by Tyson Amir
That is exactly why this work is not some attempt at race relations. I actually believe the idea of "race relations" is a backward undertaking that is counterproductive to pursue. The idea of "relations" is something that presupposes equality between those parties relating. As if both parties are equally open to dialogue and listening to concerns from the other party and possibly making changes or agreements based on said discussion. This is nowhere near the reality for America between black and white. Black people have been victimized by the American system since its inception. The only group that has received worse treatment than blacks in America are our indigenous native brothers and sisters. European migration to the Americas has meant almost complete annihilation of indigenous peoples, cultures, and languages. In what is now called the United States of America, native populations have been completely marginalized and victimized to levels of epic proportions.
The black struggle for liberation will forever be in solidarity with native peoples because their oppressor is our oppressor. The main difference between our experiences is that blacks have been thoroughly oppressed within the system of America, while the Indigenous peoples have been kept on the boundaries of American political and social life but have been exploited and oppressed all the same. Native Americans were not considered part of the United States of America until the early 1900s. Black people have been considered part of the U.S. as property, beasts of burden, and beings with no political rights since the beginning of the colonial era, and we've been forced to exist within the system ever since.
And it is precisely for this reason that race relations is such an idiotic endeavor in my opinion. My freedom, equality, dignity, and human rights in my society are not a matter of round table discussion for white overseers to ruminate over. I do not need to negotiate for your intellectual approval of what is rightfully mine and my people’s. My people and I, like anyone else in "civilized" society, have a right to exercise our freedoms, and that is a fact that is not dependent upon anyone else. I am not a fan of simple dualistic binaries, but White America and those who ally with the privileges of White America are either actively working to make full freedom and equality for blacks and all oppressed groups a reality, or they're on the wrong side.
Black freedom and equality is a must, and you either recognize that and work toward making that a reality, or you're in the way, simply another obstacle for us to maneuver through as we work to manifest our liberty, dignity, and freedom by any means necessary. Hence, no need or reason for "race relations" conversations; the time for talking has passed. We've talked and petitioned for almost 400 years; it is beyond the time for action now. Please note that any who choose to ally with our movement and who honestly wish to work to help make freedom and equality for all a reality can join at anytime. For those who wish to stand on the wrong side of history and cling to an immoral and unethical system, be forewarned that you will be seeing us shortly, and there are some who hope you do not move out of the way when we come to take what is rightfully ours.
Understanding Racism
Many attempts have been made to qualify racism, but most definitions are terribly inadequate. The main reason for this inadequacy is because this entire conversation is taking place in what can be called, "the language of the colonizer." This is borrowing a concept from Frantz Fanon, who spoke at length about the experience of a people being colonized by an outside force. To paraphrase Fanon, colonization can be more than just physical. We often think of borders, personal liberty, and resources, or things that are tangible being taken when discussing colonization, but colonization can be mental as well. In the example of Native Americans in what is now known as the United States of America, despite their best resistance efforts, some groups were so thoroughly colonized that they were forced to no longer practice their native religions. For other indigenous peoples, the colonization was so extensive that people were prevented from speaking their native languages and using their native names.
These are all markers of mental colonization. Africans who were brought here to the Americas as slaves experienced a similar mental colonization. They were prevented from speaking their native languages and practicing their original religions, and were forced to accept various forms of Christianity, which were used to justify their subservient position. The mental colonization effort was so thorough that laws were passed making it illegal for blacks to learn to read and write, in essence, forcing them to remain in a state of ignorance that would make them "easier" to control. When you are unable to educate yourself independent of the power structure, you are forced to accept the reasons and meanings the system gives to you via its word symbols.
Language
We'll briefly examine language in the abstract. What is language? How does it work? Language is arguably the greatest tool that human beings have to use. Historians and archeologists use written language as one of the markers signifying the "birth of civilization." Language allows us to pass information from one person to another. It has allowed humans to make meaning out of our experience in life. We can do that with verbal symbols (spoken words), written symbols (written words), and nonverbal communication (sign language or other forms of nonverbal communication). When one has access to a language, they are able to use that language to convey meaning and develop understanding through the lens of that language.
Not all languages are created equally. Some languages have hundreds of thousands of words and others a few hundred. Each word gives you a window to explore and understand the world. That window comes with a context that is embedded in the language that can enhance or limit the scope of experience one can have in the world. This is something people who have learned a language outside of their native tongue can attest to because they'll find that some words do not translate into other languages or certain languages do not have words for certain experiences.
Who defines these words? People do, and at times modern people do because language is constantly evolving. We create meaning and new words all the time, be they slang, or terms that are influenced by social media and technology, or pop culture references. Thus, language is alive and evolves over time. Most of us inherited our language from our ancestors. It is something that is passed on to us, and in that process of receiving language, we also receive meaning for the symbols given to us. That meaning is reinforced in our home life and our outside world. Quick note, English is the language spoken by the most nonnative speakers, which is a direct result of the colonization efforts by the English. They exported their language and culture all throughout the world. Hence my non-English self is able to write this book in English, and you are able to read it even though most of us are English speakers by force and not by birthright of being born English in England. We are all by-products of their colonization, and the language we speak, think, and write in is one of the lasting artifacts of that colonization.
English was superimposed on global populations, and it included a particular view of the world. One of the core values of that English cultural worldview became the supremacy of English people over all other groups of people. Their false reading of events in the world led them to believe they were the most "civilized" of all the nations. Their language began to reflect this cultural arrogance, and we still can witness it in the English language to this day. Case in point, examine the definitions for the words white and black. It is no mere coincidence that the people who felt they were the best of all people defined a word that is used to describe their skin color with all the positive attributes they could pile into the word.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines the words white and black as follows:
“White -
(1): free from moral impurity innocent (2): marked by the wearing of white by the woman as a symbol of purity
not intended to cause harm
d: favorable, fortunate
Black -
dirty, soiled
thoroughly sinister or evil: wicked
indicative of condemnation or discredit
connected with or invoking the supernatural and especially the devil
very sad, gloomy, or calamitous
marked by the occurrence of disaster
characterized by hostility or angry discontent: sullen
11
of propaganda: conducted so as to appear to originate within an enemy country and designed to weaken enemy morale
characterized by or connected with the use of black propaganda
characterized by grim, distorted, or grotesque satire
of or relating to covert intelligence operations
These definitions are not figments of my imagination; I did not make them up, they are "real" definitions in a popular English dictionary. To be fair, English is not the only language that attaches meaning to colors, but the Europeans via Johann Blumenbach and other pseudo-scientists began to equate skin color with position in social hierarchy. According to Blumenbach and his pseudo-scientific observations, white skin was the highest and black skin was the lowest in terms of social hierarchy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Other "respected" voices of the scientific community chimed in, and coincidently the dictionary definitions began to parallel the "educated" judgments of the day. These definitions are very telling; one can clearly see the positive definitions assigned to the word white in stark contrast to the word black. White carries meanings of purity, favor, innocence, and good fortune. These definitions are completely arbitrary, subjective, and baseless, but the English people believed them to be true and assigned them to the color that defined them. Thinking of the claims of their definitions critically, we quickly find there is no empirical data to suggest white is pure. White in terms of science is a color produced by combining all of the color frequencies. This scientific fact in no way connotes purity, goodness, favor, or fortune. That is a completely subjective conclusion based on societal biases, or as we might say on the street, “That’s that BS!”
Conversely, a black anything is almost always negative. Black carries meanings of dirty, sinister, evil, deserving condemnation, devilish, gloomy, hostility, anger, and other pejoratives. In fact, there is really only one positive connotation associated with black in the English language and that is in the financial context. Being in the black is being profitable. This supposedly comes from accountants who would note positive financial gains in black ink. That is why it is always better to be in the black than the red. Critically examining the English claim to defining black with such pejoratives leads one to see there is no scientific or objective reason to correlate black with negative, but there it is, in English, in black and white.
The impact of this type of bias in the construction of their language is not benign. What do you think this can do to a people who are identified in their society as white or as black? If all the meanings associated with how you are described are positive or negative, it will have an effect. Dr. Kenneth B. Clark conducted his famous Doll Test in the 1930s on young children and found that black kids believed that black dolls when compared with identical white dolls were evil, ugly, or bad because of the difference in skin color. There are multiple factors that contribute to what Clark found in his tests, but one thing that definitely contributes is the language that frames the understanding of the society those kids lived in.
When you analyze the recent spate of whites, especially cops not being indicted for the killing of black bodies, the power in these definitions may provide some insight. White is innocent, pure, and without harm or ill intent; it's free of moral impurity. Black is evil, connected with the devil, is dirty; it is indicative of condemnation. Maybe this linguistic context has something to do with juries finding it difficult to convict white men or white officers, or grand juries failing to find reasons to indict white cops who kill black bodies. White man or white cop can be understood through definition as man without ill intent or a cop who is innocent, and black person could be understood through definition as person who is dirty, evil, angry, hostile, or discontent. How does a black person find justice when the very language used to describe them frames their existence with guilt and evil?
The colonization effort went way beyond stealing our native languages and vilifying black bodies in the words they speak. It's also present in what we eat, where we stay, what we see, learn, and believe. Religiously, Western society has colonized the mind and soul of black folks. The most popular image of God in Western society is a white man. How is it that Jesus, who tradition tells us was born in the Middle East and was Jewish, can be drawn with no noticeable Jewish or Middle Eastern features and instead looks like he was born in Scandinavia? It doesn't stop there. At times, the West will take gods of other cultures and turn them white. Hollywood just finished white-washing ancient Egyptian gods in the film Gods of Egypt. For black people, even the "sacred" space of religion isn't immune to color-politics, and blacks are told on a daily basis that "God" does not look like them. That's only possible in a world where people are redefining their reality. They are actively shaping language, symbols, and religious imagery to their benefit and to our detriment.
Many of us do not question the symbols we've inherited, but these symbols are not innocent; they are powerful and must be confronted when they are destructive to one's mental, physical, and spiritual well-being. Fanon alluded to this when he articulated his points on the language of the colonizer. All of this has to be said because I'm writing to you in English, which is my native tongue by conqueror. This is not the language I would have received from my ancestors had certain historical events played out differently.
English as a language is full of meanings that can be confusing when delving into social and political topics. This is something that we have already seen; English is a language that carries deep bias with no empirical foundation for justifying that bias. Even though I have studied other languages, I am still left with discussing the trials and tribulations of my people in the language of those we were colonized by. The power to name and define is immense; you literally have the ability to say what is and what is not. With that in mind, the civilization that perfected the system of racism that is prevalent in almost every corner of the world today might not be the best "authoritative" or "unbiased" source for defining racism. Just like the civilization that thought it was the best of all people on the planet probably wouldn't be the best source to seek out if you want to know about the greatness of black people or other civilizations.
If we acknowledge all of these implicit and explicit biases in the English language, then how can we fully explore a topic such as racism while using the terms and the definitions of the oppressor? It is my belief that racism from the lens of the perpetrator is going to be explained away and justified in a fashion that won’t demonize the perpetrator. Just like a "white lie" or "white magic" is intended to cause no harm, racism perpetrated by whites is going to be defined in a way to minimize the harm. This is exactly what we see when trying to analyze racism as a word symbol from the hands of those perpetrating racism. Racism gets defined in such a way that the inherent evil and pernicious nature of the system is neutralized. What does this do? It causes confusion, and it victimizes those who are the victims of racism over and over again, while exonerating, through obfuscation, those who are responsible for it.
To prove this point let's examine some definitions. Merriam-Webster's online definition of racism states:
“poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race”
“the belief that some races of people are better than others”
Let us examine the second definition, the belief that some races of people are better than others. If racism were simply a belief, we'd all be fine. There would be no need for this extended discussion. Ra
cism, if it were simply a belief, would essentially be a moot point. People are free to believe whatever they choose to believe, and freedom of belief should be protected. You might believe your favorite team is the best team ever assembled to play their sport. With all due respect to your belief, your belief in your team's superiority does not guarantee their victory. Win or lose, you are still entitled to hold onto that belief for as long as you want. Another related example is in the world of religion. People believe many different things due to their religious preferences. Some religions claim certain groups of people are slated for eternal damnation. Others believe in no afterlife, or that you can only find salvation or release through a certain set of principles. Regardless of the faith orientation, another person's belief does not detract from your way of life. Their personal belief alone does not prevent you from having a job or a family, or from obtaining an education. Your quality of life remains intact regardless of the personal beliefs of others. We even have a term in modern slang for people who believe false things about you or want to see you lose; we call them "haters." Haters can hate on you all they want, but that doesn't mean that you won't be able to shine. They can attempt to throw "shade" in your direction, but you are still going to do you. This is why belief in and of itself is not the problem. What is a problem though, is the fact that the people at Merriam-Webster's haven't the slightest idea of what racism is and are in the business of passing out false definitions to people. Someone needs to tell them that they are guilty of obfuscation, which can be defined as making things harder to understand or unintelligible.