - in other words, orrowing from 7ietzsche, the loodless figure of the Hlast r man. To put an end once and for all to =ay HJF means agreeing that our

only choice is etween the hereditary nihilism of finance and social piety. It not only means accepting that

communism collapsed in the /o'iet -nion, not only ac"nowledging that the *arti $ommuniste )rancais has een wretchedly defeated, ut also and a o'e all it

means a andoning the hypothesis that =ay HJF was a militant in'ention precisely aware of the failure of state HcommunismH . And thus that =ay HJF,
and still more so the fi'e years that followed, inaugurated a new se@uence for the genuine communist hypothesis, one that always "eeps its distance from the state. $ertainly, no one could say where all this might lead, ut we "new in any case that what was at sta"e was the re irth of this hypothesis. If the thing that /ar"ozy is the name of succeeds in imposing the necessity of a andoning any idea of a re irth of this "ind, if

human society is a collection of indi'iduals pursuing their self-interest, if this is the eternal reality, then it is certain that the philosopher can and must a andon the human animal to its sad destiny. &ut we shall not let a triumphant /ar"ozy dictate the meaning of our e9istence, or the tas"s of philosophy. )or what we are witnessing in no way imposes such a renunciation of the communist hypothesis, ut simply a consideration of the moment at which we find oursel'es in the history of this hypothesis.

,N" . %$N3
Their criti;ue of the status ;uo fails to address the conditions that give rise to racism and thus fails to materiali/e into reform . the only way to solve is to unite the proletariat Selfa , (%ance /elfa, ./la'ery and the origins of racism,0 International /ocialist Re'iew, Issue !J 7o'em er-+ecem er
!LL!, http:CCisre'iew.orgCissuesC!JCrootsRofRracism.shtml6CC#* What does this discussion mean for us today? )irst, racism

is not part of some unchanging human nature. It was literally in'ented. And so it can e torn down . /econd, despite the o'erwhelming ideological hold of white supremacy, people always resisted itBfrom the sla'es themsel'es to white anti-racists. -nderstanding racism in this way informs the strategy that we use to com at racism. Antiracist education is essential, ut it is not enough. &ecause it treats racism only as a @uestion of . ad ideas0 it does not address the underlying material conditions that gi'e rise to the acceptance of racism among large sections of wor"ers.E!nThoroughly undermining the hold of racism on large sections of wor"ers re@uires three conditions: first, a roader class fight ac" that unites wor"ers across racial lines A second, attac"ing the conditions ( ad 8o s, housing, education, etc.6 that gi'e rise to the appeal of racism among large sections of wor"ersA and third, the conscious inter'ention of antiracists to oppose racism in all its manifestations and to win support for interracial class solidarity. The hold of racism rea"s down when the class struggle against the osses forces wor"ers to see" solidarity across racial lines . /ocialists elie'e that such class unity is possi le ecause white wor"ers ha'e an o 8ecti'e interest in fighting racism . The influence of racism
on white wor"ers is a @uestion of their consciousness, not a @uestion of some material ri e from the system they recei'e.

/truggle creates conditions y which racism can e challenged and defeated. Racism and capitalism ha'e een intertwined since the eginning of capitalism. Oou can>t ha'e capitalism without racism. Therefore, the final triumph o'er racism will only come when we a olish the source of racismBcapitalismBand uild a new socialist society. Their focus on the institution and not the foundation trades-off V the only way to sol'e racial oppression is to win a socialist society Taylor , (Ale9 Taylor, !! 7o'em er !LL!, .The roots of racism,0 /ocialist Wor"er, http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!LL!!CGE2CGE2RLFRRacism.shtml6CC#*

&oth assumptions are wrong. Racism isnHt 8ust an ideology ut is an institution. And its origins donHt lie in ad ideas or in human nature. Rather, racism originated with capitalism and the sla'e trade. As the =ar9ist writer $%R ;ames put it, IThe conception of di'iding people y race egins with the sla'e trade. This thing was so shoc"ing, so opposed to all the conceptions of society which religion and philosophers hadNthat the only 8ustification y which humanity could face it was to di'ide people into races and decide that the Africans were an inferior race.I <istory pro'es this point. *rior to the ad'ent of capitalism, racism as a systematic form of oppression did not e9ist. )or e9ample, ancient 4ree" and Roman societies had no concept of race or racial oppression. These werenHt
li erated societies. They were uilt on the ac"s of sla'es. And these societies created an ideology to 8ustify sla'ery. As the 4ree" philosopher Aristotle put it in his oo" *olitics, I/ome men are y nature free, and others sla'es, and that for these

ecause sla'ery in ancient 4reece and Rome was not racially ased, these societies had no corresponding ideology of racial inferiority or oppression. In fact, Dgyptian, 4ree", Roman and Darly $hristian societies had a fa'ora le image of &lac"s and of
latter, sla'ery is oth e9pedient and right.I <owe'er,

African societies. /eptemus /e'erenus, an emperor of Rome, was African and almost certainly &lac". IThe ancients did accept the institution of sla'ery as a fact of lifeA they made ethnocentric 8udgments of other societiesA they had narcissistic canons of physical eauty,I writes <oward -ni'ersity professor )ran" /nowden in his oo" &efore $olor *re8udice. IOet

nothing compara le to the 'irulent color pre8udice of modern time e9isted in the ancient world. This is the 'iew of most scholars who ha'e e9amined the e'idence.I RA$I/= ORI4I7ATD+ with the modern sla'e trade. ;ust as the sla'eholders of ancient 4reece and Rome created an ideology that their ar aric sla'e system was Inatural,I so did the modern sla'e-owning class. There was one important difference. According to them, sla'ery was InaturalI ecause of race. Africans were not human eings, and therefore, they were orn to e sla'es. As historian Dric Williams writes in his oo" $apitalism and /la'ery, I /la'ery was not orn of racismA rather, racism was the conse@uence of sla'ery.I Again, history ears this out. If racism had e9isted prior to the sla'e trade, then Africans would ha'e een the first group of people to e ensla'ed. &ut, in the early years of colonial America, sla'ery was not racially ased. Initially, the colonists attempted to ensla'e 7ati'e
Americans. They also imported thousands of white indentured ser'ants. White ser'ants were treated li"e sla'es. They were ought, sold, put up as sta"es in card games and raped, eaten and "illed with impunity. 7ot only was ser'itude a multiracial institution in

the early years of colonial America, there was also a surprising degree of e@uality etween &lac"s and whites. )or e9ample, in 2Kth century :irginia, &lac"s were a le to file
lawsuits, testify in court against whites, ear arms and own property, including ser'ants and sla'es. In other words, 2Kth century &lac"s in :irginia had more rights than &lac"s in the ;im $row /outh during the !Lth century. $olonial records from 2Kth century :irginia re'eal that one African sla'e named )rances *ayne ought his freedom y earning enough money to uy three white ser'ants to replace him. /uch e'ents pro'e the point that institutional racism did not e9ist in the early years of sla'ery-- ut was created later. O:DR

TI=D, the sla'eholding class gradually came to the conclusion that racism was in its interest and that it must e deeply em edded in all of societyHs institutions. There were se'eral reasons for this conclusion. )irst, indentured ser'itude was no longer sufficient to meet the demand for la or as industry de'eloped in &ritain and put new demands on the colonial economy. Also, y the middle of the 2Kth century, African sla'es egan to li'e longer than fi'e to se'en years--the standard period for indentured ser'itude. *ut in the cold terms of economic reality, sla'ery ecame more profita le than indentured ser'itude. )inally, Africans, whose children could also e ensla'ed, were more easily segregated and oppressed than ser'ants or 7ati'e Americans. As Williams summarized this process: I<ere then, is the origin of 7egro sla'ery. The reason was economic, not racialA it had to do not with the color of the la orer, ut the cheapness of the la orN This was not a theory, it was a practical conclusion deduced from the personal e9perience of the planter. <e would ha'e gone to the moon, if necessary, for la or. Africa was nearer than the moon.I &-T T<D
most important reason that the planter class created a racially ased sla'e system was not economic, ut political--the age-old strategy of di'ide and rule. The

Isla'eocracyI was a tiny, e9tremely wealthy minority surrounded y thousands of people whom it had ensla'ed, e9ploited or con@uered. Its greatest fear was that sla'es and ser'ants would unite against it--and this fear was legitimate. )or
e9ample, &aconHs Re ellion of 2JKJ egan as a protest against :irginiaHs policy against nati'e Americans, ut turned into an armed multiracial re ellion against the ruling elite. An army of se'eral hundred farmers, ser'ants and sla'es demanding freedom and the lifting of ta9es sac"ed ;amestown and forced the go'ernor of :irginia to flee. One thousand soldiers were sent from Dngland to put it down. The re el army held out for eight months efore it was defeated.

&aconHs Re ellion was a turning point. It made clear to the planters that for their class to sur'i'e, they would ha'e to di'ide the people that they ruled--on the asis of race.
A olitionist and e9-sla'e )rederic" +ouglass put it this way: IThe sla'eholdersN y encouraging the enmity of the poor, la oring white man against the &lac"s, succeeded in ma"ing the said white man almost as much a sla'e as the &lac" himselfN&oth are plundered, and y the same plunderers.I Or, as +ouglass also said, I They

di'ided oth to con@uer each.I O'er time, the institution of racism ecame firmly esta lished-- oth as a means of legitimizing sla'ery, ut also as a means of di'iding poor people against one other. While the $i'il War smashed the plantersH sla'e system, it did not end the institution of racism. The reason for this

is that racism

had further uses for capitalism. /imilar to the sla'e societies of anti@uity and of the early -./., under capitalism today, a small, wealthy minority e9ploits and oppresses the immense ma8ority of people. Racism is the main di'ision among wor"ers today, and it pro'ides a con'enient scapegoat for pro lems created y the system. &ut ordinary people--regardless of their race--donHt enefit from racism. ItHs no coincidence that the historical periods in which wor"ers as a whole ha'e made the greatest gains--such as the 21ELs and the 21JLs--ha'e coincided with great attles against racism. $apitalism created racism and canHt function without it. The way to end racism once and for all is to win a socialist society--in which the first priority is a olishing all traces of e9ploitation and racism.

,N" . "!> L

!"$ST

$nstitutional racism did not end with abolition 0 modern !merican capitalism is inherently racist Taylor <),M)'C *h.+. candidate in African American /tudies at 7orthwestern -ni'ersity (#eenga-Oamahtta
Taylor, !J ;uly !L2E, .Race in the O ama era,0 http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L2ECLKC!JCrace-in-the-o ama-era6CC#* The crisis is ha'ing a disproportionately rutal impact on &lac" wor"ers ecause of the racism inherent in American capitalism. -./.

capitalism was uilt on the la or of &lac" sla'es, and when sla'ery ended, capitalists in the 7orth and /outh sto"ed racism to di'ide their wor"forces, dri'e down wages and increase their profit margins. Throughout the first KL years of the !Lth century, millions of
African Americans mo'ed from the rural /outh to the ur an 7orth and /outh in search of 8o s and freedom from the codified racism of ;im $row. &lac" wor"ers found that racism in the 7orth was only different y degrees from the racism they encountered in the /outh. :iolent white mo s and racially restricted co'enants in housing deeds--which allowed pri'ate homeowners to for id the selling or renting of homes to African Americans for up to !L years--hemmed African Americans into ghettos. )ederal housing policy stipulated that &lac" inner cities e restricted from mortgage insurance, guaranteeing that usinesses and de'elopers wouldnHt in'est or uild in the cities. Instead, go'ernment monies su sidized uilding and in'estment in white su ur s. The disin'estment in the central cities fueled residential and school segregation, creating a political economy of racism where &lac"s paid more for inferior housing and ser'ices, while the managers of inner cities reaped the profits of minimal in'estment. D9isting employment in the inner cities ecame increasingly elusi'e as usinesses either mo'ed to the su ur s, to the /outh or out of the country altogether in search of cheaper la or. The

conditions of diminishing employment, low-wage ser'ice 8o s, underfunded schools and segregated housing created y racist federal policies are maintained and policed y a racist criminal 8ustice system, and ha'e een since &lac"s arri'ed en
masse in the 7orth. These pu lic and pri'ate practices ha'e led to historic disparities etween African Americans and

whites. The social mo'ements of the 21JLs eliminated the last 'estiges of legal racism and opened up greater opportunities for the economic and political ad'ancement of a small layer of African Americans, ut for the ma8ority of ordinary &lac"s, racism continues to restrict opportunity. This means that &lac"s ha'e orne the greatest runt of this economic catastrophe. The managers of capitalism profit handsomely from ine@uality and racism in the
-./. ecause they guarantee a com ination of low or lower wages paid to &lac" wor"ers and the a sence of a welfare state. =oreo'er, these

same managers ha'e historically used racism to di'ide political struggles for The material impact on the li'es of &lac" wor"ers should e clear enough, ut ideologically, the systematic and institutional impo'erishment of African American communities perpetuates the impression that &lac"s are inferior and defecti'e. These perceptions are perpetuated and magnified y the mass media, <ollywood and the general means of ideological and cultural production in ourgeois society. The recurrence and persistence of racism in this economic system is not accidental or ar itrary. American capitalism is intrinsically racist. The dominant ideology of the African as the sla'e only e9ists in the power relations created y the dawn of capitalism Selfa , (%ance /elfa, ./la'ery and the origins of racism,0 International /ocialist Re'iew, Issue !J 7o'em er-+ecem er
pu lic or state entitlements--welfare--to poor or unemployed wor"ers regardless of race. !LL!, http:CCisre'iew.orgCissuesC!JCrootsRofRracism.shtml6CC#*

IT I/ commonly assumed that racism is as old as human society itself. As long as human eings ha'e een around, the argument goes, they ha'e always hated or feared people of a different nation or s"in color. In other words, racism is 8ust part of human nature. Representati'e ;ohn %.

+awson, a mem er of $ongress after the $i'il War, insisted that racial pre8udice was .implanted y *ro'idence for wise purposes.0 /enator ;ames +oolittle of Wisconsin, a contemporary of +awson>s, claimed that an .instinct of our nature0 impelled us to sort people into racial categories and to recognize the natural supremacy of whites when compared to people with dar"er s"ins.2 =ore than a century later, Richard <errnstein and $harles =urray produced The &ell $ur'e, an FLL-page statistics-laden tome that purported to pro'e innate racial differences in intelligence. Today>s

racists might don the mantel of science to 8ustify their pre8udices, ut they are no less crude or mista"en then their 21th century fore ears. If racism is part of human nature, then socialists ha'e a real challenge on
their hands. If racism is hard-wired into human iology, then we should despair of wor"ers e'er o'ercoming the di'isions

isn>t part of human nature. The est e'idence for this assertion is the fact that racism has not always e9isted. Racism is a particular form of oppression. It stems from discrimination against a group of people ased on the idea that some inherited characteristic, such as s"in color, ma"es them inferior to their oppressors. Oet the concepts of .race0 and .racism0 are modern in'entions. They arose and ecame part of the dominant ideology of society in the conte9t of the African sla'e trade at the dawn of capitalism in the 2MLLs and 2JLLs. Although it is a commonplace for academics
and opponents of socialism to claim that #arl =ar9 ignored racism, =ar9 in fact descri ed the processes that created modern racism. <is e9planation of the

etween them to fight for a socialist society free of racial ine@uality. )ortunately, racism

rise of capitalism placed the African sla'e trade, the Duropean e9termination of indigenous people in the Americas, and colonialism at its heart. In $apital, =ar9 writes: The disco'ery of gold and sil'er in America, the e9tirpation, ensla'ement, and
entom ment in mines of the indigenous population of the continent, the eginnings of the con@uest and plunder of India, and the con'ersion of Africa into a preser'e for the commercial hunting of lac" s"ins are all things that characterize the dawn of the era of capitalist production.! =ar9

connected his e9planation of the role of the sla'e trade in the rise of capitalism to the social relations that produced racism a gainst Africans. In
Wage %a or and $apital, written twel'e years efore the American $i'il War, he e9plains: What is a 7egro sla'e? A man of the lac" race. The one e9planation is as good as the other. A

7egro is a 7egro. <e only ecomes a sla'e in

certain relations. A cotton spinning 8enny is a machine for spinning cotton. It only

ecomes capital in certain relations. Torn away from these conditions, it is as little capital as gold y itself is money, or as sugar is the price of sugar.E In this passage, =ar9 shows no pre8udice to &lac"s (.a man of the lac" race,0 .a 7egro is a 7egro06, ut he moc"s society>s e@uation of .&lac"0 and .sla'e0 (.one e9planation is as good as another06. <e shows

how the economic and social relations of emerging capitalism thrust &lac"s into sla'ery (.he only ecomes a sla'e in certain relations06, which produce the dominant ideology that e@uates eing African with eing a sla'e. These fragments of =ar9>s writing gi'e us a good start in understanding the =ar9ist e9planation of the origins of racism. As the Trinidadian historian of sla'ery Dric Williams put it: . /la'ery was not orn of racism: rather, racism was the conse@uence of sla'ery.0G And, one should add, the conse@uence of modern sla'ery at the dawn of capitalism. While sla'ery e9isted as an economic system for thousands of years efore the con@uest of America, racism as we understand it today did not e9ist. "apitalism is ine*tricably linked with racism . divisions are refashioned by the ruling class to maintain their position of accumulation Selfa , (%ance /elfa, ./la'ery and the origins of racism,0 International /ocialist Re'iew, Issue !J 7o'em er-+ecem er
!LL!, http:CCisre'iew.orgCissuesC!JCrootsRofRracism.shtml6CC#*

The close connection etween sla'ery and capitalism, and thus, etween racism and capitalism, gi'es the lie to those who insist that sla'ery would ha'e 8ust died out . In fact, the /outh was more dependent on sla'ery right efore the $i'il War than it was ML or 2LL years earlier. /la'ery lasted as long as it did ecause it was profita le. And it was profita le to the richest and most .well- red0 people in the world. /la'e production was inefficient from the point of 'iew of industrial capitalism . The comparison etween the industrial

7orth and the $onfederacy illustrates this. As

capitalism de'eloped it had less need to use sla'e la or. In &ritain in the 2Fth and 21th centuries, for instance, representati'es of some the iggest industrial capitalists called for an end to the sla'e trade and e'en a olition. This wasn>t ecause
industrial capitalists opposed sla'ery on principle, ut ecause they didn>t li"e the degree to which planters won go'ernment policies fa'ora le to them. In 2FLK and 2FEE, the &ritish *arliament passed laws outlawing sla'ery.!F In the -nited /tates, the

$i'il War a olished sla'ery and struc" a great low to racism. &ut racism itself wasn>t a olished. On the contrary, 8ust as racism was created to 8ustify colonial sla'ery, racism as an ideology was refashioned. It now no longer 8ustified the ensla'ement of &lac"s, ut it 8ustified second-class status for &lac"s as wage la orers and sharecroppers. Racist ideology was also refashioned to 8ustify imperialist con@uest at the turn of the last century. As a handful of competing world powers 'ied to car'e up the glo e into colonial preser'es for cheap raw materials and la or, racism ser'ed as a con'enient 8ustification. The 'ast ma8ority of the world>s people were now portrayed as inferior races, incapa le of determining their own future. /la'ery disappeared, ut racism remained as a means to 8ustify the ensla'ement of millions of people y the -./., 'arious Duropean powers, and later ;apan. Racism also remained one of the main ways that the ruling class used to "eep &lac"s and white wor"ers di'ided . #arl =ar9 remar"ed
on a similar di'ision etween Dnglish and Irish wor"ers in &ritain, comparing it to the di'ision etween &lac"s and poor whites in the -./.: D'ery industrial and commercial center in Dngland now possesses a wor"ing class di'ided into two hostile camps, Dnglish proletarians and Irish proletarians. The ordinary Dnglish wor"er hates the Irish wor"er as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish wor"er he feels himself a mem er of the ruling nation and so turns himself into a tool of the aristocrats and capitalists of his country against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination o'er himself. <e cherishes religious, social and national pre8udices against the Irish wor"er. <is attitude

This antagonism is artificially "ept ali'e and intensified y the press, the pulpit, the comic papers, in short, y all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes . This antagonism is the secret
toward him is much the same as that of the .poor whites0 to the .niggers0 in the former sla'e states of the -./.A. of the impotence of the Dnglish wor"ing class, despite its organization.!1 In his famous passage on the antagonism etween Dnglish and Irish wor"ers in &ritain in the end of the 21th century, =ar9 outlined the main sources of racism under modem capitalism. &y its nature, capitalism fosters competition etween wor"ers. &osses ta"e ad'antage of this in two ways: first, to deli erately sto"e di'isions etween wor"ersA second, to appeal to racist ideology. $apitalism

forces wor"ers to compete for 8o s, for afforda le housing, for admittance to schools, for credit, etc. When capitalism restructures, it replaces wor"ers with machines and higherpaid wor"ers with lower-paid wor"ers. Throughout the late 21th and early !Lth centuries, -./. osses used the surplus of cheap la or immigration pro'ided to su stitute uns"illed wor"ers for s"illed (generally white, nati'e wor"ers6, .triggering a nati'ist reaction among craft wor"ers.0EL Today, restructuring in -./. industry ma"es many -./. wor"ers open to nationalist appeals to .protect their 8o s0 against low-wage competition from =e9ico. &osses see" to le'erage this competition to their ad'antage. .#eep a 'ariety of la orers, that is different
nationalities, and thus pre'ent any concerted action in case of stri"es, for there are few, if any, cases of %aps, $hinese, and *ortuguese entering into a stri"e as a unit,0 ad'ised <awaiian plantation managers in the early 21LLs.E2 <ere was a fairly star" e9ample of the osses> conscious use of racism to di'ide the wor"force. Today,

osses continue to do the same, as when they hire nonwhite stri"e rea"ers against a stri"e of predominantly white wor"ers. And politicians ne'er stand a o'e playing .the race card0 if it suits them. Racism ser'es the osses> interests and osses foster racism consciously , ut these points do not e9plain why wor"ers can accept racist e9planations for their conditions. The competition etween wor"ers that is an inherent feature of capitalism can e played out as competition (or percei'ed competition6 etween wor"ers of different racial groups. &ecause it seems to correspond with some aspect of reality, racism thus can ecome part of white wor"ers> .common sense.0 This last point is important ecause it e9plains the persistence of racist ideas. &ecause racism is wo'en right

into the fa ric of capitalism, new forms of racism arose with changes in capitalism . As the -./. economy e9panded and underpinned -./. imperial e9pansion, imperialist racismBwhich asserted that the -./. had a right to dominate other peoples, such as =e9icans and )ilipinosB de'eloped. As the -./. economy grew and suc"ed in millions of immigrant la orers, anti-immigrant racism de'eloped . &ut these are oth different forms of the same ideologyBof white supremacy and di'ision of the world into .superior0 and .inferior0 racesBthat had their origins in sla'ery.

TA N . EN"%AS$ON
Their demand for action now and focus on individual sacrifice trades off with an institutional analysis and leads to prescriptions that can leave the oppressed worse off 3uper , (Andrew #uper, /pring !LL!, .=ore Than $harity: $osmopolitan Alternati'es to the P/inger /olution>,0
Dthics [ International Affairs :olume 2J.26CC#* <ereHs the ru : It

is not enough to say that all persons ha'e e@ual moral claims on usA we need to as" how est to organize oursel'es politically and economically to meet those claims. Which com inations of rules and institutions of go'ernance are most effecti'e? What roles ought we to play as indi'iduals in respect of the primary agents of aid and 8ustice? Analogies to ethical decisions y an indi'idual in a hermetically sealed case actually o scure all these pro lems and @uestions. )or while it is true that we often act as indi'iduals, the causal rele'ance or impact of our actions depends on the positions we occupy within comple9 social systems. *hilosophers may
want me to put the point a little more technically: /inger conflates issues of practical reason--our o ligations to the 'ulnera le--with issues of 8udgment--the o ligations of the relati'ely rich to the poor in the particular case of the world in which we li'e. If

we are to ma"e 8udgments of how to act in this world, we should not confuse a stract with practical re@uirements. )rom the fact that we ha'e an a stract o ligation of aid or charity, it does not follow that we are practically o liged to donate to the poor. <ow we
address po'erty is a matter of 8udgment: understanding the rele'ant features of a social system or situationA considering which principles are rele'ant, whether they present competing demands in practice, and how other agents are li"ely to actA and finally, ad8udicating on a conte9tual course of action. 7othing in the principle of aid or charity determines that the right action in any or all conte9ts is donation. All-too-@uic"

recommendations are not 8ust a leap from principle to action, they are symptomatic of an implicitly apolitical outloo" that does not ta"e the real demands of conte9tual 8udgment seriously. /inger might say that analogies are merely
designed to show that we do ha'e an e9tensi'e o ligation of charity. &ut this is no answer. <is analogies and other arguments a stract from the causal dynamics of po'erty and opportunity, and from the mediated and indirect nature of social relations at a glo al scale. This leads to a serious underestimation of the comple9ities of the remedies and the di'ersity of roles a'aila le to us. Indeed, it leads to a failure to see that, in ma"ing 8udgments a out po'erty relief, "nowledge of institutions and awareness of roles must frame thin"ing a out indi'iduals. D'en aggressi'ely laissez-faire capitalists maintain that their actions are est for the poor. That is, what is at sta"e most of the time is not how much we should sacrifice, ut whether and which uses of resources and what "inds of agencies ma"e a positi'e difference, and how. *O%ITI$A% ;-+4=D7T I7 $O7TDXT %est I seem to sound li"e a neoli eral apologist, or a defeatist, it is helpful to see how much more informati'e is the theoretical orientation of #arl =ar9. =ar9 understood that the

first step in approaching political struggle and producing change is a structural analysis of the dynamic causes of impo'erishment and immiseration. A theory that does not include a conte9tual and institutional analysis (in the roadest sense6 is condemned to recommending rief symptomatic relief, or e'en damaging and counterproducti'e action. This is not a peculiarly =ar9ist point, and one does not ha'e to sympathize with =ar9ists to thin" that telling the ourgeoisie to e more charita le as indi'idual actors is unli"ely to produce deep changes. There is, ironically, a @uasi-$al'inist strand to the
indi'idualist approach to de'elopment: an insistence that one can ne'er do enough, ne'er e as moral as one ought to eA and an emphasis on indi'idual conscience rather than effecti'e collecti'e moral norms and political institutions. Oet the

well-documented failure of relief efforts in recent decades is a powerful indicator that a structure-sensiti'e approach to de'elopment is indispensa le to any wise, humane program or philosophy of right action. $onsider, most star"ly, the perpetuation and intensification of the Rwandan conflict and
the human misery aggra'ated y aid agencies that sustained refugee camps. In spite of the camps ecoming ases for militiamen and incu ators for cholera, the prospect of international 74O aid encouraged people not to return to their homes e'en when it was safer to do so, thus intensifying and prolonging the conflict. $onsider also the Ifood reliefI of the

21KLs that so damaged the situation of de'eloping world farmers and their dependents. It is hardly an unfamiliar thought that things can always get worse: consider /ha"espeareHs #ing %ear on the <eath, or Titus Andronicus. +e'elopment e9perts will e highly aware of countless recent e9amples that we can only wish were fictional.

Their focus on individual practical ethics trades off with a focuses on global economics which is key to improve the conditions of the oppressed. 3uper , (Andrew #uper, /pring !LL!, .=ore Than $harity: $osmopolitan Alternati'es to the P/inger /olution>,0
Dthics [ International Affairs :olume 2J.26CC#* I ha'e repeatedly as"ed what difference philosophical theories ma"e to the pro8ect of glo al po'erty relief. It should y now e clear that an

analysis from the roader perspecti'e of political philosophy--as opposed to the simple indi'idualist lens of a purportedly Ipractical ethicsI--ena les us to egin to distinguish peremptory directi'es from considered, politically aware, and sustaina le strategies. &ut there remains the deep dis8unct etween the perspecti'e of a system of glo al 8ustice and the sedimented power structures of the current glo al order. *art of what a clearly articulated theory re'eals is that some indi'idualsH gi'ing away income may do little to remedy this schism. While charity may produce impro'ements, it may at worst cause harm, or at least the rele'ant resources might e etter used in another way. 7o dou t there are good reasons to support organizations that produce sustaina le changes in the ac"ground framewor" of social institutions. &ut a systemic and long-term approach in'ol'es far more than targeting donations etter. It re@uires a nuanced awareness that politics is ineradica ly a out scale and connectedness, and thus the coordinated action of multiple interdependent roles. We must play those
roles not with an eye to ma"ing us, the relati'ely wealthy or de'eloped country citizens, feel etter, ut with a 'iew to which comple9es of agencies and actions will generate the most sustaina le positi'e momentum. This means that the

language of sacrifice must generally gi'e way to a deeper and etter language: the language of social and economic cooperation conditioned y the interests of the glo ally disad'antaged. )or all their deficiencies, oth Rawls and =ar9 ha'e in place large parts of a political philosophy. /inger does not. It is adly needed if he wishes to pro'ide guidance for engendering lasting impro'ements to the li'es of the needy. /inger and political philosophy might enefit significantly
from his turning his mind and formida le pen to this range of difficult @uestions. As Wittgenstein put it, with characteristically wry acuity: IIf someone tells me he has ought the outfit of a tightrope wal"er I am not impressed until I see what he has done with it.I (G26

TA N . !NT!#ON$S(
The class struggle is a ;uestion of antagonism that does not apply to anti0 racist movementsEmaking the ;uestion race in the guise of culture obfuscates the challenge to capitalism Ii/ek B professor of philosophy and psychoanalysis at the Duropean 4raduate /chool (/la'o8 gize", 2K /eptem er
!LLG, ./omewhere o'er the Rain ow,0 The =el ourne /chool of $ontinental *hilosophy, http:CCwww.lacan.comCzize"somewhere.htm6CC#* The first thing to note here is that it ta"es two to fight a culture war: culture

is also the dominant ideological topic of the IenlightenedI li erals whose politics is focused on the fight against se9ism, racism, and fundamentalism, and for multicultural tolerance. The "ey @uestion is thus: why is IcultureI emerging as our central life-world category? We no longer Ireally elie'e,I we 8ust follow
(some of the6 religious rituals and mores as part of the respect for the Ilife-styleI of the community to which we elong (non- elie'ing ;ews o eying "osher rules Iout of respect for tradition,I etc.6. II do not really elie'e in it, it is 8ust part of my cultureI effecti'ely seems to e the predominant mode of the disa'owedCdisplaced elief characteristic of our times: although we do not elie'e in /anta $laus, there is a $hristmas tree in e'ery house and e'en in pu lic places e'ery +ecem er - IcultureI

is the name for all those things we practice without really elie'ing in them, without Ita"ing them seriously.I The second thing to note is how, while professing their solidarity with the poor, li erals encode culture war with an opposed class message : more often than not, their fight for multicultural tolerance and womenHs rights mar"s the counter-position to the alleged intolerance, fundamentalism, and patriarchal se9ism of the Ilower classes.I The way to unra'el this confusion is to focus on the mediating terms the function of which is to o fuscate the true lines of di'ision. The way ImodernizationI is used in the recent ideological offensi'e is e9emplary here: first, an a stract opposition is constructed etween ImodernizersI (those who endorse glo al capitalism in all its aspects, from economic to cultural6 and ItraditionalistsI (those who resist glo alization6. Into this category of
those-who-resist are then thrown all, from the traditional conser'ati'es and populist Right to the IOld %eftI (those who continue to ad'ocate Welfare state, trade unions...6. This categorization o 'iously does comprise an aspect of social reality - recall the coalition of $hurch and trade unions which, in 4ermany in early !LLE, pre'ented the legalization of stores

Icultural differenceI tra'erses the entire social field, cutting across different strata and classesA it is not enough to say that this opposition can e com ined in different ways with other oppositions (so that we can ha'e conser'ati'e Itraditional 'aluesI
resistance to glo al capitalist Imodernization,I or moral conser'ati'es who fully endorse capitalist glo alization6. The failure of ImodernizationI to function as the "ey to social totality means that it is

eing open also on /unday. <owe'er, it is not enough to say that this

an Ia stractI uni'ersal notion, and the wager of =ar9ism is that there is one antagonism (Iclass struggleI6 which overdetermines all others and thus ser'es as the Iconcrete uni'ersalI of the entire field. )eminist struggle can e articulated into a chain with the struggle for social emancipation of the lower classes, or it
can (and it certainly does6 function as an ideological tool of the upper-middle classes to assert their superiority o'er the Ipatriarchal and intolerantI lower classesA and class antagonism is as it were Idou ly inscri edI here: it is the specific constellation of the class struggle itself which e9plains why the feminist struggle was appropriated y upper classes. (The same goes for racism: it is

the dynamics of class struggle itself which e9plains why direct racism is strong among the lowest white wor"ers .6 The third thing to ta"e note of is the fundamental difference etween feministCanti-racistCanti-se9ist etc. struggle and class struggle: in the first case, the goal is to translate antagonism into difference (IpeacefulI coe9istence of se9es, religions, ethnic groups6, while the goal of the class struggle is precisely the opposite , i.e., to Iaggra'ateI class difference into class antagonism. /o what the series race-gender-class o fuscates is the different logic of the political space in the case of class: while the antiracist and anti-se9ist struggle are guided y the stri'ing for the full recognition of the other,

the class struggle aims at o'ercoming and su duing, annihilating e'en, the other - e'en if not a direct physical annihilation, class struggle aims at the annihilation of the otherHs sociopolitical role and function. In other words, while it is logical to say that anti-racism wants all races to e allowed to freely assert and deploy their cultural, political and economic stri'ings, it is o 'iously meaningless to say that the aim of the proletarian class struggle is to allow the ourgeoisie to fully assert its identity and stri'ings ... In one case, we ha'e a
IhorizontalI logic of the recognition of different identities, while, in the other case, we ha'e the logic of the struggle with an antagonist.

TA N . >%A !%$S(
Their pluralism humani/es the oppressor Ii/ek ? (/la'o8 gize", .In +efense of %ost $auses,0 page 22-2E6CC#* The first lesson thus seems to e that the proper way to fight the demonization of the Other is to su 8ecti'ize her, to listen to her story, to understand how she percei'es the situation Bor, as a
partisan of the =iddle Dast dialogue put it: IAn enemy is someone whose story you ha'e not heard.I *racticing this no le motto of multicultural tolerance, IcelandHs authorities recently imposed a uni@ue form of enacting this su 8ecti'ization of the Other. In order to

fight growing 9enopho

ia (the result of increasing num ers of immigrant wor"ers6, as well as

se9ual intolerance, they organized what they called Ili'ing li rariesI: mem

ers of ethnic and se9ual minorities (gays, immigrant Dast Duropeans or lac"s6 are paid to 'isit an Icelandic family and 8ust tal" to them, ac@uainting them with their way of life, their e'eryday practices, their dreams, and so on B in this way, the e9otic stranger who is percei'ed as a threat to our way of life appears as some ody we can empathize with, with a comple9 world of her own. . . There is, howe'er, a clear limit to this procedure. $an we imagine in'iting a 7azi thug to tell us his story? Are we ready to affirm that <itler was an enemy ecause his story hadnHt een heard? A /er 8ournalist recently reported a strange piece of news from the
politician who, after long painful tal"s, con'inced /lo odan =ilose'ic in his 'illa to surrender to the police and let himself e arrested. =ilose'ic said yes and then as"ed to e allowed to go to the first floor of the 'illa to attend to some usiness. The negotiator, afraid that =ilose'ic was going to commit suicide, e9pressed his dou ts, ut =ilose'ic calmed him down, saying that he had gi'en his word to his wife, =ira =ar"o'ic, that he would wash his hair efore lea'ing. +oes this personal-life detail IredeemI the horrors that resulted from =ilose'icHs reign, does it ma"e him Imore humanI? One can well imagine

<itler washing D'a &raunHs hair B and one does not ha'e to imagine, since we already "now to play &eetho'enHs late string @uartets with friends in the e'enings. Recall the couple of IpersonalI lines that usually conclude the presentation of a writer on the ac" co'er of a oo": IIn his free time, X li"es to play with his cat and grow tulips . . .IB such a supplement which IhumanizesI the author is ideology at its purest, the sign that he is Ialso human li"e us.I (I was tempted to suggest for the co'er of one my oo"sA IIn his free time, gize" li"es to surf the internet for child pornography and to teach his small son how to pull the legs off spiders . . .I6 Our most elementary e9perience of su 8ecti'ity is that of the Irichness of my inner lifeI: this is what I Ireally am,I in contrast to the sym olic determinations and mandates I assume in pu lic life (father, professor, philosopher6. The first lesson of psychoanalysis here is that this Irichness of our inner lifeI is fundamentally a fake: a screen, a false distance, whose function is, as it were, to save my appearance, to render palpa le (accessi le to my imaginary narcissism6 my true social-sym olic identity. One of the ways to practice the criti@ue of ideology is therefore to invent strategies to unmask this hypocrisy of Iinner lifeI and its IsincereI
that <eydrich, the architect of the <olocaust, li"ed emotions, in the manner systematically enacted y %ars 'on Trier in his films: =y 'ery first film, The Orchid 4ardener, opened with a caption stating that the film was dedicated to a girl who had died of leu"aemia, gi'ing the dates of her irth and death. That was entirely fa ricatedQ And manipulati'e and cynical, ecause I realized that if you started a film li"e that, then the audience would ta"e it a lot more seriously. E There is much more than manipulation at wor" here: in his feminine trilogy o&rea"ing the Wa'es, +ancer in the +ar", +og'ille6, 'on Trier pro'o"es us in our innermost eing, stirring up automatic sympathy with the ultimate archetypal image of the 'ictimized woman who, with her hecirt of gold, suffers pain. Through his Imanipulation,I he displays the lie of this sympathy, the o scene pleasure we gain from seeing the 'ictim suffer, and there y distur s our self-satisfaction. +oes this mean, howe'er, that my ItruthI is simply in my sym olic identity o fuscated y my imaginary Iinner lifeI (as a simplistic reading of %acan seems to Indicate, opposing the su 8ect of the signifier to the imaginary ego6?

!TF

E&A"T$ON$S( TA N

(ari*ism is not reductionist . criticisms are engineered by the elites to maintain power Taylor '' *h.+. candidate in African American /tudies at 7orthwestern -ni'ersity (#eenga-Oamahtta Taylor, G
;anuary !L22, .Race, class and =ar9ism,0 http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L22CL2CLGCrace-class-and-mar9ism6CC#* +espite the widespread eliefs to the contrary of his critics, #arl =ar9

himself was well aware of the

centrality of race under capitalism. While =ar9 did not write e9tensi'ely on the @uestion of sla'ery and its
racial impact in societies specifically, he did write a out the way in which Duropean capitalism emerged ecause of its pilfering, rape and destruction, famously writing: The disco'ery of gold and sil'er in America, the e9tirpation, ensla'ement and entom ment in mines of the a original population, the eginning of the con@uest and looting of the Dast Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for the commercial hunting of &lac" s"ins, signalized the rosy dawn of the era of capitalist production. <e also recognized the e9tent to which sla'ery was central to the world economy. <e wrote: +irect sla'ery is 8ust as much the pi'ot of ourgeois industry as machinery, credits, etc. Without sla'ery you ha'e no cottonA without cotton you ha'e no modern industry. It is sla'ery that has gi'en the colonies their 'alueA it is the colonies that ha'e created world trade, and it is world trade that is the pre-condition of large-scale industry. Thus sla'ery is an economic category of the greatest importance. Without sla'ery 7orth America, the most progressi'e of countries, would e transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe out 7orth America from the map of the world, and you will ha'e anarchy--the complete decay of modern commerce and ci'ilization. $ause sla'ery to disappear and you will ha'e wiped America off the map of nations. Thus sla'ery, ecause it is an economic category, has always e9isted among the institutions of the peoples. =odern nations ha'e een a le only to disguise sla'ery in their own countries, ut they ha'e imposed it without disguise upon the 7ew World. Thus, there is a fundamental understanding of the centrality of sla'e la or in the national and international economy. &ut what a out race? +espite the dearth of =ar9Hs own writing on race in particular, one might loo" at =ar9Hs correspondence and deli erations on the American $i'il War to draw conclusions as to whether =ar9 was as dogmatically focused on purely economic issues as his critics ma"e him out e. One must raise the @uestion: If

=ar9 was reductionist, how is his una ashed support and in'ol'ement in a olitionist struggles in Dngland e9plained ? If =ar9 was truly an economic reductionist, he might ha'e surmised that sla'ery and capitalism were incompati le, and simply waited for sla'ery to whither away. W.D.&. +u &ois in his =ar9ist tome &lac" Reconstruction, @uotes at length a letter
penned y =ar9 as the head of the International Wor"ingmenHs Association, written to A raham %incoln in 2FJG in the midst of the $i'il War: The contest for the territories which opened the epoch, was it not to decide whether the 'irgin soil of immense tracts should e wedded to the la or of the immigrant or e prostituted y the tramp of the sla'er dri'er? When an oligarchy of ELL,LLL sla'e holders dared to inscri e for the first time in the annals of the world I/la'eryI on the anner of armed re'olt, when on the 'ery spots where hardly a century ago the idea of one great +emocratic Repu lic had first sprung up, whence the first declaration of the rights of man was issued...when on the 'ery spots counterre'olution...maintained Isla'ery to e a eneficial institutionI...and cynically proclaimed property in man Hthe cornerstone of the new edificeH...then the wor"ing classes of Durope understood at once...that the sla'eholdersH re ellion was to sound the tocsin for a general holy war of property against la or... They consider it an earnest sign of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of A raham %incoln, the single-minded son of the wor"ing class, to lead his country through the matchless

=ar9 personally opposed to sla'ery and acti'ely organized against it, ut he theorized that sla'ery and the resultant race discrimination that flowed from it were not 8ust pro lems for the sla'es themsel'es, ut for white wor"ers who were constantly under the threat of losing wor" to sla'e la or. This did not mean white wor"ers were necessarily sympathetic to the cause of the sla'es--most of them were not. &ut =ar9 was not addressing the issue of consciousness, ut o 8ecti'e factors
struggles for the rescue of the enchained race and the Reconstruction of a social order. 7ot only was when he wrote in $apital, IIn the -nited /tates of America, e'ery independent mo'ement of the wor"ers was paralyzed as long as sla'ery disfigured a part of the Repu lic. %a or cannot emancipate itself in the white s"in where in the &lac" it is

understood the dynamics of racism in a modern sense as well--as a means y which wor"ers who had common, o 8ecti'e interests with each other could also ecome mortal enemies ecause of su 8ecti'e, ut ne'ertheless real, racist and nationalist ideas. %oo"ing at the tensions etween Irish and Dnglish wor"ers, with a nod toward the American

randed.I =oreo'er, =ar9

situation etween &lac" and white wor"ers, =ar9 wrote: D'ery industrial and commercial center in Dngland possesses a wor"ing class di'ided into two hostile camps, Dnglish proletarians and Irish proletarians. The ordinary Dnglish wor"er hates the Irish wor"er as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish wor"er he feels himself a mem er of the ruling nation and so turns himself into a tool of the aristocrats and capitalists of his country against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination o'er himself. <e cherishes religious, social and national pre8udices against the Irish wor"er. <is attitude is much the same as that of the Ipoor whitesI to the IniggersI in the former sla'e states of the -/A. The Irishman pays him ac" with interest in his own money. <e sees in the Dnglish wor"er at once the accomplice and stupid tool of the Dnglish rule in Ireland. This

antagonism is artificially "ept ali'e and intensified y the press, the pulpit, the comic papers, in short y all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes. This antagonism is the secret of the impotence of the Dnglish wor"ing class, despite its organization. It is the secret y which the capitalist maintains its power. And that class is fully aware of it. Out of this @uote, one can see a =ar9ist theory of how racism operated in contemporary society, after sla'ery was ended. =ar9 was highlighting three things: first, that capitalism promotes economic competition etween wor"ersA second, that the ruling class uses racist ideology to di'ide wor"ers against each otherA and finally, that when one group of wor"ers suffer oppression, it negati'ely impacts the entire class.

!TF !"T$ON NOW 3E8


The ob1ection that we cant theori/e because people are dying now masks the necessity of theori/ing to ensure that the actions we take go in the proper direction. 3uper , (Andrew #uper, /pring !LL!, .=ore Than $harity: $osmopolitan Alternati'es to the P/inger /olution>,0
Dthics [ International Affairs :olume 2J.26CC#* W<AT $A7 *O%ITI$A% *<I%O/O*<O $O7TRI&-TD? There are three road components necessary for such a political philosophy: a

political economy that charts the causal dynamics of the glo al economy and indicates the e9tent to which these could e controlledA (!26 a theory of 8ustice that supplies a metric for e'aluating goals and deri'es a set of principles with which to approach the pro lems of de'elopmentA and a political sociology that encompasses and distinguishes the respecti'e roles of indi'iduals and 'arious institutions in ad'ancing these moral ends. In considering
/outh African realities and =ar9ist thought, I ha'e said something a out the firstA I now e9amine dimensions of the remaining two y contrasting ;ohn RawlsHs approach to glo al 8ustice with that of /inger. RawlsHs ground rea"ing A

The primary determinant of how well each of us fares is a set of asic social institutions and laws that em ody certain principles of 8ustice. In The %aw of *eoples (21116 Rawls e9tends this idea to international
Theory of ;ustice (21K26 egins with the recognition that society is a scheme of cooperation for mutual ad'antage. society. (!!6 <e as"s, in short, what asic laws and institutions form fair ases for cooperation etween IpeoplesI--or what I ha'e elsewhere called Ithin states.I (!E6 Dach of these thin states is a national political structure, one that is nonaggressi'e toward others and ta"es mem ersH interests into account--at least as mem ers of ethnic, religious, and other groups. Rawls then de'elops a conception of 8ustice appropriate to an ideal /ociety of *eoples or Ithin state system.I When it comes to distri uti'e issues related to po'erty relief, Rawls argues that decent and li eral peoples do ha'e an o ligation to assist urdened societies (that is, de'eloping countries una le to maintain well-ordered regimes6. 7e'ertheless, as /inger points out, Rawls emphasizes that Ia

change of cultureI-- y which Rawls means the political system as well as ethos (!G6--is most crucial to ensuring that the li'es of indi'iduals within such societies go etter. /inger is deeply critical of this approach. <e writes that RawlsHs Iemphasis on the need for a change of culture lea'es untouched the plight of indi'iduals who are dying of star'ation, malnutrition, or easily pre'enta le diseases right now, in countries that presently lac" the capacity
to pro'ide for the needs of all their citizens.I (!M6 In one respect, /inger and I are entirely in agreement: y placing states (along with the ethnic and religious groups they contain6 at the center of his ideals of 8ustification and 8ustice ,

Rawls erroneously prioritizes group identities and national citizenship o'er indi'idual moral claims. (!J6 Rawls also fails to ta"e account of the e9tent to which peopleHs life chances within a state, and the political cultures of that state, are affected y structures and e'ents eyond its orders and control. (!K6 &ut /inger is asserting more than this. <e thin"s that it is unhelpful and irresponsi le, while thousands are dying and institutions are slow to reform, to focus on an ideal theory of 8ustice --a compelling conception of the asic institutions of a 8ust society. This fierce accusation is surely mista"en. As I now want to show, ideal theory ser'es as a 'alua le orienteering mechanism for action right now. As such, along with a focus roadly on political culture, it etter ser'es the poor than does the I/inger solution.I An ideal conception of 8ustice is 'ery far from the atrociously non-ideal conditions in de'eloping countriesA ut, for 8udging potential courses of action such a metric and set of principles is indispensa le , for se'en reasons. 2. &y ha'ing the appropriate ideal ends in 'iew, we can distinguish courses of action and institutional change that get us closer to or farther from these aimsA we are not condemned to a reacti'e de'elopment strategy. And where we are forced y ad'erse conditions to ma"e difficult or tragic choices, we will not unwittingly ma"e su optimal compromises . (!F6 !. &y focusing on the social system, and on the ways in which others are 'ulnera le to us, we ta"e account of the conte9t and

conse@uences of indi'idual agency. Actors who consider their location and capacities relati'e to other roleplayers are more effecti'e in coordinating collecti'e action, and etter at channeling their indi'idual efforts to produce cumulati'e enefits. (!16 E. A

structure-sensiti'e focus leads us to emphasize actionsH indirect and long-term conse@uences for a social systemHs capacities to pro'ide for the needy. This emphasis is the cornerstone of sustaina le de'elopment rather than ad hoc inter'entions. G. We will not uncritically support simple e@uality, since we can recognize that some ine@ualities can e 8ustified--on the grounds that they impro'e the lot of the most needy or of all of us. (EL6
(/ome attention to incenti'es, for e9ample, is surely realistic.6 /inger, on the other hand, has no criteria for distinguishing fair from unfair asymmetric distri utions. M. A

systemic account constantly directs our attention to the need for an e9planatory and predicti'e political economy , one that sets realistic limits to our ideal theories. This ma"es for rele'ant and realistic, not nai'e, idealism. J. A more comple9 causal story also reminds us to a'oid a /ingerian tendency to treat acti'e indi'iduals in de'eloping countries almost wholly as recipients or moral patients . (E26 *oor people are neither powerless nor ignorant in respect of important pro lems and opportunities for actionA they need to e addressed as agents, capa le of independent action as well as cooperati'e endea'or. K. It ecomes possi le to identify the primary agents of 8ustice and aid. (E!6 We as", Which persons and institutions are capa le of, and ear definite responsi ility for, dealing with which indi'idual and collecti'e predicaments and opportunities? The IweI that /inger addresses are single and fairly undifferentiated wealthy indi'iduals. The IweI that Rawls addresses are all indi'iduals understood as organized into cooperati'e groups and societies. This is the eginning of a proper political sociology-e'en if it needs to e ad8usted and de'eloped further and is on the whole far less de'eloped than that of
=ar9 and %enin

!TF TOT!%$I!T$ON TA N
(ar*ism does not Totali/e worker relations . demographics are adversely affected in different degrees but there is a shared reality Taylor '' *h.+. candidate in African American /tudies at 7orthwestern -ni'ersity (#eenga-Oamahtta Taylor, G
;anuary !L22, .Race, class and =ar9ism,0 http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L22CL2CLGCrace-class-and-mar9ism6CC#*

=uch of the contro'ersy a out =ar9ism and race is o'er whether =ar9ist theory appropriately comprehends the centrality of race in -./. society and eyond. &ut what is really at the heart of the de ate is the 'iew of re'olutionary =ar9ists that : one, white wor"ers do not ha'e a pri'ileged status in this country A two, white wor"ers can gain re'olutionary consciousnessA and three, therefore a multiracial and united wor"ing-class re'olution is possi le. =ar9ists start with the premise that all wor"ers under capitalism are oppressed, ut some wor"ers face further oppression ecause of additional discrimination li"e racism, se9ism, homopho ia, anti-immigrant ideas, religious oppression , etc. Thus, in the -nited /tates, white wor"ers are oppressed, ut not to the same degree as non-white wor"ers. Oppression is not 8ust an ideological tool to di'ide groups of wor"ers, ut has real material conse@uences as well. &ecause of racism, for e9ample, the median household income for white families as of !LLJ
was o'er YML,LLL a year. )or &lac"s, it was 8ust under YE!,LLL. &y e'ery measure of the @uality of life in the -./., whites are on the top and &lac"s are on the ottom. =ar9ists do not deny that these differences e9ist, nor do we deny that oppression means the li'es of some wor"ers are actually worse than others. )or =ar9ists, the

@uestion is the cause of the differences. Are the disparities the result of white wor"ers enefiting directly from the oppression of &lac" wor"ers? That is, do white wor"ers ma"e more on a'erage ecause &lac" wor"ers ma"e less? To accept this e9planation means to ignore the iggest eneficiary in the disparity in wages--employers and osses. That employers are a le to use racism to 8ustify paying &lac" wor"ers less rings the wages of all wor"ers down--the employers en8oy the difference. This is not to deny that white wor"ers recei'e some ad'antages in -./. society ecause they are white in a racist society. If they did not
get some ad'antage--and with it, the illusion that the system wor"s for them--then racism would not e effecti'e in di'iding &lac" and white wor"ers. The

distinctions and differences among wor"ers function to create a distorted 'iew of reality that turns the traits attri uted to the oppressed into a "ind of Icommon sense,I which in turn deepens those di'isions . African Americans are poorer,
ha'e worse housing, go to worse schools, ha'e a shorter life span and generally li'e in worse conditions, which helps to

so-called Icommon senseI is that it is ased on surface appearances and information, and does not reach deeper to gi'e a systemic e9planation for the disparities that e9ist in society. Instead, it creates what )rederic" Dngels was the first to call Ifalse consciousness.I )alse consciousness is simply rulingperpetuate the image in the minds of white wor"ers that African Americans are inferior. &ut the pro lem with class ideology that is used to e9plain away or co'er up material reality. The point is that white wor"ers, to the e9tent that they accept white supremacy, contri ute to capitalismHs a ility to e9ploit them more effecti'ely. The purely IpsychologicalI ad'antage o scures the 'ery real material deficit that racist oppression helps reinforce. +u &ois e9plained how Ifalse consciousnessI wor"ed in the /outh and why a la or mo'ement ne'er de'eloped there in the aftermath of sla'ery: The race element was emphasized in order that property holders could get the support of the ma8ority of white la orers and ma"e it more possi le to e9ploit 7egro la or. &ut the race philosophy came as a new and terri le thing to ma"e la or unity or la or class-consciousness impossi le. /o long as the /outhern white la orers could e induced to prefer po'erty to e@uality with the 7egro, 8ust so long was a la or mo'ement in the /outh made impossi le. )or +u &ois, racism wasnHt metaphysical, nor did it e9ist autonomously from class. Its de'elopment is a result of one classH efforts to "eep power away from another. +u &ois did come up with a famous formulation of poor whites gaining a Ipsychological wageI--as opposed to a material wage--from racism. &ut the psychological wage was to ma"e the white wor"er feel superior ecause he wasnHt &lac", e'en though he would ha'e nothing material to show for it. This leads to the @uestion: If it isnHt in the interest of white wor"ers to e racist, then why do they accept racist ideas? &ut the same @uestion could e as"ed of any group of

wor"ers. Why do men accept se9ist ideas? Why do &lac" wor"ers accept racist anti-immigrant ideas? Why do many &lac" $ari ean and African immigrant wor"ers thin" that &lac" Americans are lazy? Why do American wor"ers of all races accept many racist ideas a out Ara s and =uslims? If most people agree that it would e in the interest of any group of wor"ers to e more united than di'ided, then why do wor"ers accept reactionary ideas? There are two primary reasons. The first is competition. $apitalism

operates under the laws of false scarcity , which simply means that we are all told there isnHt enough to go around, so we must compete with each other for housing, education, 8o s and anything else 'alued in society. While the scarcity is false, the competition is real ,
and wor"ers fighting o'er these items to etter themsel'es or their families are often willing to elie'e the worst a out other wor"ers to 8ustify why they should ha'e something and others should not. The other reason is, as =ar9 wrote in the 4erman Ideology, that the ruling ideas of any society are the ideas of the ruling class . We li'e in a racist society, and therefore people hold racist ideas. The more important @uestion is whether or not those ideas can change. The

consciousness of wor"ers is oth fluid and contradictory ecause of the clash etween the Iruling ideasI in society and peopleHs li'ed e9perience. /o, for e9ample, while the media inundates people with constant images of &lac"s as criminals or on welfare, peopleHs e9perience with &lac"s at wor" completely contradicts the stereotype. The Italian
=ar9ist Antonio 4ramsci e9plained the phenomenon of mi9ed consciousness this way: The acti'e man-in-the-mass has a practical acti'ity ut has no clear theoretical consciousness of his practical acti'ity which nonetheless in'ol'es understanding the world in so far as it transforms it. <is theoretical consciousness can... e historically in opposition to his acti'ity. One might almost say that he has two theoretical consciousnesses (or one contradictory consciousness6: one which is implicit in his acti'ity and which in reality unites him with all fellow wor"ers in the practical transformation of the real worldA and one superficially e9plicit or 'er al, which he has inherited from the past and uncritically a sor ed. The person is strangely composite: it contains /tone Age elements and principles of a more ad'anced science, pre8udices all past phases of history at the local le'el and intuitions of a future philosophy which will e that of a human race united the world o'er. Whether or not a group of wor"ers has reactionary, mi9ed or e'en re'olutionary consciousness does not change their o 8ecti'e and real function as e9ploited and oppressed la or. The

@uestion of consciousness affects whether or not wor"ers are in a position to fundamentally alter that function through collecti'e action. ;ust ecause white wor"ers, to ta"e a specific e9ample, may at different times fully accept reactionary ideas a out African Americans does not change the o 8ecti'e fact that the ma8ority of the poor in the -./. are white, the ma8ority of people without health insurance are white and the ma8ority of the homeless are white. While &lac"s and %atinos are disproportionately affected y the economic reality of the -./. today, in a country that is more than JM percent white, it is a reality they share with the ma8ority of white wor"ers. This shared reality shows the potential for a united struggle to etter the conditions of all wor"ers. &ut y the same to"en, losing the attle against racism
undermines the o'erall pro8ect of wor"ing-class re'olution. As +u &ois e9plained in &lac" Reconstruction a out the defeat of the post-$i'il War Reconstruction policies that riefly put the power of the federal go'ernment ehind e@ual rights for the freed sla'es: The political success of the doctrine of racial separation, which o'erthrew Reconstruction y uniting the planter and the poor white, was far e9ceeded y its astonishing economic results. The

theory of la oring class unity rests upon the assumption that la orers, despite internal 8ealousies, will unite ecause of their opposition to e9ploitation y the capitalists. According to this, e'en after a part of the poor white
la oring class ecame identified with the planters, and e'entually displaced them, their interests would e diametrically opposed to those of the mass of white la or, and of course to those of the lac" la orers. This would throw white and lac" la or into one class, and precipitate a united fight for higher wage and etter wor"ing conditions. =ost persons do not realize how far this failed to wor" in the /outh, and it failed to wor" ecause the

theory of race was supplemented y a carefully planned and slowly e'ol'ed method, which dro'e such a wedge etween the white and lac" wor"ers that there pro a ly are not today in the world two groups of wor"ers with practically identical interests who hate and fear each other so deeply and persistently and who are "ept so far apart that neither sees anything of common interest.

AT: /%A:DRO +I/*RO:D/


Although sla'ery has persisted since efore the enlightenment V it was distinct from the modern sla'e and racism Selfa , (%ance /elfa, ./la'ery and the origins of racism,0 International /ocialist Re'iew, Issue !J 7o'em er-+ecem er
!LL!, http:CCisre'iew.orgCissuesC!JCrootsRofRracism.shtml6CC#*

The classical empires of 4reece and Rome were ased on sla'e la or. &ut ancient sla'ery was not 'iewed in racial terms. /la'es were most often capti'es in wars or con@uered peoples. If we understand white people as originating in what is today Durope, then most sla'es in ancient 4reece and Rome were white. Roman law made sla'es the property of their owners, while maintaining a
.formal lac" of interest in the sla'e>s ethnic or racial pro'enance.0 O'er the years, sla'e manumission produced a mi9ed population of sla'e and free in Roman-ruled areas in which all came to e seen as .Romans.0M The 4ree"s drew a sharper line etween 4ree"s and . ar arians,0 those su 8ect to sla'ery. Again, this was not 'iewed in racial or ethnic terms, as the socialist historian of the <aitian Re'olution, $.%.R. ;ames, e9plained: 3<5istorically

it is pretty well pro'ed now that the ancient 4ree"s and Romans "new nothing a out race. They had another standardBci'ilized and ar arian Band you could ha'e white s"in and e a ar arian and you could e lac" and ci'ilized.J =ore importantly, encounters in the ancient world etween the =editerranean world and lac" Africans did not produce an upsurge of racism against Africans. In &efore $olor *re8udice, <oward -ni'ersity classics professor )ran" /nowden documented innumera le accounts of interaction etween the 4reco-Roman and Dgyptian ci'ilizations and the #ush, 7u ian, and Dthiopian "ingdoms of Africa. <e found su stantial e'idence of integration of lac" Africans in the occupational hierarchies of the ancient =editerranean empires and &lac"-white intermarriage. &lac" and mi9ed race gods appeared in =editerranean art, and at least one Roman emperor , /eptimius /e'erus, was an African. /nowden concluded: There is little dou t that many lac"s were physically assimilated into the predominantly
white population of the =editerranean world, in which there were no institutional arriers or social pressures against lac"-white unions. In anti@uity, then, lac"-white se9ual relations were ne'er the cause of great emotional crisesp.The ancient pattern, similar in some respects to the =ahgre ian and the %atin American attitude toward racial mi9ture, pro a ly contri uted to the a sence of a pronounced color pre8udice in anti@uity.K &e tween

the 2Lth and 2Jth centuries, the chief source of sla'es in Western Durope was Dastern Durope. In fact, the word .sla'e0 comes from the word ./la',0 the people of Dastern Durope. In the =iddle Ages, most people sold into sla'ery in Durope came from Dastern Durope, the /la'ic countries. In Dastern Durope, Russia stood out as the ma8or area where sla'eholders and sla'es were of the same ethnicity . Of course, y modernday racial descriptions the /la's and Russian sla'es were white.F T his outline doesn>t mean to suggest a .pre-capitalist0 4olden Age of racial tolerance, least of all in the sla'e societies of anti@uity. Dmpires
'iewed themsel'es as centers of the uni'erse and loo"ed on foreigners as inferiors. Ancient 4reece and Rome fought wars of con@uest against peoples they presumed to e less ad'anced. Religious scholars interpreted the <e rew &i le>s .curse of <am0 from the story of 7oah to condemn Africans to sla'ery. $ultural and religious associations of the color white with light and angels and the color lac" with dar"ness and e'il persisted. &ut

none of these cultural or ideological factors e9plain the rise of 7ew World sla'ery or the .modern0 notions of racism that de'eloped from it. !n e*amination of early "olonialism proves that racial aggression was not the impetus for instituting the +lack Slave. rather it was capital accumulation and the preservation of property rights Selfa , (%ance /elfa, ./la'ery and the origins of racism,0 International /ocialist Re'iew, Issue !J 7o'em er-+ecem
!LL!, http:CCisre'iew.orgCissuesC!JCrootsRofRracism.shtml6CC#*

er

7otwithstanding the horri le conditions African sla'es endured, it is important to underscore that when

Duropean powers egan car'ing up the 7ew World etween them, African sla'es were not part of their calculations. When we thin" of sla'ery today, we thin" of it primarily from the point of 'iew of its relationship to racism. &ut planters in the 2Kth and 2Fth centuries loo"ed at it primarily as a means to produce profits for them. /la'ery was a method of organizing la or to produce sugar, to acco, and cotton. It was not, first and foremost, a system for producing white supremacy. <ow did sla'ery in the -./. (and the rest of the 7ew World6 ecome the reeding ground for racism? )or much of the first century of colonization in what ecame the -nited /tates, the ma8ority of sla'es and other .unfree la orers0 were white. The term .unfree0 draws the distinction etween sla'ery and ser'itude and .free wage la or0 that is the norm in capitalism. One of the historic gains of capitalism for wor"ers is that wor"ers are .free0 to sell their a ility to la or to whate'er employer will gi'e them the est deal. Of course, this "ind of freedom is limited at est. -nless they are independently wealthy, wor"ers aren>t free to decide not to wor". They>re free to wor" or star'e. Once they
do wor", they can @uit one employer and go to wor" for another. &ut the hallmar" of systems li"e sla'ery and indentured ser'itude was that sla'es or ser'ants were

. ound o'er0 to a particular employer for a period of time or for life in the case of sla'es. The decision to wor" for another master wasn>t the sla'e>s or the ser'ant>s. It was the master>s, who could sell sla'es for money or other commodities li"e li'estoc", lum er, or machinery. The 7orth American colonies started predominantly as pri'ate usiness enterprises in the early 2JLLs. -nli"e the /panish, whose con@uests of =e9ico and *eru in the 2MLLs produced fa ulous gold and sil'er riches for /pain, settlers in places li"e the colonies that ecame =aryland, Rhode Island, and :irginia made money through agriculture. In addition to sheer sur'i'al, the settlers> chief aim was to o tain a la or force that could produce the large amounts of indigo, to acco, sugar, and other crops that would e sold ac" to Dngland. )rom 2JLK , when ;amestown was founded in :irginia to a out 2JFM, the primary source of agricultural la or in Dnglish 7orth America came from white indentured ser'ants. The colonists first attempted to press the indigenous population into la or. &ut the Indians refused to e ecome ser'ants to the Dnglish. Indians resisted eing forced to wor", and they escaped into the surrounding area, which, after all, they "new far etter than the Dnglish. One after another, the Dnglish colonies turned to a policy of dri'ing out the Indians. They then turned to white ser'ants. Indentured ser'ants were predominantly young white
menBusually Dnglish or IrishBwho were re@uired to wor" for a planter master for some fi9ed term of four to se'en years. They recei'ed room and oard on the plantation ut no pay. And they could not @uit and wor" for another planter. They had to ser'e their term, after which they might e a le to ac@uire some land and to start a farm for themsel'es. They ecame ser'ants in se'eral ways. /ome were prisoners, con'icted of petty crimes in &ritain, or con'icted of eing trou lema"ers in &ritain>s first colony, Ireland. =any were "idnapped off the streets of %i'erpool or =anchester and put on ships to the 7ew World. /ome 'oluntarily ecame ser'ants, hoping to start farms after they fulfilled their o ligations to their masters.2M )or

most of the 2JLLs, the planters tried to get y with a predominantly white, ut multiracial wor"force. &ut as the 2Kth century wore on, colonial leaders ecame increasingly frustrated with white ser'ant la or. )or one thing, they faced the pro lem of constantly ha'ing to recruit la or as ser'ants> terms e9pired. /econd, after ser'ants finished their contracts and decided to set up their farms, they could ecome competitors to their former masters. And finally, the planters didn>t li"e the ser'ants> .insolence.0 The midq2JLLs were a time of re'olution
in Dngland, when ideas of indi'idual freedom were challenging the old hierarchies ased on royalty. The colonial planters tended to e royalists, ut their ser'ants tended to assert their .rights as Dnglishmen0 to etter food, clothing, and time off. =ost la orers in the colonies supported the ser'ants .

As the century progressed, the costs of ser'ant la or increased. *lanters started to petition the colonial oards and assem lies to allow the large-scale importation of African sla'es. &lac" sla'es wor"ed on plantations in small num ers throughout the 2JLLs. &ut until the end of the 2JLLs, it cost planters more to uy sla'es than to uy

white ser'ants. &lac"s li'ed in the colonies in a 'ariety of statusesBsome were free, some were sla'es, some were ser'ants. The law in :irginia didn>t esta lish the condition of lifetime, perpetual sla'ery or e'en recognize African ser'ants as a group different from white ser'ants until 2JJ2. &lac"s could ser'e on 8uries, own property, and e9ercise other rights.
7orthampton $ounty, :irginia, recognized interracial marriages and, in one case, assigned a free &lac" couple to act as foster parents for an a andoned white child. There

were e'en a few e9amples of &lac" freemen who

owned white ser'ants. )ree &lac"s in 7orth $arolina had 'oting rights.2J In the 2JLLs, the $hesapea"e society of
eastern :irginia had a multiracial character: There is persuasi'e e'idence dating from the 2J!Ls through the 2JFLs that there were those of Duropean descent in the $hesapea"e who were prepared to identify and cooperate with people of African descent. These affinities were forged in the world of plantation wor". On

many plantations Duropeans

and West Africans la ored side y side in the to acco fields, performing e9actly the same types and amounts of wor"A they li'ed and ate together in shared housingA they socialized togetherA and sometimes they slept together.2K A white ser'ants> ditty of the time said, .We and the 7egroes oth ali"e did fareCOf wor" and food we had e@ual share.0 The planters> economic calculations played a part in the colonies> decision to mo'e towards full-scale sla'e la or . &y the end of the 2Kth century, the price of white indentured ser'ants outstripped the price of African sla'es . A planter could uy an
African sla'e for life for the same price that he could purchase a white ser'ant for ten years. As Dric Williams e9plained:

<ere, then, is the origin of 7egro sla'ery. The reason was economic, not racialA it had to do not
with the color of the la orer, ut the cheapness of the la or.p3The planter5 would ha'e gone to the moon, if necessary, for la or. Africa

was nearer than the moon, nearer too than the more populous countries of India and $hina. &ut their turn would soon come.2F *lanters> fear of a multiracial uprising also pushed them towards racial sla'ery. &ecause a rigid racial di'ision of la or didn>t e9ist in the 2Kth century colonies, many conspiracies in'ol'ing &lac" sla'es, ser'ants, and white indentured ser'ants were hatched and foiled. We "now a out them today ecause of court proceedings that punished the runaways after their capture.
As historians T.<. &reen and /tephen Innes point out, .These casespre'eal only e9treme actions, desperate attempts to escape, ut for e'ery group of runaways who came efore the courts there were dou tless many more poor whites and lac"s who cooperated in smaller, less daring ways on the plantation.021 The largest of these conspiracies de'eloped into &acon>s Re ellion, an uprising that threw terror into the hearts of the :irginia Tidewater planters in 2JKJ. /e'eral hundred farmers, ser'ants, and sla'es initiated a protest to press the colonial go'ernment to seize Indian land for distri ution. The conflict spilled o'er into demands for ta9 relief and resentment of the ;amestown esta lishment. *lanter 7athaniel &acon

helped organize an army of whites and &lac"s that sac"ed ;amestown and forced the go'ernor to flee. The re el army held out for eight months efore the $rown managed to defeat and disarm it.!L &acon>s Re ellion was a turning point. After it ended, the Tidewater planters mo'ed in two directions: first, they offered concessions to the white freemen, lifting ta9es and e9tending to them the 'oteA and second, they mo'ed to full-scale racial sla'ery. )ifteen years earlier, the &urgesses had recognized the condition of sla'ery for life and placed Africans in a different category as white ser'ants. &ut the law had practical effect. .-ntil sla'ery ecame systematic, there
was no need for a systematic sla'e code. And sla'ery could not ecome systematic so long as an African sla'e for life cost twice as much as an Dnglish ser'ant for a fi'e-year term,0 wrote historian &ar ara ;eanne )ields.!2 &oth of those circumstances changed in the immediate aftermath of &acon>s Re ellion. In the entire 2Kth century, the

planters imported a out !L,LLL African sla'es. The ma8ority of them were rought to 7orth American colonies in the !G years after &acon>s Re ellion. In 2JJG, the =aryland legislature passed a law determining who would e considered sla'es on the asis of the condition of their fatherBwhether their father was sla'e or free. It soon ecame clear, howe'er, that esta lishing paternity was difficult, ut that esta lishing who was a person>s mother was definite. /o the planters changed the law to esta lish sla'e status on the asis of the mother>s condition. 7ow white sla'eholders who fathered children y sla'e women would e guaranteed their offspring as sla'es. And the law included penalties for .free0 women who slept with

sla'es. &ut what>s most interesting a out this law is that it doesn>t really spea" in racial terms. It attempts to preser'e the property rights of sla'eholders and esta lish arriers etween sla'e and free which were to ecome hardened into racial di'isions o'er the ne9t few years. Ta"ing the =aryland law as an e9ample, )ields made this important point: <istorians can actually o ser'e colonial Americans in the act of preparing the ground for race without fore"nowledge of what would later arise on the foundation they were laying.p 3 T5he purpose of the e9periment is clear: to pre'ent the erosion of sla'eowners> property rights that would result if the offspring of free white women impregnated y sla'e men were entitled to freedom. The language of the pream le to the law ma"es clear that the point was not yet race .p Race does not e9plain the law. Rather, the law shows society in the act of in'enting race.!! After esta lishing that African sla'es would culti'ate ma8or cash crops of the 7orth American colonies, the planters then mo'ed to esta lish the institutions and ideas that would uphold white supremacy. =ost unfree la or ecame &lac" la or. %aws and ideas intended to underscore the su human status of &lac" peopleBin a word, the ideology of racism and white supremacyBemerged fulllown o'er the ne9t generation. $apitalism>s resistance to the Dnlightenment created the percei'ed inferiority of the lac" sla'e Selfa , (%ance /elfa, ./la'ery and the origins of racism,0 International /ocialist Re'iew, Issue !J 7o'em er-+ecem er
!LL!, http:CCisre'iew.orgCissuesC!JCrootsRofRracism.shtml6CC#*

Within a few decades, the ideology of white supremacy was fully de'eloped. /ome of the
greatest minds of the dayBsuch as /cottish philosopher +a'id <ume and Thomas ;efferson, the man who wrote the +eclaration of Independencerwrote treatises alleging &lac" inferiority. The

ideology of white supremacy ased on the natural inferiority of &lac"s, e'en allegations that &lac"s were su human, strengthened throughout the 2Fth century. This was the way that the leading intellectual figures of the
time reconciled the ideals of the 2KKJ American Re'olution with sla'ery. The American Re'olution of 2KKJ and later the )rench Re'olution of 2KF1 popularized the ideas of li erty and the rights of all human eings. The +eclaration of Independence asserts that .all mensare created e@ual0 and possess certain .unaliena le rights0Brights that can>t e ta"en awayrof .life, li erty, and the pursuit of happiness.0 As

the first ma8or ourgeois re'olution, the American Re'olution sought to esta lish the rights of the new capitalist class against the old feudal monarchy. It started with the resentment of the American merchant class that wanted to rea" free from &ritish restrictions on its trading partners. &ut its challenge to &ritish tyranny also ga'e e9pression to a whole range of ideas that e9panded the concept of .li erty 0 from eing 8ust a out trade to include ideas of human rights, democracy, and ci'il li erties. It legitimized an assault on sla'ery as an offense to li erty, so that some of the leading American re'olutionaries, such as Thomas *aine
and &en8amin )ran"lin, endorsed a olition. /la'es and free &lac"s also pointed to the ideals of the re'olution to call for getting rid of sla'ery. &ut

ecause the re'olution aimed to esta lish the rule of capital in America, and ecause a lot of capitalists and planters made a lot of money from sla'ery, the re'olution compromised with sla'ery. The +eclaration initially contained a condemnation of #ing
4eorge for allowing the sla'e trade, ut ;efferson dropped it following protests from representati'es from 4eorgia and the $arolinas. <ow could the founding fathers of the -./.Bmost of whom owned sla'es themsel'esBreconcile the ideals of li erty for which they were fighting with the e9istence of a system that represented the e9act negation of li erty?

The

ideology of white supremacy fit the ill. We "now today that .all men0 didn>t include women, Indians, or most &lac"s. &ut to rule &lac" sla'es out of the lessings of li erty, the leading head-fi9ers of the time argued that &lac"s weren>t really .men,0 they were a lower order of eing.
;efferson>s 7otes from :irginia, meant to e a scientific catalog of the flora and fauna of :irginia, uses arguments that anticipate the .scientific racism0 of the 2FLLs and 21LLs. With few e9ceptions, no

ma8or institutionBsuch as the uni'ersities, the churches, or the newspapers of the timeB raised criticisms of white supremacy or of sla'ery.

In fact, they helped pioneer religious and academic 8ustifications for sla'ery and &lac" inferiority. As $.%.R. ;ames put it, .3T5he conception of di'iding people y race egins with the sla'e trade. This thing
was so shoc"ing, so opposed to all the conceptions of society which religion and philosophers had that the only 8ustification y which humanity could face it was to di'ide people into races and decide that the Africans were an inferior race.0!E White

supremacy wasn>t only used to 8ustify sla'ery. It was also used to "eep in line the two-thirds of /outhern whites who weren>t sla'eholders. -nli"e the )rench colony of /t.
+omingue or the &ritish colony of &ar ados, where &lac"s 'astly outnum ered whites, &lac"s represented a minority in the sla'e /outh. A tiny minority of sla'e-holding whites, who controlled the go'ernments and economies of the +eep /outh states, ruled o'er a population that was roughly two-thirds white farmers and wor"ers and one-third &lac" sla'es.

The sla'eholders> ideology of racism and white supremacy helped to di'ide the wor"ing population, tying poor whites to the sla'eholders. /la'ery afforded poor white farmers what )ields called a .social space0 where y they preser'ed an illusory .independence0 ased on de t and su sistence farming while the rich planters continued to dominate /outhern politics and society. .A caste system as well as a form of la or,0 historian ;ames =. =c*herson wrote, .sla'ery ele'ated all whites to the ruling caste and there y reduced the potential for class conflict.0!G The great a olitionist )rederic" +ouglass understood this dynamic: The hostility etween the whites and
lac"s of the /outh is easily e9plained. It has its root and sap in the relation of sla'ery, and was incited on oth sides y the poor whites and the lac"s y putting enmity etween them. They di'ided oth to con@uer each. 3/la'eholders denounced emancipation as5 tending to put the white wor"ing man on an e@uality with &lac"s, and y this means, they succeed in drawing off the minds of the poor whites from the real fact, that y the rich sla'e-master, they are already regarded as ut a single remo'e from e@uality with the sla'e.!M

AT: $A* I/7>T T<D ROOT $A-/D


$apitalism is the root cause of racism V focus on the a olition of class difference is "ey Jamal '- secretary for the International )ederation of Ira@i Refugees (+ashty ;amal, 2K 7o'em er !L2L, .$apitalism
is the source of all "inds of discrimination and racism,0 )ederation Issue 2!, http:CCwww.federationifir.comCenglishC ulletin.fileC)D+DRATIO7-I//-DU!L2!325.pdf6CC#* We must stand against this ine@uality ut we still ha'e to as" oursel'es: what

is the root of the discrimination and racism? What should we do to sa'e our society from the war of racism and discrimination, and how can we uild a human society? The capitalist system has di'ided human eings on the asis of race, nationality, religion, language, s"in color, West, Dast , 7orth, /outh. It has put the wor"ing class around the world in a war of ine@uality, confronting each other. In this
ad'anced human society racism and discrimination are a shame and a disgrace. /hame on the system which discriminates against people under the prete9t of eing woman, *alestinian, &uddhist, ;ewish, or Islamic. /hame on the people who are so proud of their race, religion and culture that they cut themsel'es off from the modernism of society and humanity>s destiny. /hame on the system or the authority which forces people to see" asylum from a society destroyed y war. The human eings of this particular time can see clearly in these e'ents that they ha'e one destiny. When the war erupted in Ira@ and Afghanistan the li'es of the people in the whole world faced a human tragedy. When /onamis come, 'olcanoes erupt or hunger spreads in a country all the man"ind will face great damage. When Israel separates peo ple

y putting up a wall etween them, all man"ind will face lind religious and national hatred. When the society is di'ided etween man and woman, half of the society ecomes ensla'ed and oppressed. )or this reason the man"ind gets in'ol'ed in war and fighting. &ut once again what is the root of this racism and discrimination? +iscrimination and racism are not the culture, politics or the ideology of the people, ut the elief, politics and culture of a group in power. As #arl =ar9 says: pre'ailing elief and culture in a society is the elief of the ruling class. Therefore, the go'erning class in the society is the party which infects human eings with the 'irus of racism. Otherwise human eings are friendly and against ine@uality. The capitalist system, ased on class distinctions, is a racist and apartheid system. /eparation of people to capitalist and wor"ers, rich and poor is the root of all discriminations. The capitalist class, in order to ma"e a profita le mar"et and accumulate capital needs to disperse and separate us through a false religious, nationalist and racist identity. It needs to engage us in a fight with each other so we do not find out the source of the class persecution that attac"s our li'es. And to "eep the class differences, the authorities use the media, press, ideology, art, and racist culture to fool people. They spend
illions of dollars to "eep this itter reality in the society. The capitalism and class society is a racist and discriminatory system. This reality can e co'ered y neither li eral, democratic regimes nor dictator regimes. =ulticulturalism in the heart of Durope has allowed cultures of discrimination to continue. In the same Duropean democratic system human eings are discriminated on the asis of eing refugees and eing disintegrated and cut off from their li'es and rights. &ut if capitalism and class society are the source of all "ind of racism, what

should we do to clean up the human society of the 'irus of racism and the human eings to regain the human identity? The response is 'ery easy: a olish class differences in order to cancel all "inds of persecution, oppression and discrimination. This is the tas" of the wor"ing class and all the people who get enefit from a free, e@ual and human society. The anti racist mo'ement is part of wor"ing
class message to uild a human society. %et>s ma"e today>s protest the eginning of a unified struggle to stand fast around the wor"ing class and the aim of freedom, e@uality and a wor"ers> state. Than" you.

$apitalism created the 7ew ;im $row: a6 $orporate monetary policy negati'ely targets disad'antaged lac"s V self-reflection alone doesn>t sol'e V a new system is needed Jones ', (&rian ;ones, G +ecem er !L2!, .Racism in a Pcolor- lind> society,0 /ocialist Wor"er, http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L2ECLGC!JCracism-in-a-color- lind-societyLCC#*
O7D WAO that structural racism wor"s is that the

legacy of racism opens up possi ilities to profit directly off ine@uality, there y reinforcing oth the une@ual conditions and racist ideas a out them. The su prime mortgage meltdown is a perfect e9ample. )irst, you ha'e dramatic
ine@uality in home ownership ecause of the legacy of racism. After the /econd World War, the federal go'ernment underwrote su ur an home uying for millions of wor"ing class people--almost e9clusi'ely whites. In many cases, the

to the de'elopment to "eep &lac"s and other non-white groups out. /o when the opportunity arose to sell people crappy loans, and then undle the loans together and sell them off to in'estors, the historic ine@uality of home ownership meant that there was a mar"et for selling these su prime loans to African Americans. When the payments allooned later on, the orrowers went into default and foreclosure. A study of the 2LL largest -./. metropolitan areas found that li'ing in a predominantly African-American area was a Ipowerful predictor of foreclosures .I And for African Americans, net worth is disproportionately ound up with home ownership . <ome ownership accounts for M1 percent of their net worth compared to GG percent among white families. When the housing crisis hit in !LLF, dri'ing down the 'alue of homes and pushing up foreclosure rates, &lac" households therefore lost a greater share of their wealth than did white households . In the International /ocialist Re'iew, *etrino +i%eo estimated that this was the single greatest destruction of &lac" wealth in the countryHs history. 7ot only was the legacy of material ine@uality reinforced, ut the ideas of racism were reinforced as well. When the an"s were caught targeting people of color for these su prime loans, the corporate media leapt to their defense. What defense did they reach for? RacismQ They argued that &lac"s had caused this crisis y pushing for ci'il rights legislation that forced lenders to gi'e them homes they couldnHt afford . It wasnHt
go'ernment refused to ac" the mortgages unless there were racial e9clusi'ity clauses attached racism that was the pro lem, ut the orrowers themsel'es who were the pro lem--they were Ili'ing eyond their means.I And the housing mar"et is really 8ust the tip of the ice erg. We ha'enHt e'en discussed any of the A&$s of IghettoI economics. *oor people are a huge source of profits. Whether

itHs payday loans or chec"-cashing stores that charge enormous fees for access to cash or corner stores that sell inferior food in small @uantities at huge mar"ups, thereHs a ton of money to e made off of people who are trapped in economically and racially segregated neigh orhoods. ThatHs why selfreflection oriented wor"shops, 'alua le as they might e to some indi'iduals, arenHt enough to end racism. 7o amount of introspection can ta"e away the fact that there are people who are getting rich off of racism. 6 The incarceration industry profits off of scapegoating lac"s Jones ', (&rian ;ones, G +ecem er !L2!, .Racism in a Pcolor- lind> society,0 /ocialist Wor"er,
http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L2ECLGC!JCracism-in-a-color- lind-societyLCC#* I /TARTD+ with the housing mar"et ecause lately, weH'e egun discussions of institutional racism with what =ichelle Ale9ander calls IThe 7ew ;im $rowI--the system of mass incarceration. &ut the structures of racism go far eyond mass incarceration. While I was reading Ale9anderHs oo", I found myself thin"ing again and again a out the schools--we could ha'e a whole discussion a out how racism is structured there in terms of funding, access, resources, curriculum, policing and so on. Ale9ander argues that people

who ha'e een con'icted of a felony are, for all intents and

purposes, consigned to second-class citizenship . -nder the old ;im $row, African Americans were denied e@ual access to life opportunities and resources. That "ind of discrimination has een made legal once again--if you are a

felon. )elons

can legally e denied employment--if you chec" the I<a'e you e'er een con'icted of a felony?I o9, itHs legal for employers to discriminate against you on that asis. They can e denied access to pu lic housing, to college loans and scholarships, to military employment, to food stamps. They can e denied the right to ser'e on a 8ury, and, crucially, they can e denied the right to 'ote to try to change any of that. Once you ha'e a system that o'erwhelmingly focuses on African Americans and other people of color for felony con'ictions, you ha'e the 7ew ;im $row. Ale9anderHs oo" is full of all "inds of shoc"ing statistics and comparisons that show the scope of the new system of legal discrimination. I=ore African Americans are under correctional control today--in prison or 8ail, on pro ation or paroleI she writes, Ithan were ensla'ed in 2FML, a decade efore the $i'il War egan.I /he points out that this system of mass incarceration (mainly of &lac" men6 means that Ia &lac" child orn today is less li"ely to e raised y oth parents than a &lac" child orn during sla'ery.I &ecause of mass incarceration, I=ore 3&lac"s5 are disenfranchised today than in 2FKL, the year the )ifteenth Amendment was ratified, prohi iting laws that
e9plicitly deny the right to 'ote on the asis of race.I I spo"e on a panel a out the 7ew ;im $row last year and one woman in the audience as"ed, II see this pattern where one

system is destroyed and a new one appears. What I want to "now is why does this "eep happening?I I thin" there are two parts to the answer of this @uestion. One part is profit. *risons are ig usiness. Altogether, the incarceration industry is this countryHs third-largest employer. )or-profit prisons directly enefit from the 7ew ;im $row. &usiness is ooming. &etween 211L and !LL1, the num er of prisoners in pri'ate prisons increased y more than 2,JLL percent. In !L2L, the two largest pri'ate prison companies had YE illion in re'enue. This industry has a structural incenti'e to put human eings in cages. And ecause of the legacy of racism, African Americans, especially in low-income communities, are a 'ulnera le and politically e9penda le population. /o itHs easier to ma"e money off of rounding them up, and if any @uestions are raised, there are plenty of racist ideas on hand to e9plain why theyHre getting what they deser'e. &ut thatHs not the complete answer, ecause it still doesnHt answer why the state would carry out such a policy, e'en in cases where pri'ate prisons are not in'ol'ed. The answer, I thin", is that the de'elopment of the 7ew ;im $row was not 8ust a out profit, ut was a way to sol'e many pro lems for the ruling class at once. When you thin" ac" to the end of the old ;im $row, it was, naturally
enough, African Americans who led the struggle against it. &ut the success of the ci'il rights mo'ement inspired many other social struggles. Thin" a out what that means for who was leading the way. Who was consistently the most militant section of the la or unions in the era after the /econd World War? Who led the wildcat stri"es in the auto factories or in the post office? In :ietnam, -./. soldiers increasingly refused to fight and re elled against the war. Who led the antiwar mo'ement among soldiers? Or thin" a out the tremendous actions on college campuses during that era--occupying uildings on campus, etc. Who led the struggles on college campuses? The fact is that African Americans, a historically denigrated and despised group, suddenly en8oyed tremendous moral and political prestige and authority. In his auto iography, =alcolm X descri es getting dozens of letters a day--mostly from white peopleQ &lac"s were fighting ac" and winning, and white people wanted to follow their lead. The

7ew ;im $row was a way to repress that genie ac" into the ottle. It terrorized the &lac" population and hurt &lac" credi ility in the eyes of whites. Through a solutely hysterical media campaigns, whites were taught to e@uate African Americans with crime and 'iolence. The political dynamic of the 21JLs and HKLs had
to e turned around for the social gains of that era to e ta"en ac".

c6 7eoli eralism creates the perpetual disenfranchisement of lac"s Jones ', (&rian ;ones, G +ecem er !L2!, .Racism in a Pcolor- lind> society,0 /ocialist Wor"er,
http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L2ECLGC!JCracism-in-a-color- lind-societyLCC#* WOR%+WI+D, )OR

the last GL years, the ruling class has carried out a pro8ect that is often called Ineoli eralism.I The goal was to ta"e ac" from us social protections , welfare, unemployment, /ocial /ecurity enefits, education, go'ernment regulations-- anything in the way of ta9-

supported pu lic ser'ices that could e money in the poc"ets of the rich if those ser'ices could
e cut andCor pri'atized. <ow are you going to ta"e all of those things away from people and get them to accept it? Once again, racism

was promoted ecause it was--and is--so useful to the elite. +uring &ill $lintonHs time as president, the national udget for pu lic housing was cut y Y2K illion and the udget for prisons increased y Y21 illion . /o a pu lic ser'ice--housing, something that helps us--was ta"en away and replaced with another form of IhousingI--prisons, a repressi'e apparatus that helps them. Racism has een essential to the attac" on the pu lic sector . D'en though most welfare recipients, numerically, are white, the hysteria a out Iwelfare @ueensI ga'e welfare a &lac" face and associated it with shame and freeloading. That racist campaign facilitated se'ere cuts to welfare payments in the -./. One of the iggest o stacles standing in the way of the demolition of pu lic-sector ser'ices are the pu lic-sector unions. 7ow, it 8ust so happens that pu lic-sector employment--especially union 8o s in the pu lic
sector--is one of the principal con@uests of the ci'il rights and &lac" *ower mo'ements. We should remem er that =artin %uther #ing died fighting for a group of &lac" pu lic-sector wor"ers--sanitation wor"ers in =emphis--who were trying to form a union. As #eeanga-Oamahtta Taylor has pointed out, IToday, almost

GM percent of all &lac" women who are employed wor" in a pu lic-sector 8o , and more than half of all African Americans professionals are employed y some sector of the state.I /o the section of the wor"ing class that has een historically the most re ellious is lodged in a hea'ily unionized sector that is slated for destruction . 7aturally, from a ruling class perspecti'e, that section must e dislodged. As a conse@uence, weH'e seen nearly anyplace that was a stronghold of &lac" wealth and collecti'e power o literated. +etroit--the center of auto production, =otownQ--has een reduced to ru le. In pu lic schools, thereHs a dramatic whitening of the teaching force. The -./. *ostal /er'ice has een left to rot, and many 8o s are threatened y post office closures and layoffs. The 7ew ;im $row sol'ed many pro lems for the ruling class in one stro"e. It eroded the prestige and moral authority of African Americans . It has placed millions of &lac" people in a su ordinate legal category where they are shut out of meaningful participation in the mainstream economy. It wea"ened the la or mo'ement y dislodging many of its most militant mem ers. And it terrorizes the young people coming up today, so that they learn early on to wal" a straight line. <ow else can we interpret the stop-and-fris" of the 7ew Oor" *olice +epartment, for e9ample? =illions of
people are stopped, and FK percent of them are &lac" and %atino in a city where they account for 8ust o'er half the population. And police found 8ust one gun for e'ery E,LLL stops in !L22. Is the program wildly unsuccessful or wildly successful? If the point is to stop crime and find weapons, itHs wildly unsuccessful. &ut if

the point is to terrorize poor and wor"ing class young people in &lac" and %atino neigh orhoodsA if the point is to teach them that their li'es are cheap and that they can and will e dropped into a legal lac" hole at any momentA if the point is to lower their horizons and aspirations, then stop-and-fris" is a wildly successful program. d6 The 4reat Recession pro'es the elite targeted lac"s under the disguise of .colorlindness0 to further profits Jones ', (&rian ;ones, G +ecem er !L2!, .Racism in a Pcolor- lind> society,0 /ocialist Wor"er, http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L2ECLGC!JCracism-in-a-color- lind-societyLCC#* T<D RD/-%T of the roader neoli eral offensi'e has een a massi'e transfer of wealth from wor"ers and the poor directly to the rich, and it has accelerated during the years following the 4reat Recession. In !L2L, 1E percent of the gains in o'erall income went to the top 2 percent of ta9payers, people with at least YEM!,LLL in income. =ore than onethird of the income gains went to the top L.L2 percent, 8ust 2M,LLL households with an a'erage income of Y!E.F million--their income rose y !2.M percent. =eanwhile, weHre

losing out. =edian net worth for American households o'erall dropped nearly GL percent etween !LLK and !L2L. Apart from the wealthy few, net worth for &lac"s and whites has een in decline. &ut ecause of racism, itHs worse for &lac"s. In !L2L, the median net worth of white families was Y22L,K!1. )or &lac"s, it was 8ust YG,11M. ThatHs a huge difference. &ut for oth groups, those
figures represent a dramatic drop since 8ust !LLM, when the median net worth of white families was Y2EG,11! and for &lac"s, Y2!,2!G. /o far from enefiting them, these attac"s ha'e also hurt most whites, which is the point. &ut

focusing the attac"s--in rhetoric and reality--on people of color pro'ides a 8ustification that allows the rich and powerful to get away with it. /o racist dou le standards are a deeply material fact of life. We canHt sum up the political economy of racism as merely Idi'ide and con@uer,I although thatHs a persistently important function of racism. Racist ine@uality is profita le for some in a 'ery direct way and ser'es to reinforce racist ideology . In other instances, we see racist ideology mo ilized to 8ustify some "ind of policy or practice that strengthens the rich at our e9pense. /o racism is not 8ust a out profit, ut it 'ery much is necessary to the profit system as a whole. ItHs interesting to note that racist ideology is remar"a ly fle9i le. )irst, it was that Africans were not human, then it was a out genetic inferiority, then it was a out cultural inferiority. Today, thereHs a new ideological twist: Ipersonal responsi ilityI and Icolor- lindness.I 7early e'ery institution in our society today has clear patterns of racism,
yet amazingly, they all proudly swear to Inon-discriminationI policies. /ince the ci'il rights mo'ement, the official stance of our society is Icolor- lindnessI--weHre going to treat e'eryone the same. =eanwhile, the

patterns of

discrimination persist,

ut as long as no one yells out any racial slurs, weHre told it has nothing to do with racism. I canHt tell you how many times IH'e raised @uestions of racism in class as a teacher, and if I refer to the race of a person, my students ine'ita ly raise their hands and say, IThatHs racistQI TheyH'e come to understand that anyone who rings up the topic will e attac"ed as racist. &ehind arguments of Icolor- lindness,I our

schools ha'e ecome resegregated, our prisons ha'e een filled with &lac" and &rown odies, and the stateHs repressi'e apparatus has een dramatically e9panded and strengthened. I$olor- lindnessI is a rilliant policy of official denial and is argua ly a more effecti'e way to carry out racist attac"s. Oou can target &lac" people for pretty much any policy that you want, as long as you ne'er admit to doing soQ e6 /uccessful lac"s are co-opted y the elite to 8ustify racist policies V only o'erthrowing the profit system sol'es V their criti@ue will also e co-opted to create another ;im $row Jones ', (&rian ;ones, G +ecem er !L2!, .Racism in a Pcolor- lind> society,0 /ocialist Wor"er,
http:CCsocialistwor"er.orgC!L2ECLGC!JCracism-in-a-color- lind-societyLCC#* /I7$D T<D

powers that e deny that institutional racism e9ists, thereHs no one to lame for po'erty and desperation--e9cept the poor and desperate themsel'es. =ichelle Ale9ander argues that the rise of a 'ery 'isi le &lac" elite is a necessary component of the 7ew ;im $row: &lac" success stories lend credence to the notion that anyone, no matter how poor or how &lac" you may e, can ma"e it to the top, if only you try hard enough. These stories Ipro'eI that race is no longer rele'ant. Whereas &lac" success stories undermined the logic of ;im $row, they actually reinforce the system of mass incarceration. =ass incarceration depends for its legitimacy on the widespread elief that all those who appear trapped at the ottom actually chose their fate. /o we ha'e to add another feature to our understanding of institutional racism today: the rise of a loyal &lac" elite. It is important to understand that they are not mere to"ens, ut genuine participants in the American ruling class. They operate at the highest le'els of our society, and elie'e deeply in the profit system ecause they profit from it. They include not only top an"ers, e9ecuti'es and $DOs--they named an oil tan"er

after $ondoleezza Rice for a reason-- ut also politicians. In 21KL, there were fewer than 2,MLL &lac" elected officials in the whole country. Today, there are more than 1,LLL. &ut the rise of this group has not een a 'ictory for African Americans as a whole. If anything, the

fact that their ascent coincides with the rise of the 7ew ;im $row means they ha'e een, at est, passi'e in the face of mass incarceration and at worst, complicit in it. Their message to poor and wor"ing-class &lac"s is not to Iorganize and fight ac",I ut to Iput your head down and stop whining.I That was the message that =ichelle O ama deli'ered so effecti'ely at the +emocratic 7ational $on'ention in the summer: wor" hard and donHt complain. I assume that this wasnHt a cynical mo'e on her part, ut an e9pression of what she actually thin"s. -nfortunately, that line helps to reinforce the racist idea that poor &lac"s are 8ust whiners and complainers, and the pro lem is that they donHt accept Ipersonal responsi ilityI for their circumstances. The new structures of racism include all of these rilliant means of official denial. /o the first step is to call out these structures and insist that they are, in fact, racist. The second step is to launch a struggle against these structures. )or the long term, the political economy of racism teaches us that we ha'e to get rid of the profit system. &ecause otherwise, when we tear down the 7ew ;im $row, the system will create a new one. We canHt let that happen.

%!T " $T
The promulgation of the +lack)White paradigm operates to e*clude %atinos . shifting away from the binary towards the %at"rit movement solves >erea4 7< V *rofessor of %aw, -ni'ersity of )lorida $ollege of %aw (;uan ). *erea, The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The I7ormal /cienceI of American Racial Thought, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, :ol. FM, 7o. M, .%at$rit: %atinasCos and the %aw: A ;oint /ymposium0, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, %a Raza %aw ;ournal, pp. 2!2E-2!MF, http:CCwww.8stor.orgCsta leCEGF2LM16CC4*astor
This Article is a out how we are taught to thin" a out race. In particular, I intend to analyze the role of oo"s and te9ts on race in structuring our racial discourse. I elie'e that much writing on racism is structured y a paradigm that is widely held ut rarely recognized for what it is and what it does. This paradigm shapes our understanding of what race and racism mean and the nature of our discussions a out race. It

is crucial, therefore, to identify and descri e this paradigm and to demonstrate how it inds and organizes racial discourse, limiting oth the scope and the range of legitimate 'iewpoints in that discourse . In this Article, I identify and criticize one of the most salient features of past and current discourse a out race in the -nited /tates, the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm of race. A small ut growing num er of writers ha'e recognized the paradigm and its limiting effect on racial discourse.! I elie'e that its dominant and per'asi'e character has not een well esta lished nor discussed in legal literature . I intend to demonstrate the e*istence of a +lack)White paradigm and to show its readth and seemingly per'asi'e ordering of racial discourse and legitimacy . )urther, I intend to show how the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm operates to e*clude %atinosCasE from full mem ership and participation in racial discourse, and how that e9clusion ser'es to perpetuate not only the paradigm itself ut also negati'e stereotypes of %atinosCas. )ull mem ership in society for %atinosCas will re@uire a paradigm shift away from the inary paradigm and towards a new and e'ol'ing understanding of race and race relations. This Article illustrates the "ind of contri ution to critical theory that the emergent %atino $ritical Race /tudies (%at$rit6 mo'ement may ma"e. This mo'ement is a continuing scholarly effort, underta"en y %atinoCa scholars and other sympathetic scholars, to e9amine critically e9isting structures of racial thought and to identify how these structures perpetuate the su ordinated position of %atinosCas in particular . %at$rit studies are, then, an e9tension and de'elopment of critical race theory (and critical theory generally6 that focus on the pre'iously neglected areas of %atinoCa identity and history and the role of racism as it affects %atinosCas . I identify strongly, and self-consciously, as a %atino writer and thin"er . It is precisely my position as a %atino outsider, neither &lac" nor White, that ma"es possi le the o ser'ation and criti@ue presented in this Article. =y criti@ue of the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm of race shows this commonly held inary understanding of race to e one of the ma8or impediments to learning a out and understanding %atinosCas and their history. As I shall show, the paradigm also creates significant distortions in the way people learn to 'iew %atinosCas.

+y introducing the black)white binary the aff proliferates a race scholarship that is epistemologically flawed because it ignores and e*cludes every other race that does not fall within the paradigm >erea4 7< V *rofessor of %aw, -ni'ersity of )lorida $ollege of %aw (;uan ). *erea, The &lac"CWhite &inary
*aradigm of Race: The I7ormal /cienceI of American Racial Thought, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, :ol. FM, 7o. M, .%at$rit: %atinasCos and the %aw: A ;oint /ymposium0, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, %a Raza %aw ;ournal, pp. 2!2E-2!MF, http:CCwww.8stor.orgCsta leCEGF2LM16CC4*astor
If science as a discipline is more 'ulnera le to te9t oo" distortions of history, I elie'e this is only a matter of degree, as law, through its reli- ance on precedent, is also highly dependent on paradigms. #uhn rec- ognized as much when he used 8udicial precedent, and su se@uent decisions ased on precedent, as an e9ample of paradigm ela oration.!M Although #uhn felt that the e9tent to which the social sciences had de- 'eloped paradigms was an open @uestion,!J I suggest in this Article that race

scholarship both inside and outside of law is dominated by a binary paradigm of race . %i"e science
te9t oo"s, constitutional law te9t oo"s also distort history for the sa"e of a paradigmatic, linear presentation of the e'olution of e@uality doctrines. &. +escri ing the &inary *aradigm of Race *aradigms of race shape our understanding of race and our defini- tion of racial

I define this paradigm as the conception that race in America consists, either e9- clusi'ely or primarily, of only two constituent racial groups, the &lac" and the White . =any scholars of race reproduce this paradigm when they write and act as though only the &lac" and the White races matter for purposes of discussing race and social policy with regard to race. The mere recognition that Iother people of colorI e9ist, without care- ful attention to their 'oices, their histories, and their real presence, is merely a reassertion of the &lac"CWhite paradigm. If one concei'es of race and racism as primarily of concern only to &lac"s and Whites, and understands
pro lems. The most per'asi'e and powerful paradigm of race in the -nited /tates is the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. Iother people of colorI only through some unclear analogy to the IrealI races, this 8ust restates the inary paradigm with a slight concession to demographics. =y assertion is that our shared understanding of race and racism is essentially limited to this &lac"CWhite inary paradigm.!K This paradigm defines, ut also limits, the set of pro lems that may e recognized in racial discourse. #uhnHs notion of Inormal science,I which further articulates the paradigm and see"s to sol'e the pro lems percei'a le ecause of the paradigm, also applies to Inormal researchI on race. 4i'en

the &lac"CWhite paradigm, we would e9pect to find that much research on race is concerned with understanding the dynamics of the &lac" and White races and attempting to sol'e the pro lems etween &lac"s and Whites . Within the paradigm, the rele'ant material facts are facts a out &lac"s and Whites . In addition, the paradigm dictates that all other racial identities and groups in the -nited /tates are est understood through the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. Only a few writers e'en recognize that they use a &lac"CWhite paradigm as the frame of reference through which to understand racial relations.!F =ost writers simply assume the importance and correctness of the paradigm, and lea'e the reader grasping for whate'er significance descriptions of the &lac"CWhite relationship ha'e for other people of color. As I shall discuss, ecause the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm is so widely accepted, other racialized groups li"e %atinosCas, Asian Americans, and 7ati'e Americans are often marginal- ized or ignored altogether. As #uhn writes, Ithose that will not fit the o9 are often not seen at all.I!1 /cholarly literature, te9t oo"s, and popular literature on race are crucial in reifying and transmitting the inary paradigm .I In the realm of scholarly literature, I egin
y analyzing Andrew <ac"erHs famous Two 7ations: &lac" and White, /eparate, <ostile, -ne@ual. I then study $ornel WestHs Race =atters. These oo"s, y leading scholars on race, oth illustrate the e9istence and use of the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. They show how the paradigm results in an e9clusi'e focus on &lac"s and Whites, oth from the point of 'iew of a White writer and a &lac" writer.

The

paradigm also leads to the marginalization of other non-White people , again orne out y oth writers. &oth <ac"er and West e9hi it astonishing indifference with regard to the history of ra- cism against non-&lac" people of color. I continue y analyzing three scholarly oo"s on White racism. These oo"s, all titled
White Racism, are particularly instructi'e, ecause they suggest oth the continuity of the paradigm across a span of twenty-fi'e years of scholarly in@uiry on White racism and also the "ind of paradigm ela oration and de'elopment descri ed y #uhn. The first oo", edited y &arry 7. /chwartz and Ro ert +isch, appeared in 21KL. The second, y psychoanalyst ;oel #o'el, was pu lished in a new edition in 21FG. The third, y sociologists ;oe R. )eagin and <ernan :era, was pu lished in 211M. Ta"en together, these oo"s illustrate oth the possi ilities and the limits of the &lac"CWhite paradigm. The paradigm ma"es possi le more detailed and nuanced treatment and understanding of White racism against &lac"sA simultaneously, the para- digm steadily reinforces the e9clusion of other non-Whites. )inally, I

will turn to the te9t oo", a premier source and promul- gator of the paradigm. I analyze a leading case oo" on constitutional law whose section on race and e@uality is shaped y and reproduces the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. I conclude y demonstrating how the introduction of rele'ant =e9ican-American legal history into the treat- ment of constitutionally significant racial issues has the power to alter the paradigm and to produce a 'ery different understanding of the struggle for e@uality under the $onstitution.

6ocus on the black)white binary allows the +lacks and the Whites to be the dominating races while the other non0white groups because submissive and invisible >erea4 7< V *rofessor of %aw, -ni'ersity of )lorida $ollege of %aw (;uan ). *erea, The &lac"CWhite &inary
*aradigm of Race: The I7ormal /cienceI of American Racial Thought, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, :ol. FM, 7o. M, .%at$rit: %atinasCos and the %aw: A ;oint /ymposium0, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, %a Raza %aw ;ournal, pp. 2!2E-2!MF, http:CCwww.8stor.orgCsta leCEGF2LM16CC4*astor

Andrew <ac"erHs famous oo", Two 7ations: &lac" and White, /eparate, <ostile, -ne@ual, pro'ides an e9cellent e9ample of reliance on the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm.E! Its title, proclaiming two nations, &lac" and White, oldly professes the inary paradigm. Although <ac"er recognizes e9plicitly that a full perspecti'e on race in America re@uires inclusion of %atinosCas and Asians,EE this recognition is, in the conte9t of the entire oo", insignificant and underde'eloped. <is almost e9clusi'e focus on &lac"s and Whites is clearly intentional: ITwo 7ations will adhere to its title y gi'ing central attention to lac" and white Americans.IEG <ac"erHs 8ustification for this focus is that I3i5n many respects, other groups find themsel'es sitting as spectators, while the two prominent players try to wor" out how or whether they can coe9ist with one another.II This 8ustification perpetuates the marginali/ation of the already marginali/ed. <ac"er and so many other writers on race decline to understand that, y focusing only on &lac"s and Whites, they oth produce and replicate the elief that there are only Itwo prominent players,I &lac" and White, in de ates a out race. These writers thus render other non0White groups invisible and implicitly characterize them as passi'e, 'oluntary spectators. /uch characterization is contrary to the history of these groups. EJ <ac"er descri es in detail only conditions e9perienced y White or &lac" Americans. <e first characterizes the White nature of the nation and its culture: America is inherently a IwhiteI country: in character, in structure, in culture. 7eedless to say, lac" Americans create li'es of their own. Oet, as a people, they face oundaries and constrictions set y the white ma8ority. AmericaHs 'ersion of apartheid, while lac"ing o'ert legal sanction, comes closest to the system e'en now eing reformed in the land of its in'ention.EK Of course, %atinosCas, Asian Americans, 7ati'e Americans, 4ypsies, and all non-White Americans face I oundaries and constrictions set y the white ma8ority,I ut the 'ision <ac"er ad'ances counts only &lac"s as significantly disad'antaged y White racism. /imilarly, <ac"er descri es &lac"ness as uni@uely functional for Whites: As ;ames &aldwin has pointed out, white people need the pres- ence of lac" people as a reminder of what pro'idence has spared them from ecoming.... In the eyes of white Americans, eing lac" encapsulates your identity. 7o other racial or na- tional origin is seen as ha'ing so per'asi'e a personality or char- acter.EF According to <ac"er, then, &lac"ness ser'es a crucial function in ena- ling Whites to define themsel'es as pri'ileged and superior, and racial attri utes of other minorities do not ser'e this function. <ac"erHs chapter titles largely tell the story of the inary paradigm. $hapter two, on IRace and Racism,I discusses only White and &lac" perceptions of each other. $hapter three, I&eing &lac" in America,I is followed y a chapter on IWhite Responses.I

<ac"erHs omission of non-&lac" minority groups in his discussion of specific topics similarly suggests that these groupsH e9periences do not e9ist. $hapter nine, on segregated schooling, descri es only the e9- perience of &lac" segregation. This chapter ma"es no reference to the e9tensi'e history of segregation in education suffered y %atinosCas.E1 $hapter ten as"s, IWhatHs &est for &lac" $hildren?I with no commensurate concern for other children. /imilarly, $hapter ele'en, on crime, discusses only perceptions of &lac" criminality and their interpretation. In discussing police rutality, <ac"er descri es only White police ru- tality against &lac"s. There is not a single word a out the similar police rutality suffered y %atinoCa people at the hands of White police offi- cers.GL 7or are there any words in these chapters descri ing the e9periences of 7ati'e Americans or Asian Americans. $gnoring the %atinos on the premise of GEuropean heritageH is false. %atinos are constantly critici/ed4 seen as inferior4 and e*ploited . by ignoring the %atinos the aff maintains that the only GrealH race is either black or white. >erea4 7< V *rofessor of %aw, -ni'ersity of )lorida $ollege of %aw (;uan ). *erea, The &lac"CWhite &inary
*aradigm of Race: The I7ormal /cienceI of American Racial Thought, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, :ol. FM, 7o. M, .%at$rit: %atinasCos and the %aw: A ;oint /ymposium0, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, %a Raza %aw ;ournal, pp. 2!2E-2!MF, http:CCwww.8stor.orgCsta leCEGF2LM16CC4*astor

The greatest danger in <ac"erHs 'ision is its suggestion that non- White groups other than &lac"s are not really su 8ect to racism. <ac"er seems to adopt the deser'edly criticized ethnicity theory,G2 which posits that non-White immigrant ethnics are essentially Whites-in-waiting who will e permitted to assimilate and ecome White.G! This is illustrated est in $hapter eight, IOn Dducation: Dthnicity and Achie'ement,I which offers the oo"Hs only significant discussion of non-White groups other than &lac"s. <ac"er descri es Asians in Imodel minor- ityI terms, ecause of high standardized test scores as a group.GE <e portrays %atinosCas as elow standard, ecause of low test scores and graduation rates, and as aspiring immigrants.I +escri ing Asian Americans, %atinosCas and other immigrant groups, <ac"er writes: =em ers of all these Iintermediate groupsI ha'e een allowed to put a 'isi le distance etween themsel'es and lac" Americans. *ut most simply, none of the presumptions of inferiority associated with Africa and sla'ery are imposed on these other ethnicities.GM While a full re uttal of this proposition is eyond the scope of this Article, its inaccuracy can e @uic"ly demonstrated. $onsider, for in- stance, the o ser'ations of historian +a'id We er, who descri ed early Anglo perceptions of =e9ican people: IAmerican 'isitors to the =e9ican frontier were nearly unanimous in commenting on the dar" s"in of =e9ican mestizos who, it was generally agreed, had inherited the worst @ualities of /paniards and Indians to produce a HraceH still more despica le than that of either parent.IGJ Rufus &. /age e9pressed the common 'iew of =e9icans in 2FGJ: There are no people on the continent of America, whether ci'i- lized or unci'ilized, with one or two e9ceptions, more misera le in condition or despica le in morals than the mongrel race in- ha iting 7ew =e9ico.... To manage them successfully, they must needs e held in continual restraint, and "ept in their place y force, if necessary,--else they will ecome haughty and insolent. As ser'ants, they are e9cellent, when properly trained, ut are worse than useless if left to themsel'es.GK =ore riefly, the common perception of =e9ican Americans was

that IThey are an inferior race, that is all.IGF Incredi ly, and without any supporting evidence4 <ac"er writes that I3m5ost $entral and /outh Americans can claim a strong Duropean heritage, which eases their a sorption into the HwhiteH middle class.IG1 <ac"er continues, I3w5hile immigrants from $olom ia and $yprus may ha'e to wor" their way up the social ladder, they are still allowed as 'alid a claim to eing HwhiteH as persons of *uritan or *ilgrim stoc".IIM <ac"erHs comments are simply incredible for their blithe lack of aware0 ness of how racism urdens the li'es of %atinoCa, Asian American and other racialized immigrant groups. While some %atinosCas may loo" White and may act Anglo (the phenomenon of passing for White is not limited to &lac"s6, <ac"erHs statement is certainly false for millions of %atinos)as . $urrent anti-immigrant initiati'es targeted at %atinosCas and Asians, such as $aliforniaHs *roposition 2FKMH and similar federal legis- lation targeting legal and illegal immigrants,M! $aliforniaHs *roposition !L1,ME and unprecedented proposals to deny irthright citizenship to the -nited /tates- orn children of undocumented persons, de un" any no- tion that the White ma8ority tolerates easily the presence of %atinoCa or Asian people.MG -ltimately, <ac"er seems determined to adhere to the inary paradigm of race and to ignore the comple9ity introduced y other non- White groups, ecause it is con'enient-which, it will e recalled, is a principal danger of paradigms. In the statistical section of the oo", <ac"er e9plains some of the pro lems with statistics he reproduces: /ome go'ernment pu lications place persons of <ispanic origin within the lac" and white racial groupings. Others put them in a separate category, to differentiate them from lac"s and whites. Where'er the sources permit, Two 7ations has separated out <ispanics, to "eep the oo"Hs emphasis on race as coherent as possi le. Where this has not een possi le, readers should ear in mind that the figures for whites may e inflated y the inclu- sion of considera le num ers of <ispanics.I Although go'ernment pu lications ha'e confused the a ility to count %atinosCas,MJ what is startling here is <ac"erHs 'ision that coherence in discussion of race re@uires emphasis on only &lac" and White. $n other words4 KrealK race is only +lack or White. Other groups only render this framewor" Iincoherent.I This is why the &lac"CWhite paradigm of race must e e9panded: it causes writers li"e <ac"er to ignore other nonWhite Americans, which in turn encourages others to ignore us as well. +lack)White +inary enforces the obsession with white racism 0 encourages inchoate *enophobia and 1ustifies increased distrust of %atin $mmigrants among the black community >erea4 7< V *rofessor of %aw, -ni'ersity of )lorida $ollege of %aw (;uan ). *erea, The &lac"CWhite &inary
*aradigm of Race: The I7ormal /cienceI of American Racial Thought, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, :ol. FM, 7o. M, .%at$rit: %atinasCos and the %aw: A ;oint /ymposium0, $alifornia %aw Re'iew, %a Raza %aw ;ournal, pp. 2!2E-2!MF, http:CCwww.8stor.orgCsta leCEGF2LM16CC4*astor &. $ornel West and the &lac"-White &inary *aradigm $ornel West is one of the most well "nown and well regarded phi- losophers and commentators on race in the nation . While West writes with much more insight than <ac"er, his recent oo" Race =atters also reproduces the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm of race.I /e'eral of the essays seem addressed chiefly to the &lac" community, and some to the &lac" and White communities. <is criti@ues of &lac" leadership, intel- lectuals, and conser'atism are powerful, unflinching, and persuasi'e. To a large e9tent, howe'er, West adopts the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm y addressing only the relationship etween &lac"s and Whites (and, in one essay, &lac"s and ;ews6. West

writes as though IraceI means only the &lac" race. <is remar"s confine the discussion of race and anti-racism to the need to struggle against &lac" oppression, rather than a roader anti-su ordination agenda that would include all people of color and anti-racist Whites in confronting patriarchy and racism in all their manifestation s. West correctly recognizes, in one
sentence, the Imultiracial, trans- class, and largely male display of 8ustified social rageI that occurred during the %os Angeles riots of 211!.MF West notes that only EJ percent of those arrested were &lac" (M2 percent of those arrested were %atino, ma"ing the riots and looting prominently %atino6.M1 &ut rather than dis- cuss the multiracial rage and despair that fueled the riots, West discusses the inade@uacy of our racial discourse in inary, &lac"CWhite terms. West descri es the "ind of discussions that we need to ha'e a out race in terms suggesting that only &lac"s and Whites need to participate in the discussion: To

engage in a serious discussion of race in America, we must egin not with the pro lems of lac" people ut with the flaws of American society-flaws rooted in historic ine@ualities and long-standing cultural stereotypes. <ow we set up the terms for discussing racial issues shapes our perception and response to these issues. As long as lac" people are 'iewed as a Ithem,I the urden falls on lac"s to do all the IculturalI and ImoralI wor" necessary for healthy race relations. ... 3W5e confine discussions a out race in America to the Hpro lemsH lac" people pose for
whites rather than consider what this way of 'iewing lac" people re'eals a out us as a na- tion. ... &oth 3li erals and conser'ati'es5 fail to see that the presence and predicaments of lac" people are neither additions to nor defections from American life, ut rather constituti'e ele- ments of that life.J WestHs statements are accurate, and I

would fault West only for not recognizing (if indeed he does not6 that e9actly the same statements ap- ply to %atinosCas, Asian Americans and 7ati'e Americans as well as &lac"s. If the Iterms for
discussing racial issuesI include only &lac"s and Whites, this fact will indeed shape e'eryoneHs perception of who elongs

Any serious discussion of race re- @uires incorporating the multiple points of 'iew of all racialized peo- ples. %i"e &lac"s, %atinosCas, Asian Americans, and 7ati'e Americans are all constituti'e of American life and identity to a degree that has not een fully recognized and is, in fact, acti'ely resisted. WestHs near-e9clusi'e focus on &lac"s and Whites, and thus his re- production
in the discussion, and %atinosCas, Asian Americans and 7ati'e Americans will promptly disappear. of the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm, is apparent throughout the oo". $hapter two, entitled IThe *itfalls of Racial Reasoning,I presents a powerful criti@ue of racial reasoning within the &lac" com- munity that immo ilized &lac" leaders and pre'ented them from criticizing $larence Thomas when he was appointed to the /upreme $ourt.J2 WestHs inary conception of the nation emerges when he de- scri es the Ideep cultural conser'atism in white and lac" America. In white America, cultural conser'atism ta"es the form of a chronic racism, se9ism, and homopho ia .... In lac" America, cultural conser'atism ta"es the form of a 3sic5 inchoate 9enopho ia (e.g., against whites, ;ews, and Asians6, systemic se9ism, and homopho ia.IJ! %i"e

<ac"erHs con- ception of Itwo nations,I West sees inary Americas, one White, one &lac". In addition, WestHs reference to &lac" 9enopho ia, directed at Whites, ;ews, and Asians, sets the stage for his later description of &lac" distrust of %atinosCas as well. West also descri es the inary paradigm from a &lac" point of 'iew, referring to the I lac" ourgeois preoccupation with white peer appro'al and lac" nationalist o session with white racism.IJE &lac"s, in their way, are as preoccupied with Whites as Whites are with &lac"s. In his chapter on I=alcolm
X and &lac" Rage,I West descri es =alcolm XHs fear of cultural hy ridity, the lurring of racial ounda- ries that occurs ecause of racial mi9ture.JG =alcolm X saw such hy- ridity, e9emplified y mulattoes, as Isym ols of wea"ness and confusion.IHHJ WestHs commentary on =alcolm XHs 'iews gi'es us an- other statement of the inary paradigm: IThe 'ery idea of not Hfitting inH the -./. discourse of positi'ely 'alued whiteness and negati'ely de- ased lac"ness meant one was su 8ect to e9clusion and marginalization y whites and lac"s.IJJ Although the conte9t of this @uotation is a out &lac"CWhite mulattoes, WestHs

o ser'ation is crucial to an under- standing of why %atinosCas, neither claiming to e, nor eing, White or &lac", are perpetually e9cluded and marginalized. The reified inary structure of discourse on race lea'es no room for people of color who do not fit the rigid &lac" and White o9es supplied y the paradigm . )urthermore, most %atinosCas are mi9ed race mestizos or mulattoes , who therefore em ody the "ind of racial mi9ture that =alcolm X, and, I would argue, society generally tends to re8ect.
WestHs o ser'ation a out mi9ed-race people who do not fit within traditional -./. discourse a out race applies in full

measure to %atinosCas. When West writes a out the struggle for &lac" ci'il rights in shap- ing the future of e@uality in America, he recognizes the need for &lac"s to repudiate anti-/emitism and other racisms in order to sustain the moral position garnered through the struggle for ci'il rights.JK I agree with West that a

strategy of coalition is prefera le to racial reasoning that results in a closed-ran"s mentality. JF <owe'er, WestHs remar"s do not ac"nowledge the e9tensi'e struggles for ci'il rights in which other groups ha'e
engaged. Indeed, West e9presses a degree of distrust re- garding %atinosCas and Asian Americans that wor"s against the coali- tions that West "nows are necessary to struggle successfully against racism: 3A5 prophetic framewor" encourages a coalition strategy that solicits genuine solidarity with those deeply committed to anti- racist struggle.... 3&5lac" suspicions of whites, %atinos, ;ews, and Asians runs deep for historical reasons. Oet there

are slight though significant antiracist traditions among whites, Asians, and especially %atinos, ;ews and indigenous people that must not e cast aside. /uch coalitions are important precisely ecause they not only enhance the plight of lac" people ut also ecause they enrich the @uality of life in America.J1 This paragraph
warrants further pro ing. 4i'en AmericaHs history of racism, &lac" suspicions of e'ery group may seem well-founded. )or e9ample, with respect to %atinosCas, during the nineteenth century as during the present, identification with Anglos y upper-class =e9icans meant ecoming more racist and disparaging toward lower-class and dar"er-s"inned =e9icans and &lac"s.KI <owe'er, WestHs characterization

of %atinoCa, Asian, and 7ati'e American resistance to White racism as Islight though significantIIH seems elittling, ill-informed, and marginalizing of %atinoCa, Asian, and indigenous people. K! This comment can e understood as the "ind of Iinchoate *enophobiaI West himself finds in the &lac" community.KE Another possi le reason for this distrust of %atinosCas may stem from a widespread sense that immigrant %atinosCas are displacing &lac"s.KG Toni =orrison writes specifically a out this +lack distrust of immigrants. In her essay IOn the &ac"s of &lac"s,I =orrison de- scri es the hatred of &lac"s as the defining, final,
necessary step in the Americanization of immigrants.KM IIt is the act of racial contempt 3 anishing a competing lac" shoe-shiner5 that transforms this charm- ing 4ree" into an entitled white.IKJ =orrison sees &lac"s as persistently 'ictimized y Americanizing processes, always forced to Ithe lowest le'el of the racial hierarchy.IKK The

struggles of immigrants, according to =orrison, are persistently framed as struggles etween recent arri'als and lac"s. In race tal" the mo'e into mainstream America always means uying into the notion of American lac"s as the real ali- ens. Whate'er the ethnicity or nationality of the immigrant, his nemesis is understood to e African American.KF =orrison is right that American IWhitenessI is often achie'ed through distancing from &lac"s.K1 %atinosCas participate in the paradigm y engaging in racism against &lac"s or dar"er-s"inned mem ers of %atinoCa communities. $urrent e'ents elie, howe'er, =orrisonHs notion of American &lac"s as Ithe real aliens.I =e9ican and other %atinoCa and Asian aliens ha'e ecome targets of state and federal legislation de- nying them medical and educational resources.FI The legislati'e attac" on entitlement programs and affirmati'e action programs is an attac" on &lac"s, %atinosCas and Asians.F2 In $ornel WestHs writing, we see the influence of the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm from the point of 'iew of a leading &lac" writer on race . <is
'iew shares points in common with Andrew <ac"erHs. &oth agree on the concepts of White and &lac" Americas (the Itwo na- tionsI6, and oth focus e9clusi'e attention on the relationship etween &lac"s and Whites, although they descri e the nature of this relationship in 'ery different terms. &oth writers seem indifferent towards the his- tory and conditions e9perienced y other non-White, non-&lac" groups. While <ac"er

unrealistically 'iews all non-&lac"s as aspiring immigrants on the path to assimilation with Whites, West, li"e =orrison, 'iews non- &lac" groups with suspicion. =orrison, in particular, seems to accept <ac"erHs 'iew that all non-&lac"s are (or will e6 the enemies of &lac"s as they Americanize and assimilate. Ta"en together, these 'iews pose serious pro lems for %atinosCas. :iewing %atinosCas as aspiring immigrants is, in most cases, a deeply flawed 'iew, for two reasons. )irst, =e9ican Americans, *uerto Ricans, and -nited /tates- orn $u an Americans, are not immigrants. =e9icans occupied the /outhwest long efore the -nited /tates e'er found them. /econd, this utopian 'iew of immigrant assimilation ta"es no account of the systemic racism which afflicts =e9ican Americans and *uerto Ricans . The

utopian 'iew ser'es White writers li"e <ac"er ecause they can perpetuate the 'iew that the -nited /tates has only a single race pro lem-the traditional inary pro lem of the White rela- tionship with &lac"s-rather than a more comple9 set of racisms that, if recognized, would demonstrate that racism is much more systemic and per'asi'e than Whites usually admit. The suspicious 'iew of immigrants and other non-White people , as articulated y West and =orrison, is flawed in similar ways. Again, 'iewing all non-&lac" minorities as aspiring immigrants, on their way to whiteness, negates oth history and the deep-seated racism faced y many %atinosCas.F! Oet this view allows some +lack writers to see +lacks as uni;uely victimi/ed by racism. D9cessi'e distrust of %atinosCas and other non-Whites impairs the a ility
of all non-White people urdened y racism to form useful coalitions to oppose racism. One can thus discern how the

%atinosCas and Asian Americans are presumed to e White (or @uasi-White6 y oth White writers and &lac" writers (a presumption not orne out in the li'ed e9perience of most %atinosCas and Asians6, then our claims to 8ustice will not e heard nor ac"nowledged. Whites can ignore our claims to 8ustice, since we are not &lac" and therefore are not su 8ect to real racism. And &lac"s can ignore our claims, since we are presumed to e aspiring to and ac@uiring Whiteness, and therefore we are not su 8ect to real racism. %atinosCas do not fit the o9es supplied y the paradigm.

inary paradigm interferes with li - eration and e@uality. If

+%!"30W=$TE +$N! 8 3

'N" (O&E% ($NO $T8


Their understanding of modernity perpetuates the myth of the model minority . turns case (c#owand and %indgren LJ (=iranda Oshige =c4owan_ and ;ames %indgren__ 7orthwestern /chool of %aw, !LLJ, .TD/TI74 T<D .=O+D% =I7ORITO =OT<0, http:CCwww.law.northwestern.eduClawre'iewC'2LLCn2CEE2Clr2LLn2lindgrenmcgowan.pdf6 CC=+
*rofessor 7eil 4otanda writes that white

Americans are deeply wedded to the idea that .racism directed against Asian Americans is insignificant or does not e*ist.HEG *rofessor 4otanda argues that the model minority stereotype solidifies this elief, EM though there is e'idence that discrimination against Asian Americans persists today. )or e9ample, Asian Americans ma"e less money than whites with the same educational attainment. EJ =oreo'er, Asian Americans ha'e een the 'ictims of a large num er of hate crimes. /ome ha'e argued that the
incidence of such crimes may e rising, though pinning down the precise nature and e9tent of the pro lem is difficult.EK Asian critical scholars argue, howe'er, that the

model minority stereotype creates the impression that Asian Americans could not possi ly suffer per'asi'e discrimination, .much less the "ind that spawns physical 'iolence.0EF Indeed, Asian critical scholars report that Asian Americans> complaints of discrimination are sometimes met with derision.E1 $. The =odel =inority /tereotype
Reinforces the American +ream and Implicitly &lames Other =inority 4roups for Their *ro lems .Whites lo'e us ecause we>re not lac",0 one Asian critical scholar contends.GL Asian critical scholars charge that !sian

!mericans supposed success is used Gto demorali/e or to anger other minority groups and disadvantaged people.HG2 *rofessor $hew charges that the model minority stereotype tells other
minorities that if they .wor" hard, ha'e certain 'alues, and are reasona ly intelligent0 they, too, .can e successful.0G! Alternati'ely, lack

of success means that Gthey are lazy, their 'alues are misplaced,0 or they lack Gthe inherent capabilities to succeed.H GE In other words, Gfailures are under their controlEeven perhaps their choice.0GG Other racial minorities would succeed if
only they would follow the e9ample of Asian Americans and channel the energy they spend complaining into hard wor".GM

The myth of the model minority makes white supremacy inevitable (c#owand and %indgren -M 2=iranda Oshige =c4owan_ - , and ;ames %indgren__ - , !LLJ, .TD/TI74 T<D .=O+D% =I7ORITO =OT<0, http:CCwww.law.northwestern.eduClawre'iewC'2LLCn2CEE2Clr2LLn2lindgrenmcgowan.pdf6 CC=+
Asian critical scholars are increasingly concerned that the

model minority stereotype is designed to di'ide and con@uer racial minority groups. They argue that it sows resentment and 8ealousy among groups in order to dissipate racial minorities> collecti'e power when America ecomes .ma8ority minority.0MG If, as *rofessor Wu contends, the fate of America>s minority groups depends on their unity and collecti'e efforts, MM Asian critical scholars ought to worry if the model minority stereotype .fosters resentment from non-Asian minorities who are impliedly faulted as less than model.0MJ If this charge is true, the model minority stereotype ta"es on a sinister cast. Asian critical scholars ha'e randed it a .disingenuous stereotype0 .created to perpetuate the dominance of white !mericans.H MK The stereotype y .esta lishing

a racial hierarchy that denies the reality of Asian American oppression, while accepting that of other racial minorities and poor whites.0MF =odel minority status is a poisonous prize, ecause the stereotype will Gonly be wielded in defense of the racial status ;uo.HM1Whites will remain on top, African Americans on the ottom, with Asian Americans sandwiched in etween.

!TF G$TS !""A !TEH


The myth of the model minority is incorrect and homogenizes Asian Americans (c#owand and %indgren -M 2=iranda Oshige =c4owan_ and ;ames %indgren__ 7orthwestern /chool of %aw, !LLJ, .TD/TI74 T<D .=O+D% =I7ORITO =OT<0, http:CCwww.law.northwestern.eduClawre'iewC'2LLCn2CEE2Clr2LLn2lindgrenmcgowan.pdf6 CC=+
Asian critical scholars contend that the

model minority stereotype>s line a out the socioeconomic success of Asian Americans o scures the plight of many struggling Asian Americans. !M $t inappropriately GlumpsH together all !sian !mericansB.third- or fourth-generation ;apanese or $hinese Americans0 with recent refugees and immigrants.!J The resulting composite portrait suggests success, ut mas"s the real difficulties facing some Asian Americans. !K *rofessor 7atsu Taylor /aito has pointed out that in 211K .the o'erall rate of po'erty among Asian Americans was roughly twice that of whites.0!F (While /aito>s claim used to e true, the -./. $ensus &ureau reported
that y !LLE the difference in the po'erty rates for Asian Americans and non-<ispanic whites had narrowedB22.FU of

generalizations a out po'erty mas" large differences etween su groups, with high po'erty rates among $am odians (!1.EU6 and the <mong (EK.FU6 and low rates among )ilipinos (J.EU6 and ;apanese (1.KU6.EL Asian critical scholars argue that, y concealing that there are many Asian Americans who are poor and poorly educated, the stereotype persuades people that Asians need no help in attaining economic and educational success. E2 If Asian Americans>
Asian Americans li'ed in po'erty, compared to F.J!U of non-<ispanic whites.6!1 Additionally, pro lems and challenges are ac"nowledged, it is often in the conte9t of relating how some Asian American has succeeded despite high hurdles to success.E! *eople

simply assume4 according to Asian critical scholars, that .Asian Americans don>t need pu lic assistance or culturally specific programs, don>t deser'e pri'ate foundation support, and don>t need educational help.0EE

'N" #ENE $"


The '!"s understanding of modernity presumes a divide between the race of humanism4 including White4 !sian4 South !sian4 and !rab4 vs. the +lack Wilderson '- ()ran" Wilderson, .Red, White [ &lac"06 CC=+
I am not suggesting that across the glo e <umanism de'eloped in the same way regardless of region or cultureA what I am saying is that the late =iddle Ages

ga'e rise to an ontological categoryBan ensem le of common e9istential concernsBwhich made and continues to ma"e possi le oth war and peace, conflict and resolution, etween the disparate mem ers of the human race, Dast and West. /enator Thomas <art &enton intuited this notion of the e9istential commons when he wrote that though the
IOellow raceI and its culture had een Itorpid and stationary for thousands of years . . . 3Whites and Asians5 must tal" together, and trade together, and marry together. $ommerce is a great ci'ilizerBsocial intercourse as greatBand marriage greater.I!1 Dltis points out that as late as the se'enteenth century, Iprisoners ta"en in the course of Duropean military action... could e9pect death if they were leaders, or anishment if they were deemed followers, ut ne'er ensla'ement.... +etention followed y prisoner e9changes or ransoming was common.I I&y the se'enteenth century, ensla'ement of fellow Duropeans was eyond the limitsI of <umanismHs e9istential commons, e'en in times of war.EL /la'e status Iwas reser'ed for non-$hristians. D'en the latter group howe'er . . . had some prospect of release in e9change for $hristians held y rulers of Algiers, Tunis, and other =editerranean =uslim powers.IE2 &ut though the practice of ensla'ing the 'an@uished was eyond the limit of wars among Western peoples and only practiced pro'isionally in Dast-West conflicts,

The race of =umanism 2White4 !sian4 South !sian4 and !rab5 could not ha'e produced itself without the simultaneous production of that wal"ing destruction which ecame "nown as the &lac". *ut another way, through chattel
the aseness of the option was not de ated when it came to the African. sla'ery the world ga'e irth and coherence to oth its 8oys of domesticity and to its struggles of political discontentA and with these 8oys and struggles the <uman was orn, ut not efore it murdered the &lac", forging a sym iosis etween the political ontology of <umanity and the social death of &lac"s.

This is a flawed understanding . there is no alliance between the East and the West . there is no common ontological category of White and !rab . their conception of modernity masks orientalist violence and fails to e*plain Western sub1ectivity $/adi and Saghaye0+iria -< (_)oad Izadi V doctoral student in communication, and __<a"imeh /aghaye-&iria V masters student in communication, oth at %/-, !LLK, .A +iscourse Analysis of Dlite American 7ewspaper Dditorials: The $ase of Iran>s 7uclear *rogram,0 httpF))www.campaigniran.org)casmii)files)J"$0 analysisOeliteOamericanOpapers.pdf5 ))(&
An important characteristic of Orientalist discourse is its reliance on /aid, Orientalism, inary language (/aid, 21KF6. According to

as a style of thought, is a dichotomous Western world'iew ased on Ian ontological and epistemological distinction (p. !6 etween the so-called Orient and the West. /ardar (21116 argues that such a dichotomy is t Gthe life force of Western self0identificationH (p. 2E6. In addition to using a dichotomous language, Orientalism uses an essentialist discourse, uni'ersalizing certain traits and characteristics to the Orient and the Islamic World (/aid, 21KF6. /aid considers the numerous writers, no'elists, 8ournalists, philosophers, political
theorists, historians, economists, and imperial administrators, who ha'e accepted the asic OrientalCOccidental distinction as the foundation for their wor" concerning the Orient, as Orientalists. =ost significant for this study, /aid says, I .The =iddle Dast e9perts who ad'ise 3-./.5 policyma"ers almost to a person0 (p. E!26. According to =acfie (!LLL6,

are imbued with Orientalism, Orientalism has come to signify an ideology

8ustifying and accounting for Western imperialism . The notion of di'iding the glo
structuring principle in all human language is that of inary oppositions.

e into dichotomous categories originates from a structuralist 'iew of language (de /aussure, 21M16. de /aussure argues that the uni'ersal

%anguage, 'iewed as a totality and as a social construction, is formed y the meanings assigned to o 8ects and y those o 8ects> relationship to their opposites, for e9ample, lac" 'ersus white, man 'ersus woman, and so on. O 8ects are understood as to what they are not. Therefore, a dichotomous system go'erns the formation of language, and the numerous possi ilities of meaning are restricted. According to /witzer,
=c7amara, and Ryan (21116, news narrati'es are primarily ased on inary signs, reducing reality to I .discrete, dichotomous Pfacts>0 (p. EE6. /witzer et al. contend that inary language and the tendency to define the world in terms of opposites pro'ide the sociocultural foundation of ideology. /imilarly, /aid (21KF6 argues that the

process of identity formation and maintenance in e'ery culture entails the e9istence of I .another, different and competing alter ego0 (p. EE26. /aid argues that, in the process of Western self-presentation, Orientalism is constructed as the WestPs alter ego. The inary 'oca ulary of Orientalism includes Dast 'ersus West, despotism 'ersus democracy, cruelty 'ersus fair treatment, irrational 'ersus rational, and cunning 'ersus trust (&aldwin, %onghurst, =c$rac"en, Og orn, [ /mith, !LLL, p. 2K26. &y the a solute fi9ing of the meaning of the Orient, Orientalism functions as a )oucaultean discourse of power and domination (/aid, 21KF6. :an +i8"Ps (211F 6 I .ideological s@uare0 (p. EE6
e9plains the dichotomous character of the pre'ailing discourses in societies. The ideological s@uare gets its la el from the four dimensions that ma"e it up and acts as a 8ustification for the presence of ine@uality in the society y polarizing ingroups and out-groups through a dou le process of emphasis and mitigation. Ideological discourses emphatically present the good propertiesCactions of I .us0 and the ad propertiesCactions of I .them0. The discourse also mitigates the ad propertiesCactions of the in-group and the good propertiesCactions of the out-group. :an +i8" (211M6 maintains that ideologies are often articulated on the asis of the ideological s@uare.

=ow we frame the issue of race shapes perspective and action . they reproduce violence >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
Thus, a paradigm is the set of shared understandings that permits us to distinguish those facts that matter in the solution of a pro lem from those facts that do not. As #uhn writes, 3i5n the a sence of a paradigm or some candidate for paradigm, all of the facts that could possi ly pertain to the de'elopment of a gi'en science are li"ely to seem e@ually rele'ant. As a result, early fact-gathering is a far more nearly random acti'ity than the one that su se@uent scientific de'elopment ma"es familiar.F >aradigms thus define

relevancy. $n so doing4 paradigms control fact-gathering and in'estigation. +ata-gathering efforts and research are focused on understanding the facts and circumstances that the rele'ant paradigm teaches us are important.1 *aradigms are crucial in the
de'elopment of science and "nowledge ecause, y setting oundaries within which pro lems can e understood, they permit detailed in@uiry into these pro lems. In #uhnHs words, a Iparadigm forces scientists to in'estigate some part of nature in a detail and depth that would otherwise e unimagina le.HI 2L Indeed, it is this depth of research that e'entually yields anomalies and discontinuities and, ultimately, the necessity to de'elop new paradigms. <owe'er, as

a paradigm ecomes the widely accepted way of thin"ing and of producing "nowledge on a su 8ect, it tends to e9clude or ignore alternati'e facts or theories that do not fit the e9pectations produced y the paradigm.22 #uhn uses the concept of Inormal scienceI to descri e the ela oration of the paradigm and the solution of pro lems that the paradigm allows us to percei'e. ! /cientists and researchers spend almost all of their time engaged in normal science,
conducting their research under the rules prescri ed y the paradigm and attempting to sol'e pro lems cogniza le and deri'a le from the paradigm. <owe'er, normal

science Ioften suppresses fundamental no'elties ecause they are necessarily su 'ersi'e of its asic commitments.I HE As #uhn descri es,

normal science Iseems an attempt to force nature into the performed and relati'ely infle9i le o9 that the paradigm supplies. 7o part of the aim of normal science is to call forth new sorts of phenomenaA indeed those that will not fit the bo* are often not seen at all.IHB !s normal research
progresses in depth and detail within a paradigm4 researchers make une*pected discoveries4 yielding anomalies that the current paradigm does not ade;uately e*plain. $n time4 and in the face of problems not ade;uately e*plained by the paradigm4 scientists are forced to abandon the old paradigm and replace it with some new understanding that better e*plains the observed anomalies.P

e1ect the '!" in order to e*pose the particulari/ed nature of oppression . that solves >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+ I cannot see scholarly efforts to understand and remedy White racism in all its forms as a Izerosum game,I in which efforts to understand other forms of White racism somehow ta"e away from efforts to understand and remedy White racism against &lac"s. =y goal is not to ta"e away anything from the study of White racism against &lac"s. Rather, it is to identify some limitations of this study and to add to these studies the study of White racism against other racialized American groups. /tated simply, we must study and understand White racism in all its forms. Indeed, here lie some of the possi ilities for coalition and for sol'ing some of the pro lems that resist solution under our current scholarship. !L1 Another o 8ection that critics might raise to this wor" is that I am merely su stituting another, nearly e@ually oppressi'e paradigm for the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. In other words, the criti@ue would e that I am ad'ocating a
&lac"CWhiteC%atinoCa paradigm which would gi'e %atinosCas more 'isi ility ut would render e'en more in'isi le Asian Americans, 7ati'e Americans, 4ypsies, and other racialized groups. This

is not the case. I ha'e demonstrated that the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm renders in'isi le and irrele'ant the history of e'ery group other than Whites and &lac"s. The rest of us ecome part of the undifferentiated mass of IminoritiesI or Ipeople of color.I While I ha'e used =e9ican-American legal history to
demonstrate the inade@uacy of the &lac"CWhite paradigm, and I ha'e written from my point of 'iew as a %atino scholar, I ha'e used this history to illustrate how much is lost in the ser'ice of normal science and research on race, and how the

introduction of omitted history can present a radically different picture of what we are taught to elie'e a out the story of struggles for e@uality. I "now that 8ust as much is lost regarding Asian-American and 7ati'e American legal history. In li"e manner, scholars must also present this omitted history prominently as part of the de'elopment of constitutional law and other legal su 8ects.!2L =y argument is really an argument against the use of paradigms of race, against orthodo9 attempts to understand the e9periences of e'ery racialized group y analogy to &lac"s, and for the de'elopment of particularized understanding of the histories of each and e'ery racialized group. )inally, I do not see my efforts as di'isi'e. If anything, the paradigm I criticize is di'isi'e ecause of its silencing of many groups. $oalition etween &lac"s and %atinosCas, for e9ample, depends upon %atinosCas eing acti'e participants in de ates a out racism and racial 8ustice. !22 It re@uires mutual understanding of the particularities of each othersH condition and of the particular ways in which White racism affects mem ers of different groups.

,N" TA NS "!SE
Turns the case V li eration is not possi le under their paradigm >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
One can thus discern how the

binary paradigm interferes with liberation and e@uality. If %atinosCas and Asian Americans are presumed to e White (or @uasi-White6 y oth White writers and &lac" writers (a presumption not orne out in the li'ed e9perience of most %atinosCas and Asians6, then our claims to 8ustice will not e heard nor ac"nowledged. Whites can ignore our claims to 8ustice, since we are not &lac" and therefore are not su 8ect to real racism. And &lac"s can ignore our claims, since we are presumed to e aspiring to and ac@uiring Whiteness, and therefore we are not su 8ect to real racism. %atinosCas do not fit the o9es supplied y the paradigm.

,N" $(>!"T/
The lac"-white paradigm distorts history and marginalizes the e9periences of other racialized groups in scholarship >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
Interestingly, #uhn o ser'es that te9t current state of a discipline

oo"s must distort history significantly in order to con'ey the in a linear, coherent way. F Te9t oo"s truncate Ithe scientistHs sense of his disciplineHs history and then proceed to supply a su stitute for what they ha'e eliminated.IH1 In order to do this, te9t oo"s present only a small part of history0the portion of history that authors can easily present as contri uting to the de'elopment and solution of todayHs paradigm pro lems.IL IThe result,I in #uhnHs words, Iis a persistent tendency to ma"e the history of science loo" linear or cumulati'e.H !2 In other words, te9t oo"s distort history to ma"e it appear that the current paradigm, or current "nowledge, is the result of a linear, related series of disco'eries or e'ents in which each su se@uent e'ent is causally lin"ed to the prior e'ents.H This distortion re@uires lea'ing out all of the historical comple9ity and the re'olutionary @uestions and ideas on which
new scientific disco'eries and new paradigms depend. #uhn terms this distortion of history Idepreciation of historical fact.IH Although #uhn suggests that science is more 'ulnera le to te9t oo" distortions of history than other disciplines

insights regarding paradigms, Inormal e9tremely useful in e9plaining the persistent focus of race scholarship on &lac"s and Whites, and the resulting omission of %atinosCas, Asian Americans, 7ati'e Americans, and other racialized groups from such scholarship. If science
science,I and te9t oo"s are as a discipline is more 'ulnera le to te9t oo" distortions of history, I elie'e this is only a matter of degree, as law, through its reliance on precedent, is also highly dependent on paradigms. #uhn recognized as much when he used 8udicial precedent, and su se@uent decisions ased on precedent, as an e9ample of paradigm ela oration. !M Although #uhn felt that the e9tent to which the social sciences had de'eloped paradigms was an open @uestion, !J I suggest in this Article that race scholarship oth inside and outside of law is dominated y a inary paradigm of race. %i"e science te9t oo"s, constitutional law te9t oo"s also distort history for the sa"e of a paradigmatic, linear presentation of the e'olution of e@uality doctrines.

ecause of the assumed o 8ecti'ity of scientific in@uiry, !G I elie'e his

The lac"-white inary perpetuates the marginalization of other racialized groups >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+ In addition, the paradigm dictates that all other racial identities and groups in the -nited /tates are est understood through the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. Only a few writers e'en recognize that
they use a &lac"CWhite paradigm as the frame of reference through which to understand racial relations.!F =ost

writers simply assume the importance and correctness of the paradigm, and lea'e the reader grasping for whate'er significance descriptions of the &lac"CWhite relationship ha'e for other people of color. As I shall discuss, ecause the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm is so widely accepted, other racialized groups li"e %atinosCas, Asian Americans, and 7ati'e Americans are often

marginali/ed or ignored altogether. As #uhn writes, Kthose that will not fit the bo* are often not seen at all.K!1 Their focus on the lac"-white inary is not neutral V it renders other non-white groups passi'e spectators >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
<ac"erHs 8ustification for this focus is that I3i5n many respects, other groups find themsel'es sitting as spectators, while the two prominent players try to wor" out how or whether they can coe9ist with one another.IEM This 8ustification perpetuates the marginalization of the already marginalized. <ac"er and so many other writers

on race decline to understand that, y focusing only on &lac"s and Whites, they oth produce and replicate the elief that there are only Itwo prominent players,I &lac" and White, in de ates a out race. These writers thus render other non-White groups invisible and implicitly characterize them as passi'e, 'oluntary spectators. /uch characterization is contrary to the history of these groups.EJ Their framing causes e9clusion and marginalization V they render other people of color to the periphery >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
In his chapter on I=alcolm X and &lac" Rage,I West descri es =alcolm XHs fear of cultural hy ridity, the lurring of racial oundaries that occurs ecause of racial mi9ture.I =alcolm X saw such hy ridity, e9emplified y mulattoes, as Isym ols of wea"ness and confusion.IJHM WestHs commentary on =alcolm XHs 'iews gi'es us another statement of the inary paradigm: IThe 'ery idea

of not Hfitting inH the -./. discourse of positi'ely 'alued whiteness and negati'ely de ased lac"ness meant one was su 8ect to e9clusion and marginalization y whites and lac"s.IJJ Although the conte9t of this @uotation is a out &lac"CWhite mulattoes, WestHs o ser'ation is crucial to an understanding of why %atinosCas, neither claiming to e, nor eing, White or &lac", are perpetually e9cluded and marginalized. The reified inary structure of discourse on race lea'es no room for people of color who do not fit the rigid &lac" and White o9es supplied y the paradigm. )urthermore, most %atinosCas are mi9ed race mestizos or mulattoes, who therefore em ody the "ind of racial mi9ture that =alcolm X, and, I would argue, society generally tends to re8ect. WestHs o ser'ation a out mi9ed-race people who do not fit within traditional A./. discourse a out race applies in full measure to %atinosCas. Their paradigm masks colonialism . turns the case >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+ The paradigmatic, truncated presentation of racial and legal history that results from the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm ensures that most readers will ne'er learn anything a out

=e9ican American struggles for e@uality. A presentation of this omitted history, on the other hand, would
present law students with a more comple9 and accurate sense of the scope of racism and the multiple struggles mounted against it. $ases such as %opez, =endez and <ernandez should e included in e'ery oo" that discusses racism and segregation, especially oo"s on constitutional law. Omit these cases, omit this history, and the 'ast ma8ority of law students (and many law teachers6 will ha'e no clue that the =e9ican-American struggle against segregation has een long and hard-fought in the courts. Omit these cases and most law students will ha'e no clue that the =e9ican American

Omit these cases and we get the story of the struggle for e@uality told only in &lac" and White. We get only the paradigm4 not the picture. I ha'e shown that the tendency to present a linear story of the de'elopment of e@uality doctrines corresponding to the &lac"CWhite paradigm leads to the omission of =e9ican-American history. Ro ert &launer descri es more generally the omission of $hicano history y White scholars, which leads directly to reproduction of the &lac"CWhite paradigm and pu lic ignorance a out %atinosCas: D'en informed Anglos 3and &lac"s5 "now almost nothing a out %a Raza, its historical e9perience, its present situation, its collecti'e moods. And the a'erage citizen doesnHt ha'e the foggiest notion that $hicanos ha'e een lynched in the /outhwest and continue to e a used y the police, that an entire population has een e9ploited economically, dominated politically, and raped culturally. In spite of the racism that attempts to wipe out or, failing that, distort and tri'ialize the history and culture of the colonized, oth e9pert and man in the street are far more aware of the past and present oppression suffered y lac"s. !L2
struggle against segregation has a place in our constitutional history.

The black0white binary is ahistorical and perpetuates the e*clusion of non0 black minorities Sanche/ 'C (;ames /anchez V philosophical logger, GCKC2E, .$reating *luralistic Racial Realities through +e-$oding $olor Terms0, http:CC8ameschasesanchez.wee ly.comC!CpostC!L2ECLGCcreating-pluralistic-racialrealities-through-de-coding-color-terms.html6 CC=+ The false &lac"-White inary intrigues me as a $hicano indi'idual. /tereotypically, race in America is defined through these sole &lac" and White terms ecause, mostly, of our history with sla'ery and $i'il Rights Dra of the 21JLs. These terms ma"e sense for most Americans, and the constant image of racism in our country
typically follows the &lac" manHs plight. This can e e'en seen in schools, where the $hicanosH ci'il rights mo'ement is hardly mentioned if mentioned at all. Oet, if

racism has taught us anything, we ha'e to realize that we cannot stereotype it and cannot hide ehind this inary and not face the reality of racism in !2st century. Therefore, we need more pluralistic approaches to racial realities and need to focus on racial terms that identify people as a heritage and not a color. One pro lem stems from the rhetorical use of .color coding0 races. We already see a use of .color imagery0 in society: certain colors carry different connotations, such as white sym olizing innocence and lac" sym olizing fear (+elgado, $ritical Race Theory: An Introduction, 2M16. And we "now these color connotations
wor", on some le'el, in our treatment of different races. *eople may feel less threatened around a White male than they feel around a &lac"

we li"e to thin" in color. It is logical for us as people to loo" in terms of good and e'il, and so when we try to show the pro lems of racism in society, it is easy for us to show the oppression of the White man on the oppressed &lac" man. This is what I refer to as .color coding,0 placing more emphasis on a people ecause we refer to their race as a color and not a geographic location or a culture. Oet not only is it degrading to refer to people y the color of their s"in, ut it also enefits &lac"s in eing seen as the face of the oppressed. =any critical race theorists elie'e that .if one understood 3the &lac"5 sordid history, one would also understand "now how to
male ecause of his I&lac"I manHs dar"er s"in tones. Therefore, it is easy to conclude why a racial inary e9ists in the first place:

deal with racism against all the other groups0 (+elgado, $ritical Race Theory: An Introduction, KK6. &ut I do not elie'e that is true at all. And though sla'ery is a ma8or reason for this highly-pu licized oppressed group, we ha'e to ree'aluate the conte9t of these color .codes0 and promote pluralistic 'iews of racism through de-emphasizing them. )rom a sociological and psychological perspecti'e, if we understand that people are prone to thin"ing in terms of inaries and also colors, then we ha'e to highlight the races of %atinos, Asians, Indians, and other races through getting rid of these color terms. Realistically, if people
did refer to &lac"s as African-Americans or another term and Whites as Angelo-/a9ons or another term, many people would pro a ly "eep

if our goals are to promote racial realism and pluralistic truths in society, then ta"ing this step would e eneficial for the .non-colored0 minorities. <owe'er, de-coding color terms and calling for pluralistic
their false inary logic, ecause of our history etween these two races, ut it would e a step in the right direction. And approaches do ha'e conse@uences for oth Whites and &lac"s (for lac" of confusion I will "eep referring to these color terms in this article6. )rom a White perspecti'e, this gi'es the ma8ority more social issues and types of oppressed to deal with legally and culturally. Whites could no longer create laws and social measures that synonymously refer to .race0 as &lac", which many $i'il Rights and post-$i'il Rights laws typically do. They

would ha'e to focus more on issues that are not categorized as &lac" pro lems, such as immigration issues and accent ias. This would place more emphasis of contemplating racism in a whole, thin"ing a out how each circumstance pro'ides ad'antages and disad'antages to e'ery minority group. Thus4 from a ma1ority perspective4 Whites
would typically not want to advocate de0coding color terms from a power perspective because they would have to focus on pluralistic racisms showing that all races are e;ual. +ut a problem also arises from +lackPs GminorityH status as well. The ,-'' "ensus shows that +lacks make up 'C.'Q of the !merican population4 while =ispanics make up 'M.<Q 2GState and "ountry @uick 6actsH5. So though =ispanics consist of the larger minority status in !merica4 +lacks typically have the largest advantage in having a public voice and having their oppression be known. Therefore4 one could refer to them as the Gma1ority0minority4H especially in keeping aligned with hegemonic terms. !ll minorities come together under the umbrella of oppression4 but it would be hard to argue against +lack civil rights being more important to society than %atino civil rights or !sian civil rights. $n being the ma1ority0minority4 +lacks would lose the publicity of being the face of civil rights in the theoretical de0coding of color terms. $t would be a disadvantage to their group as a whole to try and advocate these ideas because then we would not see them as the most oppressed but rather as one type of a minority. The advantages of having most civil right laws refer to the oppressed as +lack would disappear as more broad civil rights issues would take a forefront. Thus one is left to askF if the ma1ority would lose more in advocating de0coding color terms and if the ma1ority0minority would also lose more4 is this idea reasonableR $ would say it is only reasonable if we focus on Grace consciousnessH in a whole without an agenda4 understanding that Grace matters to onePs perception and e*perience of the worldH and thus has to recogni/e all peoples as e;ual in a non0binary 2>eller4 K ace "onsciousness4K 'CM5. $n conte*t of the +lack0White binary4 we

ha'e to consider the .differential racialization thesis,0 which .maintains that each disfa'ored group in this country has een racialized in its own indi'idual way and according to the needs of the ma8ority group at particular times in its history0 (+elgado, $ritical Race Theory: An Introduction, KK6. One could argue that
thus the &lac"-White inary wor"s in Whites and &lac"s fa'or in one degree. Though no ma8ority wants to e la eled as .racist0 or want to deal with the stigma of ha'ing to wor" with the minority, Whites ha'e the ad'antage in this inary thin"ing to only ha'e to deal pu licly with one group, &lac"s, and not Asians, %atinos, or any other racial group. &lac"s, on the opposite end, recei'e the recognition of the eing the face of the oppressed and are thus granted etter access to ci'il rights issues. Thus, a

plural approach to this inary, showing White oppression to all minorities, would force the ma8ority to deal with all groups, especially if we rid oursel'es of color codes.

,N" $(>!"T . !%"O66


The black0white binary negates the e*periences non0black people of color !lcoff4 C (%inda Alcoff V *rofessor at /yracuse -ni'ersity +epartment of *hilosophy, !LLE, .%ATI7OCA/, A/IA7 A=DRI$A7/, A7+ T<D &%A$#VW<ITD &I7ARO0, The ;ournal of Dthics K: MV!K6 CC=+ The discourse of social 8ustice in regard to issues in'ol'ing race has een dominated in the -./. y what many theorists name the I lac"Cwhite paradigm,I which operates to go'ern racial classifications
and racial politics in the -./., most clearly in the formulation of ci'il rights law ut also in more informal arenas of discussion. ;uan *erea defines this paradigm as the conception that race in America consists, either e9clusi'ely or primarily, of only two constituent racial groups, the &lac" and White ... In addition, the

paradigm dictates that all other racial identities and groups in the -nited /tates are est understood through the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm.M <e argues that this paradigm operates e'en in recent anti-racist theory
such as that produced y Andrew <ac"er, $ornel West, and Toni =orrison, though it is e'en clearer in wor"s y li erals such as 7athan 4lazer. Openly espousing this 'iew, =ary )rancis &erry, former chair of the -./. $i'il Rights $ommission, has stated that the -./. is comprised of Ithree nations, one &lac", one White, and one in which people stri'e to e something other than &lac" to a'oid the sting of White /upremacy.IJ To

understand race in this way is to assume that racial discrimination operates e9clusi'ely through anti- lac" racism. Others can e affected y racism4 on this 'iew4 ut the dominance of the lac"Cwhite paradigm wor"s to interpret all other effects as Icollateral damageI ultimately caused y the same phenomena, in oth economic and psychological terms4 in which the gi'en other, whether %atinoCa, Asian American, or something else, is placed in the category of I lac"I or Iclose to lac".I In other words4 there is asically one form of racism, and one continuum of racial identity, along which all groups will e placed. The lac"Cwhite paradigm can
e understood either descripti'ely or prescripti'ely (or oth6: as ma"ing a descripti'e claim a out the fundamental nature of racializations and racisms in the -./., or as prescri ing how race shall operate and thus enforcing the applica ility of the lac"Cwhite paradigm.K /e'eral %atinoCa and Asian American theorists, such as Dlaine #im, 4ary O"ihiro, Dliza eth =artinez, ;uan *erea, )ran" Wu, +ana Ta"agi, and community acti'ists such as &ong <wan #im ha'e argued that the

lac"Cwhite paradigm is not ade@uate, certainly not sufficient, to e9plain racial realities in the -./. They ha'e thus contested its claim to descripti'e ade@uacy, and argued that the hegemony of the lac"Cwhite paradigm in racial thin"ing has had many deleterious effects for %atinoCas and Asian Americans.F In this paper, I will summarize and discuss what I consider
the strongest of these arguments and then de'elop two further arguments. It is important to stress that the lac"Cwhite paradigm does ha'e some descripti'e reach, as I shall discuss, e'en though it is inade@uate when ta"en as the whole story of racism. Asian

Americans and %atinoCas are often categorized and treated in ways that reflect the fact that they ha'e een positioned as either Inear lac"I or Inear white,I ut this is not nearly ade@uate to understanding their ideological representation or political treatment in the -./. One might also argue that, although the lac"Cwhite paradigm is not descripti'ely ade@uate
to the comple9ity and plurality of racialized identities, it yet operates with prescripti'e force to organize these comple9ities into its ipolar schema. $ritics, howe'er, ha'e contested oth the claim of descripti'e ade@uacy as well as prescripti'e efficacy. That is, the paradigm does not operate with effecti'e hegemony as a prescripti'e force. I elie'e these arguments will show that continuing

to theorize race in the -./. as operating e9clusi'ely through the lac"Cwhite paradigm is actually disad'antageous for all people of color in the -./.4 and in

many respects for whites as well (or at least for white union households and the white poor6.

!7$ AT: %I7# T-R7


The mere assertion that their paradigm e9plains the uni@ue histories of other people of color is insufficient and turns the case >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+ >aradigms of race shape our understanding of race and our definition of racial pro lems. The most per'asi'e and powerful paradigm of race in the -nited /tates is the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. I define this paradigm as the conception that race in America consists4 either e9clusi'ely or primarily4 of only two constituent racial groups4 the &lac" and the White. =any scholars of race reproduce this paradigm when they write and act as though only the &lac" and the White races matter for purposes of discussing race and social policy with regard to race. The mere recognition that Iother people of colorI e9ist, without careful attention to their 'oices, their histories, and their real presence, is merely a reassertion of the &lac"CWhite paradigm. If one concei'es of race and racism as primarily of concern only to &lac"s and Whites, and understands Iother people of colorI only through some unclear analogy to the IrealI races, this 8ust restates the inary paradigm with a slight concession to demographics. =y assertion is that our shared understanding of race and racism is essentially limited to this &lac"CWhite inary paradigm.!K This paradigm defines, ut also limits, the set of pro lems that may e recognized in racial discourse. #uhnHs notion of Inormal science,I which further articulates the paradigm and see"s to sol'e the pro lems percei'a le ecause of the paradigm, also applies to Inormal researchI on race.
&. +escri ing the &inary *aradigm of Race

&lac"-white 'iolence does not e9plain the e9perience of %atinos and Asian Americans and the assertion it does turns the case >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
The 'ery conscious recognition and use of White-against-&lac"

racism as a paradigm, while a significant

step towards clarity in the intellectual tools we use to understand racism, also has its limitations. )eagin and :era assert that deeper in@uiry into the paradigmatic relationship is a necessary condition for understanding the racism e9perienced y any other racialized American minority group. They

assert, in essence, that normal, paradigmatic research is the "ey to sol'ing per'asi'e, multiple racisms. The &lac"CWhite paradigm, thus asserted, may ecome an e'en more unyielding and impenetra le form of study and discourse than it was efore. All other racial studies must e dependent upon the results of InormalI science. In my 'iew, )eagin and :era are wrong in asserting that a deeper understanding of
the &lac"-White relationship will necessarily promote understanding of the particularities of other racisms. I agree with )eagin and :era that an understanding of White-against-&lac" racism may e helpful in understanding the deployment of racism against other non-Whites, for e9ample in understanding the persistent use and tolerance of segregation against non-White peoples. <owe'er, an e9clusi'e

focus on the &lac"-White relationship, and the

concomitant marginalization of Iother people of color,I can operate to pre'ent understanding of other racisms and to o scure their particular operation. )or e9ample, the attri ution of foreignness to %atinosCas and Asian Americans, or discrimination on the asis of language or accent, are powerful dynamics as played out against these groups that do not appear to e as significant in the dynamics of White-against-&lac" racism.IG Oppression is always particular V there is no aff offense >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
After three decades of oo"s on White Racism focusing only on racism against &lac"s, one can fairly as" how much anyone understands a out racism against %atinosCas and the particular forms that such racism ta"es? The o 'ious answer is Inot 'ery much.I )or e9ample, one

could study the American &lac"CWhite relationship fore'er and ne'er understand the language and accent discrimination faced y many %atinosCas and Asian Americans.H Today %atinosCas can e fired from their 8o s merely for spea"ing /panish in the wor"place,IJ and Asian Americans can e passed o'er for hire ecause their accent is not @uite right. K +espite nominal statutory protection from such discrimination under the Inational originI pro'isions of Title :II, the courts remain almost uniformly indifferent and find no actiona le discrimination in such cases. The reason for this indifference is that such discrimination does not fit the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm of race discrimination. Redressing the particular forms of discrimination e9perienced y %atinosCas, Asian Americans, 7ati'e Americans and other racialized groups re@uires 'ery careful in@uiry into the particular histories of these groups and the forms of discrimination they ha'e e9perienced. &ut
recognition of the importance and particularity of groups other than &lac"s and Whites re@uires in@uiry well eyond the paradigm, in@uiry eyond the current ounds of Inormal scienceI and research. )rom the point of 'iew of %at$rit studies, then, the

issue ecomes why there is such a rigid and unyielding commitment to an e9clusi'ely &lac"-White understanding of race that is clearly underinclusi'e and inaccurate. /pecifically, they don>t e9plain the history of =e9ican-Americans >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
Ro ert &launer, writing in 21K!, recognized and forcefully criticized

the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm.IH <is criti@ue may e applied generally to scholars who ha'e em raced and reified the inary paradigm while ignoring greater actual racial comple9ity. &launer noted that =e9ican Americans cannot e understood within the confines of the &lac"CWhite paradigm nor the model of immigration and assimilation: The encounter etween =e9ican-Americans and the -nited /tates is sui generis, it cannot e forced into the ethnic model of immigrationassimilation nor into the category of lac"Cwhite relations. That is why $hicanos, painfully aware of their uni@ue history, resent and resist eing classified, interpreted, or IunderstoodI through analogs with the Afro-American. 21

The assertion that their understanding is universal reproduces e*clusion >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
=y o 8ection to the state of most current

scholarship on race is simply that most of this scholarship claims uni'ersality of treatment while actually descri ing only part of its su 8ect, the relationship etween &lac"s and Whites. Race in the -nited /tates means more than 8ust &lac" and White. It also refers to %atinoCa, Asian, 7ati'e American, and other racialized groups. Accordingly, oo"s titled IRace in AmericaI or IWhite RacismI that only discuss &lac"ness and Whiteness claim a uni'ersality of scope that they do not deli'er. These oo"s offer a paradigmatic rendering of their su 8ect that e9cludes important portions of ci'il rights history. Authors of such oo"s need to e aware that they promulgate a inary paradigm of race that operates to silence and render invisible %atinosCas, Asian Americans and 7ati'e Americans. Accordingly, they reproduce a serious harm. acism is always particular . blackness is not a universal heuristic >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
There are at least three reasons, howe'er, why an

e9clusi'e focus on &lac"s and Whites is not 8ustified. )irst, it is important to wor" to eradicate all racism, not 8ust the racism e9perienced y &lac"s. /econd, it is wrong to assume that racism against %atinosCas is simply a less 'irulent form of the same racism e9perienced y &lac"s. As &launer descri ed, racism against %atinosCas has a different genesis. It may also e different in "ind in ways that are 'ery important. )or e9ample, &lac"s may or may not e'er e9perience the language and accent discrimination faced y many %atinosCas. )inally, our national demographics are changing significantly.
One cannot simply ignore the concerns of an increasingly large and su ordinated group of %atinosCas fore'er. A society is 8ust only if e'eryone can participate in it on e@ual terms.

The claim that the e*perience of blacks e*plains the e*periences of other people of color perpetuates e*clusion >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+
*aradigmatic descriptions and study of

White racism against &lac"s, with only cursory mention of Iother people of color,I marginalizes all people of color y grouping them, without particularity, as somehow analogous to &lac"s. IOther people of colorI are deemed to e9ist only as une9plained analogies to &lac"s. Thus, scholars encourage uncritical readers to

continue to assume the paradigmatic importance of the &lac"CWhite relationship and to ignore the e9periences of other Americans who also are su 8ect to racism in profound ways.

,N" !TF 6O"AS ON +%!"3NESS #OO&


Theres no offense . our argument is that exclusive focus on blackness is bad >erea 7< (;uan ). *erea V *rofessor of %aw at %oyola -ni'ersity $hicago, 2LCE2C1K, .The &lac"CWhite &inary *aradigm of Race: The 7ormal /cience of American Racial Thought0, http:CCscholarship.law. er"eley.eduCcgiC'iewcontent.cgi? articleZ2JLM[conte9tZcalifornialawre'iew6 CC=+ One might o 8ect that I am distorting history y suggesting that sla'ery and the e9perience of &lac" Americans has not een of central importance in the formation of American society. I elie'e this ob1ection misunderstands my argument. There can e no @uestion, I thin", that
sla'ery and the mistreatment of &lac"s in the -nited /tates were crucial uilding loc"s of American society. !G The fact that the te9t of the $onstitution protects sla'ery in so many places demonstrates the importance of sla'ery in the foundation of the country.! M The constitutional, statutory and 8udicial attempts to create more e@uality for &lac"s,

=y argument is not that this history should not e an important focus of racial studies. Rather, my argument is that the e9clusi'e focus on the de'elopment of e@uality doctrines ased solely on the e9perience of &lac"s, and the e9clusi'e focus of most scholarship on the &lac"-White relationship, constitutes a paradigm which o scures and pre'ents the understanding of other forms of ine@uality, those e9perienced y non-White, non-&lac" Americans. The &lac"CWhite inary paradigm, y defining only &lac"s and Whites as rele'ant participants in ci'il rights discourse and struggle, tends to produce and promote the e9clusion of other racialized peoples, including %atinosCas, Asian Americans and 7ati'e Americans, from this crucial discourse which affects us all. This e9clusion is oth the power and the stricture of the &lac"CWhite inary paradigm. Its power deri'es from the fact that a limited su 8ect of in@uiry ma"es possi le the study of the &lac"-White relationship in e9traordinary detail and with great insight. Its stricture, howe'er, is that it has limited se'erely our understanding of how White racism operates with particularity against other racialized peoples. )urthermore, the inary paradigm renders the particular histories of other racialized peoples irrele'ant to an
imperfect as these all ha'e een, correspond to the history of mistreatment of &lac"s. understanding of the only racism-White racism against &lac"s-that the paradigm defines to e important. This percei'ed irrele'ance is why the history of %atinosCas, Asian Americans, and 7ati'e Americans is so fre@uently missing from the te9ts that structure our thin"ing a out race.

!"$!% $&ENT$T8 >O%$T$"S 6O"AS +!&

(ODE(ENT 6!$%S 000 &$SAN$T8 000 'N"


&isunity in their movement is inevitable 000 identity politics cant overcome lots of differences (inow4 7M (=artha, *rofessor of %aw, <ar'ard %aw /chool, ./*DD$<: 7ot Only for =yself: Identity, *olitics, and %aw,0 The $olin Ruagh Thomas OH)allon =emorial %ecture, -ni'ersity of Oregon /chool of %aw, ECKC1J, KM Or. %. Re'. JGK, )all 211J, le9is, Tashma6 The second, related difficulty is the tendency of identity politics to neglect Iintersectionality.I !2 This notion refers to the way in which any particular indi'idual stands at the crossroads of multiple groups. All women also ha'e a raceA all whites also ha'e a genderA and the indi'iduals stand in different places as gender and racial politics con'erge and di'erge. =oreo'er, the meanings of gender are inflected and informed y race, and the meanings of racial identity are similarly influenced y images of gender. &lac" women ha'e confronted male 'iolence and white domination in ways @uite different from the e9periences of either white women or lac" men. !! &lac" women and lac" men ha'e different e9periences and interests, argues #im erle $renshaw. /he pro'ides 'i'id
illustrations with lac" womenHs responses to the o scenity prosecution of the music group ! %i'e $rew and to the /enateHs treatment of Anita <ill during the confirmation hearings for ;ustice $larence Thomas. !E =en who are lac" may

e9perience racial discrimination while also participating in harassment or discriminatory practices toward women. Women who are white may e9perience gender discrimination while simultaneously participating in e9clusionary practices against lac"s and <ispanics. !G 7either gender nor racial identity groupings alone 3_JMJ5 can descri e common e9periences, standpoints, and relationships with others. !M Is it ade@uate, then, to identify a group
representati'e who shares a race with other mem ers, ut a gender only with some of them, or a gender with other mem ers ut a race with only some of them? What a out sharing a gender ut not a religion? The challenge to

a conception of representation ased on one shared trait compounds with the recognition of further intersections. Indi'iduals manifest not only race and gender ut also other ases for potential group mem ership, such as age, disa ility, religion, immigrant status, and se9ual orientation. Then political affiliation, music preferences, fa'ored sports, and other commitments further isect and realign groups. /ome of the intersections seem to in'ite new Iidentity groupings,I such as lac" women, $hicana les ians, and male i"ers. They may also e9pose and
perhaps solidify the self-affirmations of other intersectional groups, such as Iwhite menI or Imarried women.I !J At a minimum, recogni/ing intersectionality threatens to complicate identity politics

with a proliferation of new, and old, identity groupings.

(ODE(ENT 6!$%S 000 &$SAN$T8 000 ,N"


!ny risk of our argument disproves the viability of identity politics 000 everyone has a different conception of who is GblackH (inow4 7M (=artha, *rofessor of %aw, <ar'ard %aw /chool, ./*DD$<: 7ot Only for =yself: Identity, *olitics, and %aw,0 The $olin Ruagh Thomas OH)allon =emorial %ecture, -ni'ersity of Oregon /chool of %aw, ECKC1J, KM Or. %. Re'. JGK, )all 211J, le9is, Tashma6
Oet e'en these complications seem modest compared with the

third difficulty. It stems from contemporary challenges to the asic coherence of group definitions. $onsider the tensions among self-identification, assignment y self-claimed group mem ers, and assignment y self-claimed group opponents. E! Oou say you are a $hoctaw, ut do the $hoctaws say so?
The $atholics claim you, ut do you claim them? The Apartheid go'ernment declared you to e colored, whether you did or not. The gaps and conflicts among self-identification, internal group mem ership

practices, and e9ternal, oppressi'e assignments ha'e gi'en rise to poignant and persistent narrati'es of personal and political pain and struggle. EE These gaps and conflicts also e9pose the inconsistent meanings of group mem ership. The persistent failure of groupased categories to yield consistent applications hints at the defects in their oundaries, their origins, their applications, 3_JMF5 and their ultimate meaningfulness. EG The coherence is further challenged,
though not automatically undermined, y historically shifting oundaries. )re@uent order crossing can render the order uncertain. A Ione-drop ruleI defines who is nonwhite for purposes of much of -./. historyA ut some parts of this country, and other countries at times, ha'e instead recognized other degrees of ancestry, multiple ancestry, or the categories of iracial or multiracial. EM $ertain groups, once defined as nonwhite, secured the status of

whiteness o'er time. EJ $ertain indi'iduals who Icross o'erI from one racial identity to another e9pose the incoherence of the racial categories 8ust as do those who insist on a racial identity that does not match othersH e9pectations. EK /ome people struggle to claim two cultures, ased on ancestry, ut feel alien or re8ected y oth. Tons of intersecting identities will inevitably emerge within their movement (inow4 7M (=artha, *rofessor of %aw, <ar'ard %aw /chool, ./*DD$<: 7ot Only for =yself: Identity, *olitics, and %aw,0 The $olin Ruagh Thomas OH)allon =emorial %ecture, -ni'ersity of Oregon /chool of %aw, ECKC1J, KM Or. %. Re'. JGK, )all 211J, le9is, Tashma6 The idea of indi'idual mem ership in multiple, intersecting groups implies a more profound challenge, though, to identity politics and, indeed, to the especially simplistic focus on the lac"-white racial di'ide. !K It implies ultimately that each person is alone at the uni@ue crossroad of each intersecting group. !F We 3_JMK5 are each the uni@ue mem er of the sets of the endless groupings that touch us, whether called racial, gender, disa ility, family, regional, and so forth. *erhaps for strategic purposes we may choose to affiliate along one or a few lines of group mem ership, ut these lines may shift as our strategies and goals also change. /ociologist
=ary Waters reports on many Americans who choose an ancestry from among options they find in their past and present. !1 As %eon Wieseltier has asserted, IThe American achie'ement is not the multicultural society, it is the multicultural indi'idual.I EL *erhaps the 'ery felt e9perience of multiple affiliations deepens peopleHs desires to elong to one, if only temporarily. E2

(ODE(ENT 6!$%S 000 NO S>$%%ODE

000 'N"

Their cultural movement sustains racial binaries 000 if theyre right that it reflects their true identity4 the rest of society cant possibly get on board #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2KF-2K1, Tashma6
The specific traditions of pu lic in- teraction that were originally products of the agency of sla'es are eing surpassed. They are, as I ha'e already argued, declining now that postsla'e cultures are eing recomposed around

new priorities and opportunities associated with digital media, deindustrialization, and the growth consumerism. The cultural achie'ements pro'o"ed y sla'e life pro'ided more I than the contested
core of American identity: they supplied a platform for o youth cultures, popular cultures, and styles of dissent far from their places of origin. Today they are fractured y the o 'ious di'isions etween north \ and south, y o'erde'eloped and underde'eloped regions of the planet that are eing enforced y the glo alization of commerce and power. They

remain powerful ut the readth of their appeal has created new difficulties. Are they local or glo al forms? To whom, if anyone, do they elong? This chapter suggests that an e9ploration of this large and irre'ersi le change in the life of the Atlantic diaspora and its successor cultures is o'erdue. =ore contro'ersially, it employs a discussion of changing patterns in lac" popular culture to e9plore the continuing impact of fascism \s 8 cultural re'olution on the contemporary world. Against that ac"ground, l f would also li"e to 'iew some ofthe ethical and political
@uestions that ha'e arisen when critically inclined intellectuals ha'e een called upon to acB count for the enduring potency of lac" cultural styles. These ha'e often een outlaw forms that challenge con'entional commentators and demand an end to disinterested and contemplati'e 'arieties of criticism. <owe'er, they ha'e posed e'en greater pro lems for politically engaged critics whose wor"Birrespecti'e of the no le moti'es that generate itBis re'ealed to e inade@uate where it mo'es too swiftly or simplistically to ei- ther condemn or cele rate. What do they ha'e to say a out the currency of iopolitical notions that ear the historic imprint of Riefenstahl and her ecstatic, racialized physicality? An

especially 'i'id 'ersion of these pro lems has ta"en shape where comple9 and morally testing 'emacular forms ha'e appeared recently and elatedly as o 8ects of academic scrutiny. They ha'e een manifest in scholarly discussions of hipBhop and rap, where li eration and 8ustice are still demanded ut ha'e ta"en a ac" seat in recent years to re'olutionary conser'atism, misogyny, and stylized tales of se9ual e9cess. These cultural e9pressions ha'e een produced at a time
when people seem less sure than they once were a out what defines the cultural particularity they still neeiil to claim. Their 'ernacular arts precipitate and dramatize intracommunal conflicts o'er the meanings

and forms of identity and freedom. They pro8ect a growing lac" of consensus a out what the defining cultural or ethnic a core of lac"ness should encompass. The resulting pro lems are multiplied y the fact that the swift and e9traordinary glo al transformation triggered y hiphop was wholly unanticipated. With this unforeseen planetary change on our side, lac"
critics ha'e displayed a special reluc- tance to gi'e up the authority to e9pound and translate that we fought so hard to attain. <owe'er, we are still hea'ily dependent upon the disrepu- ta le authenticity of 'ernacular forms. /ome critical discourses ha'e e'en implied that only the 'ernacular can confer the medal of representati'eness upon a range of other, less o 'iously authentic, cultural acti'ities. These pro lems of 'alue, of 8udgment, and of course of class di'ision = inside the racial collecti'e ha'e een compounded in a time of great uncer- tainty a out the limits of particularity and solidarity.

Though it has won wide acceptance, the idea that 'ernacular forms em ody a special .ethnic0 essence has een most regularly articulated y critics who are comforta le with the a solutist definitions of culture I ha'e criticized. In their hands, the lac" 'ernacular can ecome a piece of intellectual property o'er which il they alone hold effecti'e copyright. Their e9positions of it specify the elusi'e @ualities of racialized difference that only they can claim to e a le to comprehend and to paraphrase, if not e9actly to decode, The desire to mo- nopolize the practice of these
'alua le transcultural s"ills and to engage in the opportunities for social regulation that they in'ite has furnished some critics with an e'en greater in'estment in the uni@ueness, purity, and power of the 'ernacular.

(ODE(ENT 6!$%S 000 NO S>$%%ODE

000 ,N"

This is offense for us 000 backlash to their movement results in more oppression (inow4 7M (=artha, *rofessor of %aw, <ar'ard %aw /chool, ./*DD$<: 7ot Only for =yself: Identity, *olitics, and %aw,0 The $olin Ruagh Thomas OH)allon =emorial %ecture, -ni'ersity of Oregon /chool of %aw, ECKC1J, KM Or. %. Re'. JGK, )all 211J, le9is, Tashma6 *ersonal testimony a out oppression displaces analysis of social structures that produce and maintain it. 12 Identity politics tends to locate the pro lem in the identity group rather than the social relations that produce identity groupings. 1! $ornel West o ser'es: Iwe confine discussions a out race in America to
the Hpro lemsH lac" people pose for whites rather than consider what this way of 'iewing lac" people re'eals a out us as a nation.I 1E /erious discussion of race in America, he argues, Imust egin not with the pro lems of lac" people ut with the flaws of American society - flaws rooted in historic ine@ualities and longstanding cultural stereotypes.I 1G Identity

politics is likely to reinforce white peopleHs conception of lac"s as IthemI rather than pressing home e'eryoneHs mutual dependence and relationships. 1M Identity politics also tends to not only produce defensi'eness among white men, ut also to ma"e it easier for white men to a andon and e'en lame people of color and women of all sorts for their circumstances. &lame should not e placed on identity politics for the indifference or selfishness of those who wish it
would go away, ut nor should those who pursue identity politics e e9cused of its effects.

Their movement is doomed to fail 000 empirics prove that they pave the way for ultra0conservatism #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2!-2G, Tashma6
These groups will need to e persuaded 'ery carefully that there is something worthwhile to e gained from a deli erate renunciation of IraceI as the asis for elonging to one another and acting in concert. They will ha'e to e reassured that the dramatic gestures in'ol'ed in turning against racial o ser'ance can e accomplished without 'iolating the precious forms of solidarity and community that ha'e een created y their protracted su ordination along racial lines. The idea that action against racial hierarchies can proceed more effecti'ely when it has een purged of any lingering respect for the idea of .raceI is one of the most persuasi'e cards in this political and ethical suit. <istorians, sociologists, and

theorists of politics ha'e not always appreciated the significance of these sometimes-hidden, modern countercultures formed y long and rutal e9periences of racialized su ordination through sla'ery and colonialism and since. The minor, dissident traditions that ha'e een constituted
against the odds amid suffering and disposses- sion ha'e een o'erloo"ed y the ignorant and the indifferent as well as the acti'ely hostile. /ome initiates, who should certainly "now etter, ha'e e'en re8ected and despised these formations as insufficiently respecta le, no le, or pure. 7onetheless, 'ernacular cultures and the stu orn social mo'ements

that were uilt upon their strengths and tactics ha'e contri uted important moral and political resources to modern struggles in pursuit of freedom, democracy, and 8ustice.Their powerful influences ha'e left their imprint on an increasingly glo alized popular culture. Originally tempered y the ghastly e9tremities of racial sla'ery, these dissident cultures remained strong and supple long after the formalities of emancipation, ut they are now in decline and their prospects cannot e good. They are already eing transformed eyond recognition y the une'en effects of glo alization and planetary commerce in lac"ness. Where the dangers represented y this historic decline ha'e een recognized, the defense of communal interests has often mo ilized the fan- tasy of a frozen culture, of arrested cultural de'elopment. *articularity can e maintained and com1munal interests protected if they are fi9ed in their most authentic and glorious postures of resistance. This understanda le ut inade@uate response to the prospect of losing one>s identity reduces cultural traditions to the simple process of in'ariant repetition. It has helped to secure deeply conser'ati'e notions that supply real comfort in dismal times
ut do little 8ustice either to the fortitude and the impro'isa- tional s"ills of the sla'es and their em attled descendants or to the com- ple9ities of contemporary cultural life. We need to understand the appeal of the idea of tradition in this conte9t. Where it is understood as little more than a closed list of rigid rules that can e applied consciously without interpretation or attention to par- ticular historical conditions, it is a ready ali i for authoritarianism

rather than a sign of cultural 'ia ility or ethical confidence. Indeed, the defense of tradition on these grounds can, as we shall see, open a door to ultraconser'ati'e forms of political culture and social regulation. ln identifying these pro lems and mo'ing eyond them, T shall try to
show that the comfort zone created in the fading aura of those wonderful cultures of dissidence is already shrin"ing and that the cultures themsel'es are not as strong, comple9, or effecti'e as they once were. They do still oc- casionally flic"er into spectacular life, urging desperate people to stand up for their rights and gi'ing them a potent political and moral language with which to do it. <owe'er, there is no reason to suppose that they will e a le to withstand all the destructi'e effects of glo alization and localiza- tion, let alone the corrosi'e power of su stanti'e political disagreements that ha'e arisen o'er the nature of lac" particularity and its significance relati'e to other contending identity-claims: religion, se9uality, generau tion, gender, and so on. The dissident traditions inaugurated y the struggle against sla'ery, a struggle for recognition as human rather than chattel, agent and person rather than o 8ect, ha'e already een changed y translocal forces, oth political and economic, that ear hea'ily on the sym olic currency of Irace.I This situation is another fundamental part ofthe crisis of raciology. lt pro'ides <irther inducements to recognize that the current disruption of race-thin"ing presents an important opportunity. There is here a chance to rea" away from the dangerous and destructi'e patterns that were esB ta lished when the rational a surdity of ]\race0 was ele'ated into an essenu tial concept and endowed with a uni@ue power to oth determine history and e9plain its selecti'e unfolding. lf we are tempted to e too cele ratory in assessing the positi'e possi- ilities created y these changes in race-thin"ing and the resulting conti' sion that has en'eloped raciology, we need only remind oursel'es that the effects of racial discourses

ha'e ecome more unpredicta le as the @uality of their claims upon the world ha'e ecome more desperate. This is a deli- cate situation, and IraceI remains nssile material. $dentity politics approach fails 000 several factors make their movement incompatible with societal acceptance #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 1K-1F, Tashma6
We ha'e seen that the uncertain and di'ided world we inha it has made racial identity matter in no'el and powerful ways. &ut we should not ta"e the concept of identity and its multiple associations with .race0

and raciology for granted. The term .identity0 has recently ac@uired great resonance ,

oth inside and outside the academic world. It offers far more than an o 'ious, common-sense way of tal"ing a out indi'iduality, community, and solidarity and has pro'ided a means to understand the interplay etween su 8ecti'e e9periences of the world and the cultural and historical settings in which those fragile, mean- ingful su 8ecti'ities are formed. Identity has e'en een ta"en into the 'is- cera of postmodern commerce, where the goal of planetary mar"eting promotes not 8ust the targeting of o 8ects and ser'ices to the identities of particular consumers ut the idea that any product whatsoe'er can e suf- fused with identity. Any commodity is open to eing . randed0 in ways that solicit identification and tty to orchestrate identity.5 In this chapter l want to show that there is more at sta"e in the

current interest in identity than we often appreciate. I would also li"e to unco'er some of the
comple9ities that ma"e identity a useful idea to e9plore if we can only lea'e its o 'iousness ehind and recognize that it is far from e- ing the simple issue that its currency in oth go'ernment and mar"etplace ma"es it appear to e. Where the word ecomes a concept, identity has een made central to a num er of urgent theoretical and political issues, not least elonging, ethnicity, and nationality. Racialized conflicts, for e9- ample, are now understood y many

commentators as a pro lem of the incompati le identities that mar" out deeper conflicts etween cultures and ci'ilizations. This diagnosis sets up or perhaps confirms the e'en more widespread
elief that the forms of political conflict with which racial di'i- sion has een associated are somehow unreal or insu stantial, secondary or peripheral. This is something I intend to dispute. The new popularity

of identity as an interpretati'e de'ice is also a result ofthe e9ceptional plural- ity of meanings the term can harness. These di'erse inflectionsBsome of which are adapted from highly specialized academic usageB are condensed and interwo'en as the term circulates. We are constantly informed that to share an identity
is to e onded on the most fundamental le'els: national, Iracial,0 ethnic, regional, and local. ldentity is always ounded and particular. It mar"s out the di'isions and su sets in our social li'es and helps to define the oundaries etween our une'en, local attempts to ma"e sense of the world. 7o ody e'er spea"s of a human identity. The

concept orients thin"ing away from any engagement with the asic , anti-anthro- pological sameness that is the premise of this oo". As ;udith &utler puts it in her thoughtful reflection on the
concept: .it seems that what we e9pect from the term identity will e cultural specificity, and that on occasion we e'en e9pect identity and g'ecyficity to wor" interchangea ly.0! The same trou ling @ualities are e'ident where the term has een emB ployed to articulate contro'ersial and potentially \illuminating themes in modern social and political theory. It has een a core component in the scholarly 'oca ulary designed to promote critical reflection upon who we are and what we Want. ldentity helps us to comprehend the formation of that perilous pronoun .we0 and to rec"on with the patterns of inclusion and e9clusion that it cannot help creating. This situation is made more difficult once identity

is recognized as something of a pro lem in itself and there y ac@uires an additional

weighting. $alculating the relationship etween identity and difference , sarneness and otherness is an intrinsically political operation. It happens when political collecti'ities reflect on what ma"es
their inding connections possi le. It is a fundamental part of how they comprehend their "inshipBwhich may e an imaginary connection, though nonetheless powerful for that.

. 3elly proves our argument #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2FE-2FG, Tashma6
DRO/, TRA7ATO/, A7+ DRO/ A4AI7 /ome si9 years after he first appeared, #elly

remains a gifted producer and artist whose career helps to periodize important changes in African-American and lac" Atlantic cultures. <e has een more faithful to the profane muses of rhythm and lues than ha'e many of
his fellow prac- titioners of the hy rid offspring of soul and rap. <is formal, almost oper- atic opposition of the interloc"ed, warring 'oices of an unhappy lac" couple on /par"le>s classic .&e $areful0 comes off especially well when compared with the wor"s of his principal competitors: =issy Dlliott, Dry"ah &adu, and the other emerging stars of . lac" alternati'e0 pop pro- gramming. ln this case, howe'er, his citation and adaptation of the earlier tune were not moti'ated y a desire to engage in the archaeology of li'ing .interte9tual0 traditions. They wor"ed

li"e a stolen sample or a orrowed instrumental riff to inde9 the interperformati'e relationships that constitute a counterculture. %i"e /ean .*uff +addy0 $om s, who has uilt an impressi'e career from similar
gestures, #elly made the past audi le in the here and now ut %u serr'ienthz. =usical history was conscripted into the ser'ice of the present./Tlnli"e, say, $harlie &altimore>s contemptuous re- wor"ing ofthe O5ays> .)or the %o'e of =oney0 into shoc"ing cele ration I of all that money can uy, #ellyls su 'ersi'e transformation of an old tune cut in the year that he was orn etrayed the oedipal impulses that are a cornerstone of this co'ert modern tradition. <is creati'e

gesture, which managed to e simultaneously oth insu ordinate and re'erent, e9pressed, in a small way, the contraction and remodeling of the lac" pu lic sphere. These processes ha'e de'eloped closely in step with what might e termed the narrati'e shrin"age of the rhythm and lues idiom: one of the more pernicious effects of the preeminence of a hip-hop culture that has een dominated y grim tales of se9, drugs, and gun play . #elly>s cool pose was entirely complicit
with what ell hoo"s identified as the .life threatening cho"e hold (that6 patriarchal masculinity imposes on lac" men.0] It could e argued that the e9plicit repudiation of social amelioration that #elly>s words contained con'eyed in its small way something pro- found a out the imploded contemporary character of lac" political cul- ture, which finds it

progressi'ely difficult to find a political tone at all. <owe'er, I want to suggest something different and
slightly more com- ple9. #elly>s repudiation of progress was nota le for the way it was com- i ined with an unusually fer'ent endorsement of the pursuit of se9ual l pleasure. That com ination of sorrow with anticipation and compensation i was a special e'ent. It pro'ided a precise historical em odiment of the dismal process in which pu lic politics ecame unspea"a le and a

ody-centered iopolitics egan to ta"e hold. R. #elly>s great popularity was one of many signs that the lac" ody politic was regularly eing represented internally and e9ternally as an inte- gral ut .frea"y0 ody. Wild, intense se9ual acti'ity etween
consenting heterose9ual adults in pri'ate was the residual, transcoded trace of earlier i political re ellions. The androcentric and phallocratic presentation and representation of heterose9ual coupling at which #elly has continued to e9cel were the sign and the limit of a different charisma and a different utopia from those that #enny &ur"e and his si lings had in mind in $hi- cago thirty years ago when they cut the original 'ersion of .Ooh $hild.02] Their choice ofthe name ./tairsteps0 for their pre-5ac"son family @uintet had suggested upward momentum, racial ele'ation, and communal mo'e- ment toward something . righter,0 something closer to the hea'ens, if not to the 4od of their Islamic faith.

Their attempt to create a new racial identify 1ust serves to strengthen the old identity #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. !22-!2!, Tashma6
This apprehension of a deep change in the location and significance of Africa for the political imaginary of its most recent diaspora is also eing registered at a time when lac" communities inside the o'erde'eloped zones are e9periencing oth an unprecedented degree of internal differen- tiation and new le'els of economic immiseration. The metropolitan areas where those populations ha'e een concentrated can e characterized y the demise of that common lifeworld once shared y the poor and the pri'ileged. These groups no longer cluster in integrated crossuclass com- munities and may no longer e'en reside in the same physical space, let alone dwell in the same undifferentiated .culture0 or e9perience racism in essentially the same ways. This di'ergence in lac" e9perience and history has fed the underlying crisis in understanding racial particularity s"etched in earlier chapters. Increasingly desperate assertions of a

common, in'ari- ant racial identity cannot plausi ly e pro8ected through the idea of a

common cultureA rather, they find alternati'e e9pression in a significant return to aspects of an older racial science. Identity, understood only as sameness, is once more lodged in and signified y special properties discerni le in lac" odies. Interest in the iochemical
properties of melanin and in the wor"ings of distinct racialized forms of memory ha'e een two ofthe most prominent themes in this re'i'al. The iological codes of the eighteenth century ha'e een rought ac"

in in'erted form. %ea'ened with 7ew Age and occult themes, they ha'e

een made to produce tantalizing glimpses of a redempti'e and compensatory lac" superiority. These tropes are part of a powerful new racial poetics, ut it has not een sufficient to complete a cosmetic procedure capa le of concealing the scars of intracommunal di'i- sion that are 'isi le through economic lenses and confirmed y disputes surrounding the moral, eha'ioral, and carnal rather than corporeal attri - utes of lac"ness. Well-pu licized panics o'er the decadence, misog8my, and nihilism of slac"ness, gangsta rap, ooty rap, and the su 'ersi'e 'ul- garity of the 5amaican dancehall (which now circulates in eddies far from its $ari ean ghetto sources6 ha'e pro'ided 'alua le insights into the class- and genderB ased pathologies of the lac" ody politic.

)raming .e'eryone else0 as the enemy fails --- identity politics mo'ements empirically fail Smith, 1G (/haron, .=ista"en identityBor can identity politics li erate the oppressed?,0 International /ocialism, :olume J!, /pring 211G, http:CCwww.is8.org.u"C?idZE22, Tashma6 The politics of identity cannot point the way towards uilding the "ind of mo'ement which can actually end oppression. In fact, among e9isting organisations founded on the asis of identity politics, the tendency has een towards fragmentation and disintegration, rather than growth. =ore often than not among mo'ements organised on the asis of identity politics the enemy includes Pe'eryone else>Bpercei'ed as an amorphous, ac"ward lo which ma"es up the rest of society. Instead of seeing the class struggle as a way to o'ercome oppression, the wor"ing class is seen as a arrier to this process. At its heart, identity politics is a re8ection of the notion that the wor"ing class can e the agent for social change, and a pessimism a out the possi ility for significant, ne'er mind re'olutionary, social transformation. As
/tanley Aronowitz argued in his oo", The *olitics of Identity: $lass, $ulture, /ocial =o'ements:

(ODE(ENT 6!$%S 000 >! !%8S$S 000 'N"


Even if they win their movement is unified4 it will inevitably fail 000 members depend on their victim status 000 results in paralysis (inow4 7M (=artha, *rofessor of %aw, <ar'ard %aw /chool, ./*DD$<: 7ot Only for =yself: Identity, *olitics, and %aw,0 The $olin Ruagh Thomas OH)allon =emorial %ecture, -ni'ersity of Oregon /chool of %aw, ECKC1J, KM Or. %. Re'. JGK, )all 211J, le9is, Tashma6
&esides strengthening the categories and methods of oppression, identity

politics may freeze people in pain and also fuel their dependence on their own 'ictim status as a source of meaning. Wendy &rown has written powerfully a out these dangersA she argues that identity- ased claims re-enact su ordination along the lines of historical su 8ugation. F! This danger arises, in her 'iew, not
only ecause of the ready acceptance of those 'ery 3_JJK5 lines of distinction and oppression in a society that has used them, ut also ecause people ecome in'ested in their pain and suffering, or in her terms,

their Iwounded attachments.I FE /he writes: *oliticized identity, premised on e9clusion and fueled

y the humiliation and suffering imposed y its historically

structured impotence in the conte9t of a discourse of so'ereign indi'iduals, is

as li"ely to seek generalized political paralysis, to feast on generalized political impotence, as it is to see" its own or collecti'e li eration through empowerment. Indeed, it is more li"ely to punish and reproach ... than to find 'enues of self-affirming action. FG

!SS$($%!T$ON #OO& &! 000 'N"


Their movement reverses progress 000 focusing on identity politics cant possibly succeed 000 only racial assilimation ends racial discrimination Wehrer4 < (=argaret, cites Richard )ord, professor at /tanford %aw /chool, .Racial $ulture: A $riti@ue,0 *erspecti'es on *olitical /cience, :olume EJ, Issue !, /pring !LLK, pg. 22E-22G, pro@uest, Tashma6
The title of Richard

)ordHs oo", Racial $ulture: A $riti@ue, is an understatement. This oo" deals a decisi'e low to identity politics in general and to mainstream African American leadership more specifically. )ord, a

law professor at /tanford %aw /chool, is not only a s"illed writer with a powerful analysis of racial and ethnic identity, ut a young African American who is impatient with esta lished African American political leaders who IpoliceI lac"ness and essentialize racial identity. In criticizing racial identity politics, he "nows he may e la eled a conser'ati'e, self-hating IOreoIA one cannot help ut admire his courage in Iairing the dirty laundryI of his racial community pu licly. )ord recognizes the tenacity of institutional racism and supports its a olitionA he 8ust does

not see the current craze for Icultural rightsI and racial separatism as the most effecti'e 'ehicle for achie'ing it. =arshalling an e9tensi'e "nowledge of legal precedents as e'idence, )ord warns that focusing antidiscrimination law on Icultural rightsI such as clothing, hairstyles, and language will result not only in legal dead ends ut in diverting needed resources from dismantling the Istatus hierarchyI of racism. <is reasons are numerous and persuasi'e. )irst, racial and ethnic groups are not homogeneous or unified, nor do they ha'e formal leadership and esta lished rituals (as do religions, for e9ample6. It would therefore e impossi le to accurately define cultural or ethnic eha'ior in legal terms. /econd, culture change is not an e'il that can and should e a'oided, ut a natural cultural process with inherent enefits. )ord argues that parochialism-resistance to outside forces-has historically pro'en to e shortli'ed and unwise, while cosmopolitanism-openness to glo al forces of change-is uni'ersally eneficial. =ore specifical, he asserts that assimilation to the 'alues and eha'iors of dominant white society is a necessary and eneficial tas" for nonwhites in the -nited /tates. )ord argues that the only way to end racial discrimination in the -nited /tates is for minorities to access resources and power, and this will re@uire that nonwhites assimilate into the dominant culture. (I disagree with him on the social costs of such
assimilation and the uni'ersal I enefitsI of glo alization.6 Toward the end of the oo", )ord re'eals a pro usiness ias, arguing that usinesses will find it too costly to comply with Icultural rightsI legislation, and that the in'isi le hand of the mar"etplace pro'ides sufficient protection for employeesH cultural rights. )ord compares African American Icultural rightsI cases with those of i"ers and dog owners in /an )rancisco, arguing that there will e no end of fri'olous Icultural rightsI lawsuits if racial groups are protected.

!SS$($%!T$ON #OO& &! 000 ,N"


Their movement will never achieve unity 000 assimilation achieves their ends and creates a basis for ending all oppression Wehrer4 < (=argaret, cites Richard )ord, professor at /tanford %aw /chool, .Racial $ulture: A $riti@ue,0 *erspecti'es on *olitical /cience, :olume EJ, Issue !, /pring !LLK, pg. 22E-22G, pro@uest, Tashma6 #ey targets of )ordHs criti@ue are racial identity mo'ements, which he accuses of fanning the flames of separatism, racial essentialism, and cultural nationalism. Instead of enforcing a single, rigid model of in-group eha'ior, )ord urges such mo'ements to allow mem ers to define themsel'es y selecting from the wide array of cultural eha'iors and attitudes a'aila le to a cosmopolitan society. <e also urges li erals to re'ise their idealistic 'iew of the law as an impartial ar iter of social 8usticeA the law is a fle9i le, contingent, socially constructed form of pu lic
policy and may not e the ultimate solution to racial ine@uality. A ma8or strength of )ordHs oo" is his deconstruction of the concept of race and his insistence that

iological IraceI does not imply a unified, essential cultural identity. )or this reason, assimilation, cultural hy ridity, and cosmopolitanism are 8ust as compati le with African American identity as is racial essentialism. )urthermore, y decentering race as the primary source of identity, African Americans may uild stronger cross-racial coalitions to address se9ism, homopho ia, po'erty, and other sources of oppression. )ord is not afraid to criticize oth li erals and conser'ati'esA
although most of his 'enom is spent criticizing li eralsH lo'e affair with identity mo'ements and Icultural rights,I he also criticizes conser'ati'esH I@uota-pho iaI (21G6.

acial assimilation is possible and good 000 theres no such thing as racial identity 000 their authors are biased to think the opposite 3arst4 7: (#enneth %., +a'id 4. *rice and +allas *. *rice *rofessor of %aw, -ni'ersity of $alifornia, %os Angeles, .ARTI$%D: =yths of Identity: Indi'idual and 4roup *ortraits of Race and /e9ual Orientation,0 GE -$%A %. Re'. !JE, +ecem er 211M, le9is, Tashma6
$. The Drosion of the Identity $ategories To the suggestion that our categories of racial and se9ual orientation identity seem to e lurring and corroding, one response might e: What else is new? American history pro'ides dozens of large-scale e9amples of

social groups in the process of assem lage or deterioration. One such change is assimilation. The word raises hac"les among writers and community organizers who see threats to the sur'i'al of a culture and to an assumed group political solidarity. These fears are well founded. The
integration of indi'iduals into the larger society usually does imply some wea"ening of their Iidentification withI the racial or ethnic groups that ser'ed 3_!1K5 as their ancestorsH IprimordialI identities. 2ML &ut we should also remem er that

the earliest and most effecti'e assimilations in America were the ones that created those 'ery identities - say, I7egro,I I4erman,I or IItalianI - out of peoples who had pre'iously thought of themsel'es as disparate. 2M2 A similar change is 'isi le today, as Americans who trace their separate ancestries to
;apan, $hina, the *hilippines, #orea, and :ietnam (and sometimes the *acific Islands6 are increasingly - if uneasily, and not without dissent - displaying a sense of political identity emphasizing not the older national or ethnic loyalties ut an Asian American Ipanethnicity.I 2M! Assimilation is not so much an indi'idual choice as a group process, mainly 'isi le as one generation gi'es way to another. 2ME When we say that the current generation seems largely assimilated, as contrasted with their immigrant grandparents who retained strong ethnic identities, we are referring to the younger peopleHs wider participation in the larger culture. D9amples are spea"ing Dnglish, attending school, reading and listening to 3_!1F5 general-circulation newspapers, radio, and other communications media, entering the 8o mar"et, 8oining a union, mo'ing away from the ethnic neigh orhood, marrying outside the group, and 'oting. These forms of participation , with concomitant erosion of ethnic community onds, historically

ha'e followed the attainment of middle class status , not y the family mo'es to the su ur s and the children go to college, the indicators of assimilation are already strong. Roughly half of
the immigrants ut y their familiesH succeeding generations. When recent marriages of ;apanese Americans ha'e in'ol'ed persons who ha'e no ;apanese ancestry. 2MG

An ethnic identity, li"e the others we ha'e

een discussing, is a myth. /ome Duropean American ethnic groups, formerly @uite 'isi le, ha'e een assimilated so completely as to lose much of their mythic e9istence and 'irtually all their e9istence as political groups. )ew politicians court the 4erman American 'ote any more, let alone the +utch American 'ote. The imagery of the melting-pot was widely deployed during the era when IAmericanizationI was a code-word for Anglo-conformity. 2MM It is no wonder that some leaders who see" to maintain the political

mo ilization of lac" people (or 7ati'e Americans or %atinos or Asian Americans6 or of gay and les ian Americans spea" of IassimilationistsI with disdain. To those leaders, e9ploding the myths of racial identity and se9ual orientation identity may seem the cruelest of 8o"es. /till, a considera le source
of the erosion of the su ordinating la els comes from within the groups, that is, from indi'iduals who ha'e seen themsel'es as part of the groups thus su ordinated. TodayHs intensified challenges to the pre'ailing myths of racial identity and se9ual orientation identity are to e found at le'els oth particular and a stract. )irst, indi'idual eha'ior, multiplied y the thousands, can

erode an identity category. Our chief historical e9ample is ethnic assimilation. A smaller-scale racial analogue
seems li"ely, as todayHs interracial marriages produce children and grandchildren whose self-identification may well lose 3_!115 much of its racial distinctness. &eyond this modest ut predicta le generational wea"ening of racial group ties, some indi'iduals today are e9plicitly re8ecting their assignment to one or another racial identity or se9ual orientation identityA some are e'en suggesting alternati'e identity la els. /econdly, and more a stractly, scientists and social

theorists are challenging the identity myths of race or se9ual orientation as artificial, or harmful, or oth. !lign yourself with the ideology of +ooker T. Washington 6rum4 'C (+a'id, contri uting editor at 7ewswee" and The +aily &east and a $77 contri utor, .&oo"er T. WashingtonHs =essage for !2st $entury America,0 The +aily &east, !CJC2E, http:CCwww.thedaily east.comCarticlesC!L2ECL!CLJC oo"er-twashington-s-message-for-!2st-century-america.html, Tashma6
/o was &oo"er T. Washington a failure? It would e easy to say so, and perhaps Washington himself died thin"ing so. And yet N thin" again. Washington urged these lessons upon lac" Americans: _ To thin" of

themsel'es as Americans first and foremost , not to succum to the racial illusions that distorted the minds of their white fellow-citizens - or to follow future false messiahs into some mystical ac"-to-Africa fantasy. _ 7ot to allow itterness o'er the past to distract them from their prospects for the future. _ To emphasize education, wor", and capital accumulation as their path to success. _ To seize the opportunities pro'ided y a free, competiti'e economy. _ To elie'e the est of their country - and of their place in it. +espite li'ing at the moment when race hatred came to its fiercest oil in all American history , fiercer than anything e9pressed e'en under sla'ery, Washington remained serenely con'inced. <is ideas remain potent today. <ear =aya
Angelou: Oou may write me down in history With your itter, twisted lies, Oou may trod me in the 'ery dirt &ut still, li"e dust, IHll rise. It was a message that an oppressed and despised lac" America welcomed in 21LL.

It was a message re8ected as too plainti'e and apologetic y the lac" America of 21ML. &ut itHs a message that is looking truer and truer in the post-racial America of the ,'st century.

+$O>O%$T$"S &! 000 'N"


$dentity political movements are biopolitical 000 constrains freedom by forcing people to conform to norms =ayward4 '- ($larissa Rile, Associate *rofessor of *olitical /cience at Washington -ni'ersity in /t. %ouis, and Ron Watson, doctoral student in *olitical /cience at Washington -ni'ersity in /t. %ouis, .The *olitics of Identity after Identity *olitics: Identity and *olitical Theory,0 EE Wash. -. ;.%. [ *olHy 1, le9is, Tashma6
&. IdentityHs &urdens /till, ecause identities

constrain freedom - ecause they define IothersI whose e9clusion they can promote and at the same time legitimize - Ithe mo ilization of identity categories for the purposes of politicization always remains threatened y the prospect of identity ecoming an instrument of the power one opposes. I 1E <ence the )oucaultian emphasis on genealogizing and more generally on IrefusingI identity , rather than urging states
to recognize it 'ia group rights, accommodations for minority cultures, or Ie9ternalI protections. As our discussion in *art III suggests, the )oucaultian focus is the cost of identification: its urdens, more so than its enefits. 3_EL5 What is worth underscoring, howe'er, is that neither strong multiculturalists nor li eral theorists of recognition @uarrel with the claim that, 'ery often, collecti'e identities ha'e costs. To the contrary, oth sets of theorists ac"nowledge that groups e9clude, and that groups often limit the freedom of mem ers. &oth ac"nowledge that some forms of recognition, ecause they gi'e those who are dominant within groups power o'er those who are su ordinate, can promote coercion and ena le the restriction of freedom. It is this worry that dri'es TaylorHs insistence that states protect minority group mem ersH Ifundamental rights,I such as their rights to ha eas corpus. 1G It is this worry that informs #ymlic"aHs claim that states should only rarely allow Iinternal restrictionsI y groups. 1M *ractices of restricting religious freedom, or of discriminating against female group mem ers, #ymlic"a writes, Iare inconsistent with any system of minority rights that appeals to indi'idual freedom or personal autonomy.I 1J They Icannot e 8ustified or defended,I he continues, Iwithin a li eral conception of minority rights.I 1K The principal differences etween the multiculturalist and the )oucaultian positions are, first, their emphases multiculturalists stress the enefits of identification, )oucaultians the urdens - and, second, their assumptions a out the li"ely effects of state recognition. =ulticulturalists underscore that well- eing is closely ound up with a sense of collecti'e elonging. The costs of identity, they suggest, are well worth the goods identity pro'ides. As long as Ifundamental rightsI are protected, as long as protections are Ie9ternal,I rather than restrictions on important rights and freedoms, people gain more than they lose when states recognize identity-constituting collecti'ities. The )oucaultian claim, y contrast,

is that identityPs substantial harms outweigh its enefits. D'en those identities which li erals 'iew as entirely eneficial - namely, the identities of autonomous, rational modern sel'es su 8ect, and they discipline human eings. &ecause people ne'er perfectly fit any identity-category, and ecause efforts to ma"e them fit are a "ind of 'iolence , state recognition, e'en when 3_E25 it promotes solidaristic feelings of trust and elonging, always also fosters e9clusion and nontri'ial forms of unfreedom.

+$O>O%$T$"S &! 000 ,N"


Their movement inevitably will frame e*emplary figures as leaders 000 thats inherently biopolitical #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2FM-2FJ, Tashma6
<ere the

mo'e toward iopolitics is est understood as an outgrowth of the pattern identified as .identity politics0 in earlier periods y a num er of writers.22 It is a mood in which the person is defined as the ody and in > which certain e9emplary odies at 'arious times during the 211OsBthose of -sher, Tupac, =i"e Tyson, =ichael 5Lrdan, 5ada *in"ett /mith, 7a- omi $am ell, %il> #im, and :eronica We Bcould ecome impacted instantiations of community. This situation necessitates a different conception of freedom from those hitherto channeled into modern citizenship or de'eloped in post-sla'e cultures, where odily and spiritual freedoms were sharply differentiated and
freedom was more li"ely to e associated with death than with life. On this historic fre@uency, organic intellectuals ,v from )rederic" +ouglass to 4eorge $linton suggested that the most 'alu- # a le forms of freedom lay in the li eration of the mind. +r. )un"enstein>s prescription was .)ree your mind and your ass will follow.0 The dualism was pro lematic, ut it could e forgi'en ecause, against the e9pectations of raciologists, it was the mind that came firstQ Racialized

iopolitics operates from altogether different premises that refuse this distinction. It uses a This is achie'ed almost e9clusi'ely through the 'isuals representation of racialized odiesBengaged in characteristic acti'ities,f l usually se9ual or sportingBwhich if they do not induce immediate solidar-A ity,
id'ersal of these historic priorities to esta lish the limits of the authentic Q racial community. certainly ground and solicit identification.

This de'elopment is pro lematic for se'eral reasons. )or one thing, it mar"s the racial community e9clusi'ely asRaaspacepfRhetYerose9ual acti'ity"w and confirms the a andonment of any politics aside from the ongoing oppositional creati'ity of genderedself-culti'ation: an acti'ity
that is en- > dowed with almost sacred significance ut underta"en in something of the same resolute spirit as wor"ing out with weights. If it sur'i'es at all'ppli- tics eco,mesRan D9clpsiyey aesthetic concern with all the perils that im- plies. The racialized ody, 2iffed,iri'ulnera le, and arranged suggesti'ely with a precision that will e familiar to close readers of the =ar@uis de /ade, whose writings anticipate this de'elopment, supplies its critical e'aluatfi'e principle. Affiliates of the racialized collecti'ity are there y led .to focus their attention on themsel'es, to decipher, recognise and ac- "nowledge themsel'es as su 8ects of desire, ringing into play etween themsel'es and themsel'es a certain relationship that allows them to dis- co'er, in desire, the truth of their eing.I!

ESSENT$!%$S( &! 000 'N"


Their counter0essentialist movement ensures that racial binaries become stronger Jarach4 B (%awrence, .Dssentialism and the *ro lem of Identity *olitics,0 Anarchy: A;O+A eMF, )allCWinter !LLG-LM, http:CCtheanarchistli rary.orgCli raryClawrence8arach-essentialism-and-the-pro lem-of-identity-politics.pdf, Tashma6 Dssentialism is the idea that there e9ists some detecti le and o 8ecti'e core @uality of particular groups of people that is inherent, eternal, and unaltera leA groupings can e categorized according to these @ualities of essence, which are ased on such pro lematic criteria as
gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, se9ual orientation, and class. These e9ternal @ualities are almost always mar"ed y 'isual cues, ma"ing the categories more o 'ious andCor easier to notice. These @ualities contain social and B more importantly from an antiauthoritarian perspecti'e B hierarchical significance to those mar"ing the cues and those mar"ed y the cues: se9ism, in the case of genderA racism in the case of s"in toneA the unwanted attention of authorities in the case of any and all different loo"ingCacting people. Racism, se9ism, classism, and most other forms of historical oppression are ideologies and policies maintained and 8ustified y essentialism. )or a person or group of people on the recei'ing end of racism and se9ism (etc.6, essentialism

can appear to e a powerful defensi'e perspecti'e and counter-narrati'e. Rather than promoting categories of denigration and su ordination , the counter-essentialist discourse of Identity *olitics attempts to in'ert the historical categories of oppression into categories of cele ration. This is often initiated y appropriating insults and turning them into accepta le, e'en honora le, la els. What had once een intended to harm the Other there y ecomes a way to show pride in the 4roup /elf. #eeping with the in'ersion process, the counter-essentialist often merely turns the categories of Otherness upside-down, making 'isually identifia le mem ers of the Oppressor group into enemies. A sense of elonging either to a group that has oppressed or een
oppressed is immaterial B essentialism is not the e9clusi'e domain of oppressors.

ESSENT$!%$S( &! 000 TA NS "!SE


This turns the case 000 dooms their movement to failure (inow4 7M (=artha, *rofessor of %aw, <ar'ard %aw /chool, ./*DD$<: 7ot Only for =yself: Identity, *olitics, and %aw,0 The $olin Ruagh Thomas OH)allon =emorial %ecture, -ni'ersity of Oregon /chool of %aw, ECKC1J, KM Or. %. Re'. JGK, )all 211J, le9is, Tashma6 The defect in identity claims signaled y the charge of IessentialismI e9presses the faulty assumption that any gi'en trait of an indi'idual determines 'iewpoint, e9perience, or political interest and commitment. Dssentialist notions of identity also mistakenly reduce indi'iduals to one trait when they themsel'es thin" that other traits also matter. 4roups may try to use single identities for strategic political goals, ut simply in'o"ing a shared trait of identity does not produce political solidarity and action. 21 ;une ;ordan e9plained the difficulty this
way:

ESSENT$!%$S( &! 000 $NED$T!+$%$T8 T $"3


They dont rid the world of racism4 they 1ust allow it to ta"e on new forms Jarach4 B (%awrence, .Dssentialism and the *ro lem of Identity *olitics,0 Anarchy: A;O+A eMF, )allCWinter !LLG-LM, http:CCtheanarchistli rary.orgCli raryClawrence8arach-essentialism-and-the-pro lem-of-identity-politics.pdf, Tashma6
The discourse of counter-essentialism includes the ideologies of innocence and 'ictimization, which can @uic"ly transform an identity ased on the history of shared oppression into a posture of superiority. $ounter-essentialism

supposedly pro'es that the 'ictim is eternally innocent, so 'ictims> actions and reactions are fore'er
eyond reproachA all good $hristians "now that suffering is enno ling. Oppression is ne'er the result of anything the 'ictim has actually done to the Oppressor, so whate'er strategies of resistance the 'ictim chooses are legitimate. /elfdefense is its own 8ustification. The adherents of Identity *olitics rarely B if e'er B @uestion the criteria leading to

'ictimization. They can>t concei'e of the possi

ility that the ele'ation of any particular culturally constructed mar"er

into a significant 'alue B laden category could lead to oppression. -nli"e Oppressor essentialists, counter-

essentialists ignore the comple9ities of relations of power (which are conditional and contingent6A ut li"e Oppressor essentialists, they re'el in the smug self-assurance that their Identity is static, independent, and eternal. Dssentialists create and maintain their own pri'ileges through the
institutionalization of powerA counter-essentialists through the institutionalization of innocence. )ranz )anon, Drnesto .$he0 4ue'ara, *atrice %umum a, and many other Third World national li erationists e'en less reputa le to anarchists (li"e $astro, Tito, and =ao6 inspired generations of self-descri ed re'olutionaries in the Imperial =etropole to fight against discrimination, racism, colonialism, and oppression. That all these Third World nationalists thought, wrote, and acted within a statist B and usually =ar9ist-%eninist, which is to say /talinist B framewor" is also clear. +espite this, as successful anti-imperialists, they retain a certain appeal and credi ility among anarchists. After all, what anarchist would e in fa'or of imperialism? The philosophy and 'ision of self-determination re@uires an appeal to world political opinionA it is as if so-called re'olutionary nationalists wanted to say: .We are mature enough to run our own go'ernments, ma"e treaties, engage in trade with the esta lished states of the world, and control trou lesome dissidents.0 On a certain le'el, these soon-to- e national leaders accepted and promoted the 8ustification for colonialism B namely that the nati'es were too child-li"e or uneducated to determine the proper e9ploitation of the natural resources of their lands. They wanted to show B either through the force of morality (as in the totally mythologized case of 4andhi6 or the force of arms (as in the totally romanticized case of $he and others6 B that they were worthy of eing rec"oned and negotiated with, and e'entually recognized as e@ual partners in the realm of statecraft. 7ational orders in'ented and imposed y colonial powers would e respected, trade agreements would generally (or e'entually6 e concluded with the former colonial power, laws drawn up y the former colonial masters against internal dissidence would continue to e used, etc. The nati'e ourgeoisie too" o'er all the institutions of go'ernment, deflecting B through appeals to e9plicitly cross-class ethno-national unity and solidarity B the more asic struggle etween e9ploiter and e9ploited. The gender- and ethnic- ased li eration mo'ements in Durope and the -nited /tates of the late-21JLsCearly-21KLs too" their ideological cues and 8ustifications from these successful anti-colonialist struggles. The rhetoric of Third World national li eration was used constantly, to the point where many African-Americans, some women and other selfidentified oppressed groups egan to descri e themsel'es as .internal colonies.0 =inorities of all "inds had already een identified as su ordinate Others y the elites of hierarchical societiesA the facile identification of the colonial

e9ploiter and his institutions as the oppressi'e Other is at the heart of the trou le with Identity *olitics. The assigning of lame, responsi ility, and guilt to e'eryone identified as elonging to the category of oppressi'e Other curtails the possi ility of transcending hierarchy and dominationA this process merely in'erts the 'alues placed on particular classes or groups of people, regardless of their personal complicity in historical or contemporary oppression.
)or most women li erationists, the category of Woman B reduced to a hermetic category ased only on gender B ecame the only category of importance. The denigration and oppression of women was clear e'erywhere: discrimination, rape and other forms of 'iolence, harassment, the e9pectation and enforcement of motherhood and heterose9uality, and the myriad ways of "eeping women dependent and su ser'ient. Women li erationists declared *atriarchy to e the Dnemy, some ta"ing the ne9t logical step and ma"ing =en B reduced to a hermetic category ased only on gender B the Dnemy.

ESSENT$!%$S( &! 000 %$N3 W!%%


Their movement robs individual identity 000 the black body takes on a monolithic form Jarach4 B (%awrence, .Dssentialism and the *ro lem of Identity *olitics,0 Anarchy: A;O+A eMF, )allCWinter !LLG-LM, http:CCtheanarchistli rary.orgCli raryClawrence8arach-essentialism-and-the-pro lem-of-identity-politics.pdf, Tashma6 )or most lac" nationalists, the category of &lac" B reduced to a hermetic category and race B ecame the only category of importance. The denigration and oppression of
ased on genetics

lac"s was clear e'erywhere: discrimination in the form of ;im $row, lynching and other forms of 'iolence, harassment (especially y law enforcement6, the e9pectation and enforcement of ser'ility, and the myriad ways of "eeping lac" people dependent and su ser'ient. &lac" nationalists declared White Racism to e the Dnemy, some ta"ing the

ne9t logical step and ma"ing White *eople B reduced to a hermetic category the Dnemy.

ased on genetics and race B

Race and gender, similar to other culturally specific ideological constructs, are oth real and unreal. -nreal in the iological senseA conceptions of these distinctions do not correspond to o 8ecti'e B that is, non-culturally ased B categories. Real in the sociological senseA there are clear ways of discerning racism, se9ism, and other forms of domination and e9ploitation regardless of any particular cultural conte9t. They are therefore deser'ing of critical attention. Those who champion the discourse of gender studies ha'e done an e9cellent 8o in analyzing and shattering the contingent nature of how gender is understood, showing that particular com inations of chromosomes and genitalia are only a part (and argua ly not e'en the most important part6 of what ma"es gender meaningful. $ritical race theory is also an encouraging and interesting recent anti-essentialist de'elopment. $olonialists and their apologists consistently promote mythico-ideological categories of domination. *eople opposed to hierarchical institutions already understand and e9pect that. The main conceptual contradiction of anti-imperialists (those who supposedly oppose colonial practices6 is

their own acceptance of DuroAmerican pre8udices and stereotypes B only with the 'alues in'erted. The categories of denigrated Other ( lac", sa'age, woman6 created and maintained for the e9clusi'e enefit of Durosupremacists and se9ists are not called into @uestionA their o 8ecti'ity is selfe'ident, ased on the common sense of the culture originally created y the racists and se9ists. D'eryone can tell whether someone is male or female B it>s iological. D'eryone can tell whether someone is
lac" or white B it>s scientific. D'en efore ( ut especially during6 the formati'e years of Duropean colonialism, /cience and &iology were seen as methodologies for discerning O 8ecti'e Reality. Anti-imperialists, as good =ar9ist-%eninists, find nothing trou ling a out /cienceA it>s what separates their particular ideology from all other forms of socialism. <owe'er, /cience is an ideologically dri'en pursuit. Thin"ing of /cience as some neutral e9amination and discernment of facts for the sa"e of technological progress, increasing human li eration, and "nowledge a out the uni'erse should e treated as any other form of wishful thin"ing. #nowledge is not separate from the uses to which it has een and is currently eing put. 4roup self-definition would seem to fit in with the anarchist principles of self-organization and 'oluntary association. $ounter-essentialist identity can e'en e understood as an attempt to recapture "inship- ased community, destroyed y the imposition of industrial capitalism (which is ased on di'ision of la or and the resulting atomization and alienation of indi'iduals from each other6. It remains pro lematic, howe'er, ecause it is an identity forged within the ideology of 'ictimizationA it rests on the same ar itrary and constructed categories that were pre'iously formulated to 8ustify oppression. $reating a supposedly li eratory counter-narrati'e that remains ased on 'isual mar"ers can ne'er possi ly @uestion the 'alidity of an oppressi'e ideology. The other pro lem is the promotion of an ideologically

constructed identity. /uch an identity demands group loyalty and solidarity o'er and a o'e the actual li'ed e9periences of the indi'iduals in'ol'ed. The person who is attracted to the promised sense of elonging offered y any institution (whether an oppressed group, a hierarchical organization, or any formation promoting -nity6 must agree to the prior distinctions and categories created y others. Once the counter-essentialist agrees to the oundaries of
inclusionCe9clusion (which is step one on the road to separatism6, sChe can>t identify or e identified any other wayA whate'er criteria already e9ist in the counter-essentialist narrati'e are the only ones that matter. This Identity

)undamentalism re@uires that any person interested in radical transformation relin;uish the ability to define herChimself. /Che must dissol'e any self-awareness into pre-e9isting categories of significance. &iology B no matter its ideological and cultural constraints B
is +estinyA su 8ecti'ity can only e sacrificed andCor suppressed. One of the first authoritarian lies is that someone else "nows etter.

Their movement is essentiali/ing 000 that results in the alienation of everyone involved =utchinson4 , (+arren %enard, :isiting Assistant *rofessor, -ni'ersity of *ennsyl'ania %aw /chool, Assistant *rofessor, /outhern =ethodist -ni'ersity /chool of %aw. &.A., -ni'ersity of *ennsyl'aniaA ;.+., Oale %aw /chool, .$RITI$A% RA$D /T-+ID/: *rogressi'e Race &lindness?: Indi'idual Identity, 4roup *olitics, and Reform,0 G1 -$%A %. Re'. 2GMM, ;une !LL!, le9is, Tashma6 *roponents of progressi'e race lindness also argue against race consciousness on the grounds that race essentializes groups of indi'iduals y 3_2GJ!5 falsely implying that they e9perience life at a unitary location. )ord, for e9ample, eschews lin"ing race and culture ecause he fears that this will pose pro lems of cultural authenticity. )raming claims of cultural
oppression in racial terms ris"s litigating the messy @uestion of what forms of cultural e9pression are legitimate. !F $unningham considers race a Imalignant pro9yI for community, !1 and Ro inson contends that racial . Racial $lassifications Dssentialize 4roups

categorization oppresses and limits the eha'iors and choices of lac"s y rigidly defining those acti'ities that are IauthenticallyI lac". EL
c. Race $onsciousness &reeds Alienation /ome progressi'e race lindness theorists ha'e also argued that race

consciousness reeds alienation - on oth an indi'idual and a community le'el. ace consciousness alienates the individual from his or her KtrueK self, a self unmarred y the myth of racial su 8ecti'ity. E2 Race consciousness also separates all of us from one another y imposing artificial di'isions among the populace. E!

#$% O8 3 $T$3 000 'N"


Their conception of GraceH is flawed 000 acknowledging that the white0black binary e*ists cements racism #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2G-2M, Tashma6
A $RI/I/ O) RA$IO%O4O

Any in'entory of the elements that constitute this crisis of raciology must ma"e special mention of the rise of geneBoriented or genomic constructions of .race.0 Their distance from the
older 'ersions of raceBthin"ing that were produced in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries underlines that the meaning of racial difference is itself eing changed as the relation- ship etween human eings and nature is reconstructed y the impact of the +7A re'olution and of the technological de'elopments that ha'e en- ergized it.! This oo" is premised upon the idea that we must try to ta"e possession of that profound transformation and somehow set it to wor" against the tainted logic that produced it. In other words, the argument here unfolds from the asic idea that this

crisis of .race0 and representation, of politics and ethics, offers a welcome cue to free oursel'es from the onds of all raciology in a no'el and am itious a olitionist pro8ect. The pursuit of li eration from.race0 is an especially urgent matter for those peoples who , li"e modern lac"s in the period after transatlantic sla'ery, were assigned an inferior position in the enduring hierarchies that raciology creates.T<owwvDx,TlysiHtApportunity is not theirs alone. There are
'ery good reasons why it should e enthusiastically em raced y others whose antipathy to race-thin"ing can e defined, not so much y the way it has su ordinated them, ut ecause in endowing them with the alchemical

magic of racial mastery, it has distorted and delimited their e9periences and consciousness in other ways. They may not ha'e een animalized, reified, or e9terminated, ut they too ha'e suffered something y eing depri'ed of their indi'iduality, their humanity, and thus alienated from species life. &lac" and white are onded together y the mechanisms of .race0 that estrange them from each other and amputate their common humanity. )rantz )anon, the
=artini@ean psychiatrist and anticolonial acti'ist whose wor" frames these concerns, o ser'ed this dismal cycle through its effects on the li'es of men: fthe 7egro ensla'ed y his inferior- C ity, the white man ensla'ed y his superiority ali"e eha'e in accordance if with a neurotic orientation.0E r+r. =artin %uther #ing, 5r., another influential pathologist of .race,0 whose wor" counterpoints )anon>s own, was fond of pointing out that race-thin"ing has the capacity to

ma"e its eneficiaries inhuman e'en as it depri'es its 'ictims of their humanity. !dvocating for racial identity is inherently fascist 000 their strategy reproduces violence and hierarchies #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2L2-2L!, Tashma6 The dizzying 'ariety of ideas condensed into the concept of identity , and the wide range of issues
to which it can e made to refer, foster analyti- cal connections etween themes and perspecti'es that are not con'entionally associated. %in"s can e esta lished etween political, cultural, psychological, and psychoanalytic concerns. We need to consider, for e9- ample, how the errrotiylrrand affecti'e ondsithat form the speciiic asis of raciological and ethnic samwydyscsxdPczMAaapL/wa, and how they ecome patterned socialwacthrities ela orate cultural features. <ow are they a le to induce conspicuous acts of altruism, 'iolence, and courage? <ow do they moti'ate people toward social interconnection in which indi'iduality is renounced or dissol'ed into the larger whole represented y a nation, a people, a .race,I or an ethnic group? These @uestions are important e- cause, as we ha'e seen, gra'e moral and political

conse@uences ha'e followed once the magic of identity has een engaged tactically or in manipulati'e, deli erately o'ersimple ways. D'en in the most ci'ilized cir- cumstances, the signs of sameness ha'e degenerated readily into em lems of supposedly essential or immuta le difference. The special appeal of indi'iduality-transcending sameness still pro'ides an antidote to the forms of uncertainty and an9iety that ha'e een associated with economic and polit- ical crises. The idea of fundamentally shared identity ecomes a platform for the re'erie of a solute and eternal di'ision.
The use of uniforms and other sym ols to effect the sameness that identity only spea"s a out has sometimes een symptomatic of the process > in which an an9ious self can e shed and its concerns con8ured away y the >C emergence of a

stronger compound whole. The uniforms worn in the 21ELs y fascists (and still worn y some fascist groups today6 produced a compelling illusion of sameness oth for mem ers of the group and for those who o ser'ed their spectacular acti'ities. The &ritish -nion of )as- cists, one of the less-successful lac"-shirted organizations from that pe- riod, argued that their gar was all the more attracti'e to adherents when contrasted with the conflict and itterness created y classased di'isions that were tearing the nation apart from within: (The . lac"shirt06 rings down one of the great arriers of class y remo'ing differences of dress, and one of the o 8ects of )ascism is to rea" the arriers of class. Already the lac"shirt has achie'ed within our own ran"s that classless unity which we will ultimately secure within the nation as a whole.G

We will e9plore elow how the ultranationalist and fascist mo'ements of the twentieth century deployed ela orate technological resources in order to generate spectacles of identity capa le of unifying and coordinating ine'ita le, untidy di'ersity into an ideal and unnatural human uniformity. Their synthetic 'ersions of fundamental identity loo"ed most seducti'e where all difference had een anished or erased from the collecti'e. +ifference within was repressed in order to ma9imize the difference etween these groups and others, identity was cele rated e9tra'agantly in military styles: uniforms were com ined with synchronized ody mo'ement, drill, pageantry, and 'isi le hierarchy to create and feed the comforting elief in sameness as a solute, metaphysical in'ariance. =en and women could then appear as interchangea le and disposa le
cogs in the encamped na- tion>s \military machine or as indistinguisha le cells in the larger organic entity that encompassed and dissol'ed their indi'iduality. Their actions may e'en e imagined to e9press the inner spirit, fate, and historicality of the national community. The citizen was manifested as a soldier, and 'iolence B

potential as well as actualBwas dedicated to the furtherance of national interests. That 'ital community was constituted in the dynamic interaction etween marchers mo'ing together in austere time and the crowds that watched and sa'ored the spectacle they created. ln dissemi- nating these 'alua le political effects, identity was mediated y cultural and communicati'e technologies li"e Dlm, lighting, and amplified sound. These t''entiethBcentury attri utes were only partly concealed y the in'o- cation of ancient ritual and myth.

The alternative is to align yourself with the diaspora 000 endorse a group consciousness 000 thats key to break down racial binaries 000 only we access the root cause of racism #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2!E-2!G, Tashma6 +IA/*ORA A/ A /O$IA% D$O%O4O O) I+D7TI)I$ATIO7 The idea of diaspora offers a ready alternati'e to\ the stern discipline of primordial "inship and rooted elonging. It re8ects the popular image of natural nations spontaneously endowed with self-consciousness, tidily composed of
uniform families: those interchangea le collections of or- dered odies that e9press and reproduce a solutely distincti'e cultures as well as perfectly formed heterose9ual pairings. As an alternati'e to the metaphysics of .race,0 nation, and ounded culture coded cultural and historical mechanics

into the ody, diaspora is a concept that pro lematizes the of elonging. It disrupts the fundamental power of territory to determine identity y rea"ing the simple se@uence of e9planatory lin"s etween place, location, and consciousness. It destroys the nai'e in'ocation of common memory as the asis of particularity in a similar fashion y drawing attention to the contingent political dynamics of commemoration. The ancient word diaspora ac@uired a modern accent as a result of its
unanticipated usefulness to the nationalisms and su altern imperialisms of the late nineteenth century. It remains an enduring feature of the continu- ing aftershoc"s generated y those political pro8ects in *alestine and else- where. If it can e stripped of its disciplinarian associations it might offer seeds capa le of earing fruit in struggles to comprehend the sociality of a new phase in which displacement, flight, e9ile, and forced migration are li"ely to e familiar and recurrent phenomena that transform the terms in which identity needs to e understood. Retreating from the totalizing im- modesty and am ition of the word .glo al,I diaspora is an outer-national term which contri utes to the analysis of intercultural and transcultural processes and forms. It identifies a relational networ" , characteristically produced y

forced dispersal and reluctant scattering. It is not 8ust a word of mo'ement, though purposi'e, desperate mo'ement is integral to it. -n- der this sign, pushufactors area dominant influence. The urgency
they in- troduce ma"es diaspora more than a yoguish synonym for percrination or nomadism. As the iographies of D@uiano and ::heatley suggest, life it- self is at sta"e in the way the word connotes flight following the threat of 'iolence rather than freely chosen e9periences of displacement. /la'ery, pogroms, indenture, genocide, and other unnamea le terrors ha'e all figured in the constitution of diasporas and the reproduction of diaspora consciousness in which identity is focused, less on the e@ualizing, pre- democratic force of so'ereign territory and more on the social dynamics of remem rance and commemoration defined y a strong sense of the dan- gers in'ol'ed in forgetting the location of origin and the tearful process of dispersal. The term opens up a historical and e9periential rift etween

the locations of residence and the locations of elonging. This in turn sets up a further opposition.
$onsciousness of diaspora affiliation stands opposed to the distincti'ely modern structures and modes of power orchestrated y the institutional comple9ity of nationBstates. +iaspora identification e9ists outside of and sometimes in opposition to the political forms and codes of modern citizenship. The nationBstate has regularly een presented as the institutional means to terminate diaspora dispersal. At one end of the communicati'e circuit this is to e accomplished y the assimilation of those who were out of place. At the other, a similar outcome is realized through the prospect of their return to a place of origin. The fundamental e@uili rium of nature and ci'il society can thus e restored. ln oth op- tions it is the nation-state that rings the spatial and temporal order of di- aspora life to an a rupt end. +iaspora yearning and am i'alence are transformed into a simple unam iguous e9ile once the possi ility of easy reconciliation with either the place of so8ourn or the place of origin e9ists. /ome, though not all, 'ersions of diaspora consciousness accentuate the possi ility and desira ility of return. They may or may not recognize the difficulty of this gesture. The degree to which return is accessi le or de- sired pro'ides a 'alua le comparati'e moment in the typology and classification of diaspora histories and political mo'ements.

#$% O8 3 $T$3 000

OOT "!ASE

They gloss over the root cause of racism 000 acknowledging its e*istence makes transformation impossible #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 22-2!, Tashma6
It is impossi le to deny that we

are li'ing through a profound transformation in the way the idea of .race0 is understood and acted upon. -nderlying it there is another, possi ly deeper, pro lem that arises from the changing mechanisms that go'ern how racial differences are seen, how they appear to us and prompt specific identities. Together, these historic conditions ha'e disrupted the o ser'ance of .race0 and created a crisis for raciology, the lore that rings the 'irtual realities of .race0 to dismal and destructi'e life. Any opportunities for positi'e change that arise from this crisis are circumscri ed y the enduring effects of past catastrophe. Raciology has saturated the discourses in which it circulates. lt cannot e readily
re--signified or de-signified, and to imagine that its dangerous meanings can e easily re-articulated into enign, democratic forms would e to e9- aggerate the power of critical and oppositional interests. ln contrast, the creati'e

acts in'ol'ed in destroying raciology and transeending .raceI are more than warranted y the goal of authentic democracy to which they point. The political will to li erate human"ind from racethin"ing must e complemented y precise historical reasons why these attempts are worth ma"ing. The first tas" is to suggest that the demise of .raceI is not something to e feared. D'en this may e a hard argument to win. On the one hand, the eneficiaries of racial hierarchy do not want to gi'e up their pri'ileges. On the other hand, people who ha'e een su ordinated y race-thin"ing and its distincti'e social structures (not all ofwhich come ti- dily color-coded6 ha'e for centuries employed the concepts and categories of their rulers, owners, and persecutors to resist the destiny that IraeeI has allocated to them and to dissent from the lowly 'alue it placed upon their li'es. -nder the most difficult of conditions and from imperfect materials that they surely would not ha'e selected if they had een a le to choose, these oppressed groups ha'e uilt comple9 traditions of politics, ethics, identity, and culture. The currency of .race0 has marginalized these tradi- tions from official histories of modernity and relegated them to the ac"- waters ofthe primiti'e and the prepolitical, They ha'e in'ol'ed ela orate, impro'ised constructions that ha'e the primary function of a sor ing and deflecting a use. &ut they ha'e gone far eyond merely affording protec- tion and re'ersed the polarities of insult, rutality, and contempt, which are une9pectedly turned into important sources of solidarity, 8oy, and col- lecti'e strength. When ideas of racial particularity are in'erted in this de- fensi'e manner so that they pro'ide sources ofpride rather than shame and humiliation, they ecome difficult to relin@uish. )or many racializcd pop- ulations, Irace0 and the hard-won, oppositional identities it supports are not to e lightly or prematurely gi'en up.

$ts try or die for the alternative 000 racism is inevitable in the world of omnipresent racial binaries =utchinson4 , (+arren %enard, :isiting Assistant *rofessor, -ni'ersity of *ennsyl'ania %aw /chool, Assistant *rofessor, /outhern =ethodist -ni'ersity /chool of %aw. &.A., -ni'ersity of *ennsyl'aniaA ;.+., Oale %aw /chool, .$RITI$A% RA$D /T-+ID/: *rogressi'e Race &lindness?: Indi'idual Identity, 4roup *olitics, and Reform,0 G1 -$%A %. Re'. 2GMM, ;une !LL!, le9is, Tashma6
E. <umans /hould +iscard Racial Identity In addition to elie'ing that we can discard the concept of race, progressi'e race lindness theorists elie'e that we should part company with racial categorization. Ad'ocates of progressi'e race lindness ha'e assumed a highly s"eptical posture towards the utility of race in their scholarship. These scholars ha'e argued Iagainst raceI on se'eral grounds. a. Racial $lassifications <a'e *roduced a %egacy of In8uries and Wrongs Ad'ocates of progressi'e race lindness point to the in8urious history of racial

classifications as a 8ustification for radically deconstructing race consciousness. Racial categories, they argue, ha'e historically ser'ed as a site of 'iolent su 8ugationA ecause these categories are artificial, chosen, and oppressi'e, we should endea'or to destroy them. The
progressi'e race lindness theorists contend that y clinging to racial classification, we em race an identity rooted in su ordination and domination. $unningham, for e9ample, argues that Ithe process of racing is a malignancy that infects our identities, li"e those who raped our ancestors and thus ecame our ancestors and oursel'es. This trauma is e'idenced y self-identification that rages against racism yet clings to concepts of race that ma"e it possi le in defining who we are.I !M Ro inson ta"es an e@ually - if not more - mor id 'iew of racial identification. To Ro inson, race consciousness

uys into a flawed structure in which Iwe internalize raceHs limitations - self hatred,

alienation, and segregation.I !J The implications of li'ing within the IlimitationsI of race are especially
trou ling for persons of color. According to Ro inson, race consciousness reeds a culture of inferiority, 'ictimization, and helplessness among persons of color. !K If Ro insonHs claims are true, then progressi'e mo'ements li"e

antiracism should not fight for the legal and political recognition of such a psychologically destructi'e construct as race.

#$% O8 3 $T$3 000 8ES 6!"$S(


egardless of their intentions4 the search for a new racial identity will dissolve into facism #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2LE-2LG, Tashma6
Today>s u i@uitous coniiicts etween warring constituencies that claim in- compati le and e9clusi'e identities suggest that

these large-scale theatrical techni@ues for producing and sta ilizing identity and soliciting national, .racial,0 or ethnic identification ha'e een widely ta"en up. The reduction of identity to the uncomplicated, militarized, fraternal 'ersions of pure sameness pioneered y fascism and 7azism in the 21ELs is now routine, particularly where the forces of nationalism, .tri alism,0 and ethnic di'i- sion are at wor". Identity is thus re'ealed as a critical element in the dis- I tincti'e 'oca ulary used to 'oice the geopolitical dilemmas of the late modern age. Where the power of a solute identity is summoned up, it is often to account for situations in which the actions of indi'iduals and groups are eing reduced to little more than the functioning of some o'erarching presocial mechanism. ln the past, this machinery was often under-

stood as a historical or economic process that defined the special, manifest destiny ofthe group in @uestion. These days, it is more li"ely to e repre- sented as a prepolitical, socio iological, or iocultural feature, something mysterious and genetic that sanctions especially harsh 'arieties of deter- ministic thin"ing. In this light, identity ceases to e an

ongoing process of self-ma"ing and social interaction. It ecomes instead a thing to e possessed and displayed. It is a silent sign that closes down the possi ility of communication across the gulf etween one hea'ily defended island of particularity and its e@ually well fortified
neigh ors, etween one national encampment and others. When identity refers to an indeli le mar" or code somehow written into the odies of its carriers, otherness can only e a threat. Identity is latent destiny. /een or unseen, on the surface ofthe ody or uried deep in its cells, identity fore'er sets one group apart from others who

lac" the particular, chosen traits that ecome the asis of typology and comparati'e e'aluation. 7o longer a site for the affirmation of su 8ecti'ity and auton- omy, identity mutates. Its motion re'eals a deep desire for mechanical soli- darity, seriality, and hypersimilarity. The scope for indi'idual agency dwindles and then disappears. *eople ecome earers of the differences A that the rhetoric of
a solute identity in'ents and then in'ites them to cele- rate. Rather than communicating and ma"ing choices,

indi'iduals are seen as o edient, silent passengers mo'ing across a flattened moral landscape toward the fi9ed destinies to which their essential identities , their genes, and the closed cultures they create ha'e consigned them once and for all. And yet, the desire to fi9 identity in the
ody is ine'ita ly frustrated y the ody>s refusal to disclose the re@uired signs of a solute incompati- ility people imagine to e located there.

$dentity politics achieve the opposite of their desired effect #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2LM-2LJ, Tashma6
These fragments from a history of unspea"a le ar arity underline how the

notion of fi9ed identity operates easily on oth sides ofthe chasm that usually di'ides scholarly writing from the disorderly world of political conflicts. Recently, identity has also come to constitute something of a ridge
etween the often discrepant approaches to understanding self and sociality found on the different sides of that widening As a theme in contemporary scholarship, identity has offered academic thin"ing an im- portant route ac" toward the struggles and uncertainties of e'eryday life, where the idea of identity has ecome especially resonant. It has also

pro'ided the distincti'e signatures of an inward, implosi'e turn that rings the difficult tas"s of politics to an end y ma"ing them appear irrele'ant in the face of deeper, more fundamental powers that regulate human conduct irrespecti'e of go'ernmental superficialities. If identity and difference are fundamental, then they are not amena le to eing reBtooled y crude
po- litical methods that cannot possi ly get to the heart of primal ontologies, destinies, and fates. ::hen the sta"es are this high, nothing can e done to offset the catastrophic conse@uences that result from tolerating difference and mista"en attempts at practicing democracy. +ifference corrupts and compromises identity. Dncounters with it are

8ust as unwelcome and po- tentially destructi'e as they were for <ouston /tewart $ham erlain. They place that most precious commodity, rooted identity, in gra'e 8eopardy. When national and ethnic identities are represented and pro8ected as pure, gygpgsure to difference threatens, them with dilution and compro- mises their prized purities with the e'erB present possi ility of contamina- tion. $rossing as mi9ture and mo'ement must e guarded against. 7ew hatreds and 'iolence arise not, as they did in the past, from supposedly re- lia le anthropological "nowledge of the identity and difference of the Other ut from the no'el pro lem of not eing a le to locate the OtherHs difference in the commLnasense le9icon of alterity. +ifferent people are certainly hated and feared, ut the timely antipathy against them is noth- ing compared 'rdth the hatreds turned toward the greater menace of the half-different and the partially familiar. To ha'e mi9ed is to ha'e een party to a great etrayal. Any unsettling traces of hy ridity must e e9cised from the tidy, leachedout zones of impossi ly pure culture. The safety of sameness can then e reco'ered y either ofthe

two options that ha'e regularly appeared at the meltdown point of this dismal logic: separation and slaughter. ace and fascism are intertwined 000 their movement cant possibly evade our offense #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2GG-2GJ, Tashma6
.RA$D0 A7+ )A$I/= %et us turn now toward the pro lems presented y these difficult historical lin"s. A

consideration of fascism and its conceptual rather than its contin- gently political connections to the idea of .race0 pro'ides an o 'ious way of recognizing the power of raciology and holding it at the center of these in@uiries. It might also contri ute something to a strategy for reintegrating interconnected ut falsely separated
histories, for ridging di'ergent disci- plines, and for approaching the apparently incommensura le moral claims which acti'e and deli erate commemoration of these catastrophic e'ents sets in motion. I approach the concept of fascism with trepidation not 8ust ecause it lin"s together so many different historical and local phenomena, lt has een engulfed y the way it has functioned as a term of general a use and corrupted y the way it has een used to e9press a sense of e'il that is frus- tratingly a stract ut that remains hostage to fashiona le contemporary fascination with o scenity, criminality, aggression, and horror. To reengage with the idea of generic fascism is , I hope, to wor" toward

redeeming the term from its tri'ialization and restoring it to a proper place in discussions of the moral and political limits of what is accepta le. 21 The urgency of that tas"
cannot e disputedA howe'er, my aims in this chapter are more modest. I would li"e only to outline an ethical economy for the multicultural present in which oth fascism and the raciologies that ha'e een intertwined with it are accorded serious if elated attention. The connections and continuities that come into 'iew when the reli- ance of fascism on raciology is fully appreciated can e distur ing.!] #nowing e9actly where fascisms egin, updating oursel'es as to what they loo", sound, and feel li"e, and e9ploring the ine'ita le continuities e- tween the normal orders of democratic go'ernance and their re'olutionary repudiation are all e9tremely difficult. <owe'er, the most rigorous and sensiti'e comparati'e wor" on these su 8ects has consistently demon- strated that there is much to e gained, morally and

intellectually, from stri'ing to ring these for idding and gna''ingly uncomforta le issues ac" into focus. They should e essential in our attempts to rewrite the history of our species and to distill and clarify its meanings for our o'm postcatastrophic predicament.
We retreat from these tas"s only if we are not prepared to face up to the commanding power of raciology as a means to di'ide and a use. <uge 'olumes ha'e een addressed to the many difficulties concerning how fascism should e defined.

We are o liged to distinguish etween fascism as a historical de'elopment, a political and social mo'ement, a rare pattern of go'ernment, and a recogniza le ideological and cultural formation. )ollowing the monumental wor" of the great comparati'e historians of fascism li"e Roger

4riffin and /tanley *ayne and specialists in its intel- lectual lineage li"e 4eorge =osse and gee' /ternheel, I thin" that pursu- ing a generic dehnition of fascism is not only possi le and desira le ut imperati'e. It is necessary not least ecause, although some contemporary enthusiasts for fascism con'eniently opt to wear 7azi uniforms, many do not announce their nihilistic and ultranationalist commitments so oldly. It is essential, as li'ing memory of the fascist period fades, to e a le to identify these new groups and their influence on the 'olatile li'es of postindustrial polities. 5ust maintaining a discussion a out fascism as an ongoing heuristic pro8ect has additional 'alue in a postBcold war setting from which the West has disappeared and where a re orn Durope must confront its past. *ondering the nature of

fascism and its recurrent appeal is not 8ust a matter of clarifying what those ofus who oppose racism are against. lt is a matter for antiracisits and would- e li erationists, too. lt o liges us to scrutinize our own political philosophies, practices, and cultural predilee- tions where they stray close to the dangers in'ol'ed in ecoming enamC oured of power.!2 I will discuss the special attracti'eness of fascism>s political techni@ues to some ofthe peoples who ha'e een its 'ictims in a later chapter. In the meantime, 4riffin>s minimal ut wieldy definition of fascism pro'ides an in'alua le starting point.!! <e accentuates its populist? and ultranationahstgyures and draws attention to the fascistsH claim to offer dynamic re irth after periods of national wea"ness and decadengl Other insightful commentators ha'e placed greater emphasis on the spe- cial in'estment that fascist mo'ements ha'e made in the ideal of fraternityQ6 The

comprehensi'e masculinization ofthe pu lic sphere and the militaris- tic style with which this has een accomplished in many different settings suggest a relationship to patterns of male desire that demand comparati'e ; and cross-cultural e'aluation.!E This isinot to deny the roles of women as r full, energetic, and "nowing participants in these mo'ements. <owe'er, A the strongly rnasculinist character deri'ed principally from the egtatipn grof war as a space in which men can "now themsel'es etter and lo'e one iiranotherilegitimately in the a sence of the feminine is not incidental. lt is iiclosely associated with the 'arieties of elligerent ultranationalism that fascists always articulate.

Their tactics are akin to industriali/ed genocide #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. E!M-E!J, Tashma6 The e9traordinary stories of these lac" detainees, anti-fascists, 'eter- ans, li erators, and military tra'elers are not 8ust welcome opportunities to recall the agency of lac"s in the worldBhistoric struggle against <itlerism. Though that act of reco'ery is itself an important gesture for Durope, they ha'e ac@uired another, less transient signincance. They are a 'alua le means to place lac" people and their attles against raciology and its codes in the same moral and political world that encompasses the righ- teous sufferings of the ;ews and the industrialized genocide that attended the implementation of racial-hygiene. In addition, these stories can now e part of ma"ing the .strategic0 uni'ersalism toward which my argument has een mo'ing. They promote an understanding of the 'ital lin"s etween racism and fascism that should e seen as part of contemporary po- litical conflict rather than as relics which e9press the essential, unchanging meaning of 7azism.

#$% O8 3 $T$3 000 %$N3 W!%%


"ultural e*pressions of racial identity sustain racism 000 several modern e*amples prove #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. !2-!E, Tashma6 As acti'ely deBpoliticized consumer culture has ta"en hold, the world of racialized appearances has ecome in'ested with another magic. This comes courtesy of de'elopments li"e the
proliferation of e'er-cheaper cos- metic surgery and the routine computer enhancement and modification of 'isual images. These changes, which uild upon a long history of technical procedures for producing and accentuating racial differences on film,2! un- dermine more than the integrity of raciological representation. They inter- act with other processes that ha'e added a conspicuous premium to today>s planetary traffic in the imagery of lac"ness. %ayer upon layer of easily commodified e9otica ha'e culminated in a racialized glamour and contri - uted an e9tra cachet to some degree of nonspecific, somatic difference. The perfect faces on ill oards and screens and in

magazines are no longer e9clusi'ely white, ut as they lose that uniformity we are eing pressed to consider and appreciate e9actly what they ha'e ecome, where they fit in the old hierarchy that is eing erased, and what illicit com ination of those familiar racial types com ined to produce that particular loo", that e9otic style, or that transgressi'e stance. The stimulating pattern of this hyper-'isi ility supplies the signature of a corporate multiculturalism in which some degree of 'isi le difference from an implicit white norm may e highly prized as a sign of timeliness, 'itality, inclusi'ity, and glo al reach. A whole new crop of lac" models, stylists, photographers, and now, than"s to the good offices of /pi"e %ee, a lac" ad'ertising agency, ha'e contri uted to this change of climate in the meaning of racialized signs, sym ols, and odies. The stardom of prominent iconic
<gures li"e Tyson &ec"ford, Tyra &an"s, and, ofcourse, %ee himself supplements the super- human personalities and conspicuous physical attri utes of the latest he- roic wa'e of lac" athletes who uilt connections to the emerging planetary mar"et in leisure, fitness, and sports products. ln that domain, lac"ness has pro'ed to e a su stantial asset. ::hat )anon, pondering the iconic stardom of 5oe %ouis and 8esse Owens, called .the cycle of the io- logicalwl was initiated with the mythic figure of The 7egro: either un- thin"ingly lithe and athletic or constitutionally disposed to e lethargic and lazy. That modern cycle may also e thought of as terminating in the space of lac" rnetaphysicality. gygmunt &auman has argued that the pri- mal scene of postmodern social life in the o'erde'elopcd world is eing staged in a distincti'e pri'ate relation to one\s own corporeality, through a disciplinary custodianship that can e specified as the idea of the ody .as tas".Il_ This has une9pected conse@uences where the ideal of physical prowess, to which lac"s were gi'en a special title in e9change <{r their disassociation from the mind, assumes an enhanced significance. It is est to e a solutely clear that the u i@uity and prominence eur- rently accorded to e9ceptionally eautiful

and glamorous ut nonetheless racialized odies do nothing to change the e'eryday forms of racial hierar- chy. The historic associations of lac"ness with infrahumanity, rutality, crime, idleness, e9cessi'e threatening fertility, and so on remain undistur ed. &ut the appearance of a rich 'isual culture that allows lac"ness to e eautiful also feeds a fundamental lac" of confidence in the power of the ody to hold the oundaries of racial difference in place.It creates an9iety a out the older racial hierarchies that made that re'olutionary idea of lac" eauty o9ymoronic, 8ust as it re@uires us to forget the political mo'ement that made its ac"nowledgment imperati'e. lt is as though these im- ages of nonwhite eauty, grace, and style somehow ma"e the matter of Irace0 secondary, particularly when they are lit, filtered, te9tured, and toned in ways that challenge the increasingly affled o ser'er\s sense of where racial oundaries might fall. ln this an9ious setting, new

hatreds are created not y the ruthless enforcement of sta le racial categories ut from a distur ing ina ility to maintain them. $onforming enthusiastically to wider social patterns, the surface of lac" odies
must now e tattooed, pierced, and randed if they are to disclose the deepest, most compelling truths of the pri'atized ontology within. The words IThug %ifeI famously in"ed onto the elo@uent torso of the late

Tupac /ha"ur, li"e the he9a- grams, Oriental characters, cartoon pictures, and other de'ices sported y a host of starsB Treach, )o9y &rown, and +ennis Rodman, to name only threeB conform to this trend and ha'e the additional significance of showing the world how far from the color lac" these muscled lac" odies really are.

#$% O8 3 $T$3 000 !"E L SO"$!%%8 "ONST A"TE&


ace doesnt e*ist 000 its as a social construction propped up by society 000 breaking away from this flawed conception is possible =utchinson4 , (+arren %enard, :isiting Assistant *rofessor, -ni'ersity of *ennsyl'ania %aw /chool, Assistant *rofessor, /outhern =ethodist -ni'ersity /chool of %aw. &.A., -ni'ersity of *ennsyl'aniaA ;.+., Oale %aw /chool, .$RITI$A% RA$D /T-+ID/: *rogressi'e Race &lindness?: Indi'idual Identity, 4roup *olitics, and Reform,0 G1 -$%A %. Re'. 2GMM, ;une !LL!, le9is, Tashma6
I. *rogressi'e Race &lindness: The Theory A. 4eneral Themes Although most critical scholars support race consciousness, a small group of critical scholars ha'e ta"en the position that society should a andon the

concepts of race and racial identity. /cholars in the humanities, such as Anthony Appiah and *aul 4ilroy,
ha'e produced the ul" of this scholarship. Recently, howe'er, scholars such as $hristi $unningham, Richard )ord, and Reginald %eamon Ro inson ha'e egun to em race progressi'e race lindness in legal analysis. This part discusses the central themes of progressi'e race lindness. &ecause the proponents of progressi'e race lindness do not thin" identically, this part also discusses, when rele'ant, certain important differences among the ideas of these scholars. 3_2GM15 2. Race Is /ocially $onstructed The proponents of progressi'e race lindness all start from the

proposition that race does not e9ist in natureA instead, race is a product of human effort and interaction. Reginald %eamon Ro inson, for e9ample, argues that Irace is not iologically factual. It is not real. As such, race does not ha'e any meaning that sur'i'es its social and historical conte9t. Race e9ists, if e'er, in our indi'idual and cultural consciousness.I 2K /imilarly, Richard )ord o ser'es that Iit is now almost common "nowledge that the idea of race-as- iological-difference has een discredited as a matter of science.I 2F Ad'ocates of progressi'e race lindness em race the persuasi'e contemporary social
theories that dispel traditional accounts of race (and other identity categories6 as products of iology. These categories are instead products of social construction: *olitics, history, economics, and social relations - rather than iology - fa ricate race. 21 !. Race $an &e A andoned &ecause they su scri e to constructi'ist theories of race, ad'ocates of

progressi'e race lindness contend that race does not ha'e an ine'ita le e9istence. On the contrary, race is a concept that society can discard. Ro inson challenges the normalization of racial identity. <e contends that race consciousness pro'ides life support for the racial category. Ro inson argues that Iif we do not constantly and consciously meditate on it, race cannot e9ist. -nfortunately, we fuel this social construct with our mental 3_2GJL5 "indling and intellectual logs.I !L $hristi $unningham urges persons of color to ImournI racial su 8ugation y setting aside
race as a component of their personal identities. !2 /he contends that persons of color can and should Ilet die our malignant pro9ies for 3community5,I such as racial identity, and re-create identity on nonartificial grounds. !! Richard )ord ma"es a similar claim as $unninghamHs - that race should e disaggregated from identity and

culture. <e argues that one can consistently support group consciousness for the sa"e of antisu ordination politics while remaining s"eptical of the coherence of group culture or culture-as-traditions and am i'alent or e'en hostile to traditionalism and the idea that the norms and practices of any group should e preser'ed from pressure to change. !E *aul 4ilroy e9hi its a strong faith in the a ility of society to transcend race. <is e9citement stems
from the scientific discrediting of the naturalness of race. 4ilroy argues that the term race linguistically implies a natural differentiation among indi'iduals that mas"s a deepening crisis in racial categorization rought a out y constructi'ist understandings of identity: 3Race5 stands outside of, and in opposition to, most attempts to render it secondary to the o'erwhelming sameness that o'erdetermines social relationships etween people and continually etrays the tragic predicaments of their common species life. The under'alued power of this crushingly o 'ious, almost anal human sameness, so close and asically in'ariant that it regularly passes unremar"ed upon, also confirms that the crisis of raciological reasoning presents an important opportunity where it points toward the possi ility of lea'ing IraceI ehind, of setting aside its disa ling use as we mo'e out of the time in which it could ha'e een e9pected to ma"e sense. !G The import of social construction theories for the proponents of progressi'e race lindness is clear: +ecause human

interaction and agency, rather than biology, create and re0create race4 humans can dismantle and set aside their usage of racial categori/ation.

#$% O8 3 $T$3 000 !%TE N!T$DE 000 !TF $(>OSS$+%E


The black)white binary isnt inevitable #ilroy4 ,k (*aul, *rofessor of American and Dnglish %iterature at #ing>s $ollege %ondon, Against 'ace, <ar'ard -ni'ersity *ress, pg. 2K, Tashma6 the ideal of military genderlessness can enhance our understanding of moral and ci'ic agency. As a sign of transitionA it hints at a uni'ersality that can e9ist in less elligerent forms. There need e no concessions to the flight from em odiment that has een associated with the consolidation of a stract, modern indi'iduality.K <ere, the constraints of odily e9istence ( eing in the world6 are admitted and e'en welcomed, though there is a strong inducement to see and 'alue them differently as sources of identification and empathy. The recurrence of pain, disease, humiliation and loss of dignity, grief and care for those one lo'es can all contri ute to an a stract sense of a human similarity powerful enough to ma"e solidari- ties ased on cultural particularity appear suddenly tri'ial. F
*erhaps, pending the e'entual su lation of go'ernmental militarism, /ome other features of this pragmatic, planetary humanism can e tentati'ely enumerated. Though most political philosophers who consider these @uestions ha'e ignored this possi ility or failed to recognize its truly su 'ersi'e force,

I would suggest that a certain distincti'eness might also e seen to emerge through the deli erate and self-conscious renunciation of .race0 as a means to categorize and di'ide human"ind. This radically nonracial humanism e9hi its a primary concern with the forms of human dignity that race
Bthin"ing strips away. Its counteranthropological and sometimes misanthropic orientation is most powerfully articulated where it has een accompanied y a elated return to consideration of the chronic tragedy, 'ulnera ility, and frailty that ha'e defined our species in the melancholic art of di'erse poetic figures from %eopardi and 7ietzsche to Dsther *hillips and +onny <athaway. Its signature is pro'ided y a grim determination to ma"e that predicament of fundamentally fragile, corporeal e9istence into the "ey to a 'ersion of humanism that contradicts the triumphal tones of the anthropological discourses that were enthusias- tically supporti'e of raceBthin"ing in earlier, imperial times.

%$>S$TI 3 $T$3 000 'N"


Their attempt to strengthen identity politics backfires 000 they gloss over the fact that whiteness is also an identity that will benefit from their movement !N& they distract from other relevant social issues 000 the alternative is to vote negative to mobili/e around a common group identity 000 empirically4 this is the only viable movement %ipsit/4 M (4eorge, *rofessor of &lac" /tudies and /ociology at the -ni'eristy of $alifornia, /anta &ar ara, The Possessive (nvestment in Whiteness, Temple -ni'ersity *ress, e rary, pg. JJ-J1, Tashma6
-nity and +i'ision We li'e in an age of painful contradictions. =ass communication and mass migration ring the people of the world closer together in unprecedented ways, uniting di'erse populations through common participation in glo al mar"ets, in'estments, and mass media. Oet the practices and processes that affect e'eryone do not affect e'eryone e@ually.

At the 'ery moment that we find the people of the world ecoming more united, we also find that economic ine@uality, cultural insecurity, and ethnic, religious, and racial ri'alries renew old antagonisms and engender new conflicts, lea'ing us parado9ically more di'ided than e'en efore. Dthnic di'isions and racial conflicts ha'e a particularly poisonous presence at the present moment. )rom &osnia to &elfast, from Rwanda to Russia, from Dast Timor to Tel A'i', we see the destructi'e conse@uences of ethnic antago- nisms e'erywhere. It is understanda le that under these circumstances people might e wary of any "ind of .identity politics0 in which racial , religious, and ethnic identities ecome the asis for political solidarity and cultural practice. Writers arguing from a 'ariety of political perspecti'es ha'e criti@ued identity politics as encouraging allegiance to group interests rather than a sense of ci'ic responsi ility e9tending across racial and ethnic lines, as an assault on the traditions and 'alues most responsi le for human progress, and as a di'ersion from real social pro lems that ha'e nothing to do with social identities. Alarmist
articles in ma8or news magazines emoan the erosion of a .common0 culture in the -nited /tates, while neoconser'ati'es sneer a out the emergence of .'ictim studies0 in academia. $ritics attac" minority artists and intellectuals as guiltmongering whiners demanding special pri'ileges and see"ing to ele'ate inferior wor"s in order to ele'ate their own selfesteem. On a roader front, am itious politicians demagogically dismantle the antidiscrimination mecha- nisms esta lished as a result of the ci'il rights mo'ement, misla eling antiracist remedies as instruments of .re'erse racism.0 All around us, we see e'idence of a fundamentally new era for the possessi'e in'estment in whiteness, fueled y ferment o'er identity politics. Oet

once we remem er that whiteness is also an identity, one with a long political history, contemporary attac"s on .identityH politics come into clear relief as a defense of the traditional pri'ileges and priorities of whiteness in the face of critical and political pro8ects that successfully disclose who actually holds power in this society and what has een done with it. $ontrary to the claims of neo- conser'ati'es that they stand for uni'ersal interests, the politics of whiteness as e9emplified y attac"s on immigrants and on affirmati'e action amount to little more than a self-interested strategy for preser'ing the possessi'e in'estment in whiteness, a politics ased solely on identity. $on'ersely, the est ethnic studies scholarship, cultural production, and community organizing aims at opening up an understanding of ethnicity as hy rid, heterogeneous, and multiple (in the elo@uent formulation of %isa %owe6Bas a political pro8ect aimed at creating identities ased on politics rather than politics ased on identities. These pro8ects rely on egalitarian politics and struggles for social 8ustice to counter
the identity politics of whiteness that generates identities ased on the defense and perpetuation of ine@uality.!F +ifferent ethnic groups ha'e different histories and e9periencesA as long as that is the case, organizing along ethnic lines will always ma."e sense. Oet ethnic groups stil.l must decide which things ring them together and which things di'ide them, which groups offer them useful alliances and which do not. =o

ilizing around a common group identity does not preclude forming strategic and philosophical alliances with other groups. -nder
current conditions, defending immigrants re@uires solidarity among Asian, %atino, and $ari ean communities. Attac"s

on linguistic di'ersity cre- ate opportunities for coalitions etween %atinos and Asians, while incidents of racially moti'ated police rutality ring together immigrants and citizens. Df- forts to organize trade unions among low-wage wor"ers re@uire coalitions that include African Americans, %atinos, Asian Americans, 7ati'e Americans, and Duropean Americans. The $ommittee against Anti-Asian :iolence in 7ew Oor" defends Asian 'ictims of 'igilante 'iolence and police rutality, ut it also unites with the 7ational $ongress for *uerto Rican Rights to stage a Racial Iustice +ay rally and march, while pu licizing the acti'ities of *ro8ect RDA$<, a multicul- tural organization esta lished to pro'ide drop-in centers that offer safe ha'ens to gay and les ian youths, support <I:-positi'e youth, help women defend themsel'es against se9ual assaults, and train youth leaders.!1 Asian Immigrant Women Ad'ocates (AIWA6 in Oa"land, $alifornia, rings together second- and third-generation Asian American women united in their commitment to help empower Asian immigrant women wor"ing in the electronics, hotel, and gar- ment industries. AIWA>s mem ers come from different national ac"grounds, spea" different languages, and elong to different classes, yet their shared con- cern a out the l.i'es of low-wage women wor"ers from Asia leads them to political actions that address the class pro lems that women face as wor"ers, the gen- der pro lems they confront as women, the legal pro lems they e9perience as immigrants, and the racial pro lems they encounter as mem ers of racial.ized groups.E] Organizing efforts among %atino wor"ers at the 7ew Otani <otel in %os Angeles ha'e drawn upon ethnic solidarity in =e9ican and /al'adoran communities, ut they ha'e also fused a strategic alliance with #orean 'eterans of Iapanese sla'e la or camps with longstanding grie'ances against the hotel>s Iapanese owner, the #a8ima $orporation, for its role in Iapanese imperialism during W'orld War II.E2 The

&us Riders -nion in %os Angeles originated in pro lems with pu lic transportation in the city that affect all ethnic groups. Oet the group>s analysis showed that the transportation routes fa'ored y
inner-city residents gener- ated funds for the transit system that su sidized the commuter trains used y su ur an residents. Arguing that neigh orhood race effects accounted for the disproportionate resources made a'aila le to commuters from mostly white su ur s, the union rought suit against the transit authority on ci'il rights grounds. In this case, the 2L to !L percent of white us riders in the inner city e9perienced 'iolations of their ci'il rights ecause they relied on ser'ices utilized disproportionately y minorities. The &us Riders -nion reached an impressi'e settlement with the transit authority Their strategy demonstrated the centrality of race in determining access to pu lic ser'ices, yet they

mo ilized a struggle that did not re'ol'e around racial identities, ut rather one that united mem ers of all races in a common struggle for social 8ustice.E! Action within and across
ethnic groups in these struggles is made possi le y what the participants "now, not who they are. Their situated "nowledges, historical e9periences, and current struggles with power gi'e their ethnic iden- tities their determinant meanings. %i."e scholars in $hicano studies and other ethnic studies fields, their "nowledge comes from their e9periences, their strate- gic insights from the ways in which ha'ing less power than your enemies ma"es it important to "now the truth and dangerous to deny reality. *olitical struggle, social analysis, and social theory are mutually constituti'eA each is etter when lin"ed to the other. As Iames &aldwin pointed out years ago, . *eople who cling to their delusions find it difficult, if not impossi le, to learn anything worth learning: a people under the necessity of creating themsel'es must e9amine e'erything, and soa" up learning the way the roots of a tree soa" up water. A people still held in ondage must elie'e that l" shall "now the truth, and the truth shall ma"e yefree8m

You might also like