The R-word in question is racism. Everyone’s throwing it around these days, but very few people seem to agree on what it means.
The NAACP recently asked Tea Party leaders to repudiate the movement’s racist members, to stop displaying “continued tolerance for bigotry and bigoted statements.”
Mark Williams of the Tea Party Express responded by describing the NAACP’s antiquated use of the word “colored” (in its name) as racist and declaring that the storied Civil Rights organization makes “more money off of race than any slave trader” ever did.
Other right-wingers simply dismiss the NAACP’s accusation of racism as racist, the socio-political equivalent of saying “I’m rubber; you’re glue. Everything you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.”
Via tweet, Sarah Palin called the NAACP’s very charge “appalling.”
In other racial news, Jesse Jackson is still being clowned and condemned for claiming that Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert can only see Lebron James as a high-priced “runaway slave,” and Whoopi Goldberg has been defending her defense of Mel Gibson all week. For the last few days, we’ve been getting new tape recorded snippets of a voice that sounds a lot like Gibson’s (granted, a demonically possessed version) raging against the mother of his youngest child with a barrage of sexist expletives: c-words, b-words, f-bombs and just about every other letter in the alphabet. That same tape-recorded voice matter-of-factly deploys terms like “wetback” and the n-word to color its apoplectic attacks.
“I have had a long relationship with Mel,” Goldberg declared. “You can say he’s being a bonehead, but I can’t sit [here] and say that he’s a racist, having spent time with him in my house with my kids.”
Detractors dismiss Whoopi as an apologist with a long history of defending the indefensibly racist, Ted Danson’s blackface Friar’s Club performance being their prime example. Whoopi’s position is instructive though, and reminiscent of when African-American comic Paul Mooney took some heat for not demonizing Michael Richards after the latter’s 2006 “meltdown,” when Richards peppered his comedy club audience with a string of n-words and lynching imagery (in response to some black hecklers).
But there are at least two important things to remember in any discussion about the facts or fictions of racism (and counter/accusations thereof).
First, racism is almost never a smoking gun. It explains very little all by itself. Social causality is much more complicated than that.
Historians of early America have been unpacking and debating a version of this point for years. Our country’s history of chattel slavery wasn’t caused (in any simplistic and straightforward sense) by racism. Was Trans-Atlantic slavery a clear-cut example of racism? Yes. Did racism (as ideology) facilitate, justify, and rationalize the dehumanization of African people? It did. But racism alone doesn’t provide us with the system’s motives and raison d’etre. At the very least, we’d need to add economic arguments to that mix.
All of that is simply to say that racists are never just racists. Racism is not a mysterious island somewhere in the middle of the ocean. Eighteenth- and 19th-century slavemasters were racists, but they weren’t only racist. They were also revolutionaries and humanitarians, adventurers and religionists. To call someone racist isn’t about explanatory exclusivity. Racism is one important ingredient in the recipe for American apple pie, but there are still other details to be worked out about how much it adds, about when in the process it gets added, and about what else goes into the mixing bowl.
Second, racism is less about what someone is (absolutely and forever) than about what a person does (in specific moments). Racism is at least as much about opportunity as ontology (to butcher a proper philosophical term).
We often imagine ourselves to be looking for racists who are racist 365 days out of the year. To chronicle the several days each week or month or lifetime when they are not demonstrably racist is either (i) to dismiss such fallow periods as exceptions (or mere performance) or (ii) to offer them up as proof that said accusations are false. But it doesn’t make sense to think of racism the way we think of, say, racial identity (as something we conspicuously carry around with us all the time, everywhere we go). That’s one of the most powerful points demonstrated by Officer John Ryan, the disturbing character played by Matt Dillon in the award-winning 2004 film Crash.
In one scene, Ryan is a working-class cop who mercilessly harasses a middle-class black couple during a traffic stop, clearly relishing his racial privilege and lauding it over his intimidated victims. In another scene, he can risk his own life to pry that same black woman from a burning car before it explodes.
Critics knock the film for ignoring the lopsided specifics of America’s racial history, making every example of racial prejudice (black on white, white on black, white on Latino, black on Latino, black on Asian…) equivalent to every other.
Dillon’s character was often singled-out as a pathetic attempt to humanize and redeem white racism. But that’s only one interpretation. The film also argues that a racial monster in one moment can be a self-sacrificing hero in the next. Very few people organize their every breath around racial animus. We often slip in and out of racism’s seductive logic: sometimes rising to meet the better angels of our nature, sometimes falling victim to the easy lure of social scapegoating. That’s what’s so complicated about how racism animates our social lives today, helping to explain why Whoopi is right and wrong about Mel Gibson. Gibson might be a child-friendly, politically correct dinner guest one night and a maniacal phone caller spitting out the n-word in the morning.
16 Responses to The R-Word (Again)
falzf - July 16, 2010 at 10:36 am
John, this one of the most profound essays I’ve ever read, anywhere, on the topic of racism. Thank you.Laurie Fendrich
glord - July 16, 2010 at 11:00 am
Exceptional analysis. Wish I had said all this.
livefreeordie2 - July 16, 2010 at 2:51 pm
It is a good essay. . .an excellent essay. But there is more to say and I completely disagree with some of your points. First of all, racism is a word – a word with a dictionary definition. And the definition speaks to a belief – a belief that one’s own race is superior to other races. You have described quite eloquently the kinds of behavior that flow from that type of belief, but suggesting that racism is more about what a person does than what a person is misses the mark dramatically. For a person to be a racist, he/she must believe that his/her race is superior. When Imus makes a bone-headed, unfunny joke involving a black women’s basketball team, for example, it would only be racist if he believed his race to be superior. Absent that belief, it’s just a bone-headed joke. And that’s where this whole racism thing has gone off the tracks. Someone who judges others based solely on race is an evil, wretched fool, someone to be scorned – a racist. And we all know that in 2010. Which is why calling someone a racist or alleging racism is a very serious charge. It is not what someone does alone, it requires the above belief. Unfortunately, for political reasons (or reasons of personal gain), the left and some in the African American community apply the label to things people do for public policy reasons. Disagree with Obamacare? You must be a racist. Want strict enforcement of immigration laws? You must be a racist. It’s an attempt to coerce cooperation through fear – fear of being labeled a racist. It’s disgusting behavior.Almost as disgusting as those who would have us believe that only whites can be racists because it isn’t about race, rather it’s about power. Is there anyone here that can, with a straight face, make a case that the African American Maurice Heath isn’t a racist when he says, “You want freedom? You’re gonna have to kill some crackers! You’re gonna have to kill some of their babies!” This is the same man who stood in front of a Philadelphia polling place with a night stick threatening voters. (Yeah. . .the same one that the DoJ has decided not to pursue). From his words, you can deduce his beliefs as opposed to a comedian making a dumb joke.There’s no question that slavery was America’s original sin. There’s no question that there are racists in this country – of all races. There’s no question that racism, and misguided attempts to remedy the effects of racism, shaped many of the public policies that we continue to live with. . . That said, we’ve come a long way from when I was young. The days of Birmingham and Watts on the TV – when the phrase “race riot” was in use every day. We can’t know the thoughts or beliefs of everyone, but discrimination is not legal and is not tolerated. Those with openly racist beliefs are shunned. It’s time that we begin to shun those who would use frivolous charges of racism to try to silence their political opposition.
sherbygirl - July 17, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Excellent essay and excellent comment, livefreeordie2. I wonder, however, if racial superiority is the real mark of a racist. There are plenty of “positive” racial stereotypes (AfAm being better dancers, Asians are better at school, Jews are better with money, etc). Now, I suppose you could consider this “racist” towards your own race (because you view another race as superior) but it confuses the issue a great deal. To continue on with your definition, Maurice Heath may not be racist in the sense you mean. He may be calling for the killing of “crackers” because he see whites as superior. I’m being intentionally difficult and slighly obtuse with these questions only to illustrate that, yes, we claim to know racism when we see it, but it resists any concrete definition as we understand it as a society. There may be a definition in the dictionary, but context is key to understanding how any word is used and how it is meant in society. Thank you for a useful and thought-provoking discussion.
trendisnotdestiny - July 17, 2010 at 7:08 pm
QUOTE:”For a person to be a racist, he/she must believe that his/her race is superior. It would only be racist if he believed his race to be superior. Absent that belief, it’s just a bone-headed joke.”"Someone who judges others based solely on race is an evil, wretched fool, someone to be scorned – a racist. And we all know that in 2010. Which is why calling someone a racist or alleging racism is a very serious charge. It is not what someone does alone, it requires the above belief.”livefreeordie2, After reading your post, I am uncertain whether you understand the complexity of Dr. Jackson’s gift to us in the R(word) again, but I read it through the lens of multiple forms of racism. When reading it that way, I can only construe that most of your comments involve a passionate, yet uninformed understanding of racism… Racism is not a singular notion nor is it just a word. Here are couple words for your personal benefit…1) OVERT & COVERT RACISM – Personally mediated (what most people refer to when speaking about r-word in public)… Language, direct affronts, attacks on character, jokes, videos, music etc… And in some cases, racism draws attention for purposeful intentions or an unintended understandings…Society shapes the terms for overt and covert racism. As our culture has changed this has been a location where we see the post-racial commentary, why can’t we move on from this piece, and it wasn’t me to perpetrated these acts, (white america) why should I have to make for the past…2) INSTITUTIONAL RACISM – this starts off as a historical means of “othering” or “discipling” those who are different or as Jones refers to as the Historical insult. Structures are put in place to advantage one group versus another (historically structures who have power to effect this advantage like banks, police, jails, courts and educational institutions). At the same time, the culture is selling “superiority” within the structures using biological determinism, unearned privilege and an implicit understanding that these structures (barriers)are for one set of people and not for another… Here the history of socioeconomic status for white families and families of color are transformational…. Transgenerational wealth, credit worthiness and access to well-paying jobs protect these structures from outsiders as well as strengthen hierarchies… (This type of racism, we all participate in; ALL OF US) By virtue of living in a society with these structures we all have a conscious notion and an unconscious notion of racism…. It is our responsibility to create awareness from living in a racist culture…. This should not be confused with individual covert and overt forms of racism… The institution has measures to protect itself from the criticism of racism over the years…3) INTERNALIZED RACISM – Jones discusses this type of racism as eroding ones’ sense of value in society. I prefer the mirror analogy where the outside mirrors to one thing to a privileged group and a more incidious message to the oppressed group. Often this is compounded by fewer supports, resources, and insights into larger institutions which the oppressed class receives little access to…. We know through marketing and propaganda that if you tell a group enough times, in event different ways with enough intensity that they are not privileged based on pigment, sexuality, body style, X Chromosome etc… eventually that message gets internalized inward… This type of racism that all of us see the least, but it has huge emotional impact. So, livefreeordie2, when I read Dr. Jackson, I take in his comments that we all are capable at any moment of racism or bravery. I take in that racism happens even when we do not intend it to be so or when we fully understand the concept (like Imus). I take in historically that many still claim the r-word is a thing of the past, but very few of the institutional structures have been consciously changed. I take in that institutional racism makes me more racist by virtue of living in this culture and that we all have the capacity for it whether intended or unintended…. I take in the fact that many experience it without my knowledge…. I take in that Dr. Jackson’s central point in the article is that a lot of people throw it around and yet do not have a nuanced understanding! http://www.citymatch.org/downloads/JonesGardenersTale.pdfHere is the single best articulation of racism: definition, structure and concepts. The author is Camara Phyllis Jones MD, Phd….
bradleyhockey - July 19, 2010 at 10:04 am
Hollywood blacklisting worries me. Where to begin? Calling all studio heads and their housekeepers- keep a recorder and submit trailers to the appropriate agency at once. Calling all comedians and rap artists- submit scripts and lyrics to the appropriate agency prior to performance. Hollywood not loaded with alcoholics- journalists are teetotalers? Am I going mad? Racism, sexism and misognists not running studios or running top talent agencies?? And while we are at it how about revving up the sympathy vote in Hollywood for Roman Polanski. Studio heads pulling strings and coughing up dollars to keep Roman cooped up in his chalet in Gstaad- oh my. Funny Gstaad is not far from where Chaplin was exiled to right? Anyone read the rap sheet on Romans crime- talk about under the influence?? I dont like the notion of McCarthyism- last time the theme was Communism this time its political correctness and the shock of hearing a man speak privately about private matters with his wife- and oh by the way- doctored tapes are the high tech version of McCarthyism. If Hollywood continues to roast Good ole Mel- Nannies, Housekeepers, interns, ex wives, partners get out your flip cameras- R-E-C-O-R-D!! Now you might not ever work in this town again but what a retirement package!! Sorry recording people like this and doing the Frankenstein torch march is much more horrifying to me than listening to a drunk on tape say a slew of abusive words patched together for world wide distribution. Havent we learned from the McCarthy days that the gatekeepers were the WORST of the WORST speaking out of 2 sides of their closeted twisted lives? Sorry I don’t like doing the Frankenstein dance. Whether foundation dollars or Hollywood dollars help the gatekeepers keep the rifraff out- its all the same politics to me.
trainer12 - July 19, 2010 at 10:44 am
My institution of higher learning has about 24% minority or people of color enrollment. Yet it has only about 10% of the faculty, both full and part time of minority or of people of color. For Aministrative Leaders, it is about 5% from minority or of “people of color” background. It seems to me, when you look at my institutions demographics for the non-managerial service and support staff, the Administrative side has 90% or higher miniority participation of minority or people of color backgrounds. The lower you go in the ranks Administration or Faculty the darker the skin color you get. Also, if you are a 9 or 10 month Administrative or a part-time Adjunct, there are no medical, dental or tuition reimbursements. So in a sense, we have recreated the Southern Plantation and their is no ladder or opportunity for advancement for oneself or for one’s children. So this may be seen as “institutional racism”, but I see it as more class discrimination or “classism”, because their are whites in those low level department positions, who are held back because of their function, lack of education, skills and exoerience. And even if they are lucky and obtain a bachelor’s and/or a master’s degrees, they have to leave the institution, because of the their “killer skill” or job titles as “janitor” “secretary”, “security guard” or “food service” workers. I know of three individuals, all with Master’s Degrees from this institution, one with a Computer Science Degree, one with a Communications and another with a Nursing Degree, could not get a professional or teaching job, because they “lacked experience” at that level in that area. The one with the Nursing Degree left our institution because he couldn’t get a higher level administration or teaching position because he was seen as a security guard, even though he was a Lieutenant. So I long for the day when merit and the “content of our character” will be the criteria for hire and promotion.
yandoodan - July 19, 2010 at 10:58 am
A superb essay, Dr. Jackson, and very clarifying. Your contrast between opportunity and ontology is particularly appealing, and on-target.It is true that racism is endemic among Americans, and that racism, like pornography, is a sort of “I know it when I see it” thing. But how do we construct a concept of racism when we reject the very idea of an ontology of an individual — the idea that an individual human being has an essense, an unchanging identity: racist, gay, proletariate, Republican, minority, whatever. What if we believe that an individual is the sum of his or her experiences, decisions, and beliefs, unsummarizable? And, as these change constantly, that individual’s “essense” changes constantly?What does “racist” mean then?We need a perspective on racism — and other social constructs so important to our social and political dialogs — that has meaning in a nominalist universe. For that is surely the universe we live in, like it or not.
livefreeordie2 - July 20, 2010 at 9:24 am
It is indeed a difficult topic, however, as I tried to say in my earlier comment, there are those who would obscure the obvious for their own purposes. TrendorDestiny provides us with a Baskin-Robbins like menu of kinds of racism. I’m sure that all those definitions are academically legitimate to one degree or another, but it misses the point. What point? Racism is serious stuff. We should recognize it when we see it and at the same time, not throw the charge around lightly. Two items in today’s news are illustrative.Item 1. Sarah Palin is in a dustup with NYC over plans to put a mosque adjacent to Ground Zero. She sent a twitter message suggesting that such a move would “stab (many Americans) through the heart” and got a response from a Bloomberg policy aide named Andrea Batista Schlesinger that asked, “Whose hearts? Racist Hearts?” Now, forget about the right or wrong of either side of the issue. The thing that struck me is that this has nothing to do with race. Nothing at all. Yet the first response of this policy aide was to accuse not just Palin of racism, but anyone who disagrees with putting the Mosque near Ground Zero. Item 2. Shirley Sherrod, appointed by the Obama administration in 2009 to be the Georgia Director of Rural Development was speaking at the March 2010 NAACP Freedom Fund Banquet. During her speech (Go to Youtube.com and search for her name to hear it for yourself) she spoke of a white farmer that was sent to her for help. She said that when she thought of the poor Blacks who had lost their land, and this guy was white, she “Didn’t give him the full force of what I could do.” Even later in her speech when she suggests she learned that it was more about have vs. have not, she says it’s still about black and white. I think she’s a racist through and through, but please look for yourself. Btw, she either resigned or was fired today and the NAACP has come out with a statement condemning her behavior. But this happened in March. It happened at an NAACP event. Why did it take four months and a viral web video for the NAACP to figure that out? The reaction of the audience is, to me, almost as important as Sherrod’s statements. There’s no apparent negative reaction at all among those visible. Why not?So. My point, once again, is that when we see a racist, we should react with fierce disapproval. But the accusation should NEVER be made lightly. To call all those who disagree with a policy decision racist when the decision doesn’t even involve race is just as despicable as actually being a racist.
livefreeordie2 - July 20, 2010 at 12:11 pm
My, my. . . it is a busy day for news about racism. There is a report out from a conservative web site that a group of journalists in 2008 talked about deflecting criticism of Obama during the Rev. Wright controversy. Apparently, they got hold of emails from a listserv for liberal journalists – Journolist – that includes a back and forth about trying to prevent the Wright story from damaging Obama’s campaign. There is a rather derisive article on salon.com minimizing the importance of the whole thing, but even in that article, they quote the journalist Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Examiner as saying the following:”If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them – Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares – and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country?”Again, I don’t care about Wright or Obama in this case. What bothers me is that someone in a position to smear reputations tried to recruit others in a position to smear reputations to call people racist without any foundation. He was willing to attach that damning word to people simply to advance his own political beliefs. (Does the fact that he was supposed to be an objective journalist make it worse or not?) I disagree with yandoodan – Racism is not endemic in America. There is less and less of it every day and the less common it is, the more serious each charge becomes. The even greater problem than falsely accusing someone is that eventually, with enough false accusations, the word will indeed lose its meaning – and its impact.
trendisnotdestiny - July 20, 2010 at 6:56 pm
Baskin Robbins Flavor #1: Rocky Road”Racism is not endemic in America. There is less and less of it every day and the less common it is, the more serious each charge becomes.” http://www.faireconomy.org/files/SoD_2010_Drained_Report.pdf1) People of color as a whole had only 16 cents of wealth for every dollar of white wealth in 2007 (Sect. 2).Whites are 34 times more likely to have a median net wealth over2) $3.5 million than African-Americans, based on new analysis of Survey of Consumer Finance data3) Blacks and Latinos are 2.9 and 2.7 times as likely, respectively, to live in poverty as whites (Graph in Sect. 1).4) The median value of the financial assets held by white families with assets was $39,500, while families of color with assets held only $5,500.———————————————————–Baskin Robbins Flavor #2 Superman”Racism is serious stuff”1) Then do not minimize it (you seem to put a lot of energy into making molehills out of mountains)2) Then address my central points (which is that we all participate in racism either personally mediated, institutional or internalized). It has not gone away! Do not rationalize it away while selling us the idea that racism occurs less and less.3) Then do not change the subject or deflect… you have expressed enough ‘personal responsibility rhetoric’ here to convince me that your understanding of racism is more about humiliating overt racist behavior as well as fomenting white denial about the day to day problems associated with racism… You cannot have it both ways, it is very serious but only occurs infrequently… What about institutional racism? 4) Lastly, then do not use claims of competing victimization (your examples are really precious livefree, but lets get real here. These examples you point to, obfuscate how dominance works in society. Who has the power to make the rules create the narratives: A) Katrina – Denziger Bridge Shooting B) Lousiana – Jena 6C) Prison System – charges, sentencing & overturned convictionsD) Wage & Employment Disparities – see aboveE) Payday Loan Saturated – Communities of Color (400% interest) Yeah right, livefree, racism is less and less….. You need to read-learn more and write about this subject less… Someone like Tim Wise might be of help. Baskin-Robbins Ice CreamFlavor of the Month: Livefree Nutty Cheesecake
livefreeordie2 - July 20, 2010 at 11:38 pm
Sorry. . . you’re wrong. You can dig into all the statistics you want and it doesn’t really amount to much more than discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. As each new generation is born into a world where racism and discrimination are unacceptable and as the older generations pass, it will continue to recede. It will never completely go away because there will always be morons, but it will be looked upon as an oddity.When I was growing up, homosexuality was pretty well hidden and the subject of open scorn. More than half a century later, gay marriage is legal in the state I live in. It’s controversial to be sure, but the legislature passed it and the governor signed it. Gay relationships are nothing terribly odd to the kids growing up today. Just as interracial marriages are nothing terribly odd. That wasn’t so when I was married to a woman of a different race. . .I’m tired of your many learned points. By trying to convince everyone that racism is everywhere and that, even if we don’t realize it, we’re ALL racists, all you do is feed divisiveness and perpetuate a victim mentality. Immerse yourself in it. . .go ahead! Study and research it from morning ’til night. I’ll pass, thanks, because racists are a dying breed, thank God, and I find your points to be of limited usefulness.
livefreeordie2 - July 21, 2010 at 9:14 am
Correction – I must apologize for apparently getting the Sherrod story wrong. Rather than being a story about racist attitudes, it is, again apparently, a story about change – a story about overcoming feelings based on race. I got suckered in by the video and the fact that by the time I read the story, she had already been fired by the White House and the NAACP had denounced her. Based on that, I did exactly what I’ve been complaining about – labeled this woman a racist unfairly. I was wrong about Sherrod (unless the story changes again tomorrow. . .) The entire story still raises questions, but she is clearly not a racist.
trendisnotdestiny - July 21, 2010 at 12:55 pm
livefreeordie2,QUOTE”I’m tired of your many learned points. That is comprises many good dialogues, you know points, experiences and differing beliefs…..QUOTEBy trying to convince everyone that racism is everywhere and that, even if we don’t realize it, we’re ALL racists, all you do is feed divisiveness and perpetuate a victim mentality. Immerse yourself in it. . .go ahead! You say racism occurs less and less…. I say racism has morphed and occurs more and more subtley… Feeding racism involves not ackowledging it when it exists (fomenting a minimization, rationalized view of denial)…. The only way to fight racism is to look for it or as you put immerse yourself in it… This isn’t about convincing: its about being open to other people’s life history and context… What creates divisiveness and victims is when the culture sends the message of personal individual responsibility while racist institutions maintain their old objectives to stratify…. QUOTE”Study and research it from morning ’til night. I’ll pass, thanks, because racists are a dying breed, thank God, and I find your points to be of limited usefulness.”Understood…. I find it funny that we are at the end of our dialogue and you are no closer to understanding what a racist is than before… No wonder racists are dying breeds in your world, you are too tired to look at the issue.
livefreeordie2 - July 21, 2010 at 3:12 pm
trendisnotdestiny – Thanks. I really appreciate your input.
honore - July 28, 2010 at 9:25 am
John, I KNOW that as you read these exercises in pedanticism, your funny bone must (very privately) be experiencing phantom tickles. And yes there is a lot of alleged “truth” in many of these comments. But I KNOW that you must be asking yourself…”why is it that a black man has to write about racism and the rest of the country gets a pass “GO” card and collects a lifetime of free rent in America”.I would love to meet with you and discuss the answer.In the meantime, I will share some of my most favorite white apologist quotes-in-denial:”I just don’t see ‘race’”"Why can’t you just let go of the past?”"Race doesn’t exist; it’s just a social construct, after all”"We’re all black at some level”"You know I do support diversity”"If we just had more interracial marriages, then….”And then they hop into their bicycle-racked Volvos filled with sweaty spandex, stop for hunk of cheese at Whole Foods, then drive off to their all-white enclaves in University Heights.Thank you for your article. I can always count on you to write a cogent, comprehensible and candid treatise, though I can also count on predictable responses….seen it all in Madison, WIP.S. Let me know if you want me to write you privately.