This is part five of “Clarity in Our Use of the Term Racism.” When I began this series back in December, that is in the Omaha Star newspaper, it was with the idea that the topic could be reasonably addressed in three or four installments, but it quickly became clear that “Clarity in Our Use of the Term Racism” was going to require more exploration and explanation than I had expected it would. Racism is such an ill-defined concept and is used to apply to such a broad range of situations that it has become functionally meaningless. We commonly hear such terms as white racism, Black racism, institutional racism, etc, and at the same time are led to believe that the essence of racism is hatred or dislike. This leads us to such “enlightened” and “profound” verbiage as: “Well, you know, there are some good white people and some bad white people, just like there are some good Black people and some bad ones.” Such a statement of the obvious is simplistic nonsense that brings us nowhere close to an understanding of the nature of our situation as African people living in the U.S. of A., and the nature of our domination by European institutions and systems.
Looking at what we think of as racism in its historical context, and tracing it back to its apparent 15th century origins, we are compelled by the abundant evidence to identify Europeans (Caucasians) as a manufacturer of a concept of race in which one race is superior to others, and has a God given right to subdue and rule over the “inferior races.” Moreover, the historical record shows, clearly, that Europeans established institutions by which “white” power could be expanded, maintained, and refined; so if we can correctly identify racism as a product of European construction and recognize that many present-day institutions and systems operated by Europeans, function to uphold the European position of dominance over people of color in our lands and resources, why do we persist in using the term racism as if it does not have a specific origin and as if it actually does have useful and functional definition? We do this because we have been indoctrinated to automatically accept Europeans’ definitions of words and explanations of concepts as correct, sensible, and valid.
Besides, English is one of their languages. We take it for granted that they know or ought to know how to use it. At this point, it might be useful to look at the word/concept, sexism, which is an attitude and or pattern of practices by which persons of one gender see themselves as superior to those of the other gender, and treat the members of the other gender in a manner that demonstrates this attitude. Generally speaking, it is males who perpetrate the practice of sexism and females who are victimized by it. But there can only be sexism if there is more than one sex, gender. One group or category of people can only feel superior to another group if there is another group. If there’s been one human race, then there is no other human race for members of the human race to feel superior to or inferior to. When then, we accept the concept of racism as valid, aren’t we accepting as valid the notion that there’s more than one human race? Let’s be mindful of the fact that the idea of there being more than one human race is one of the pillars of what we know of as racism. So, by our use of the term, we are implicitly accepting that we are a separate human race, and since the reality is that we are ruled by European institutions, we might also be accepting as real that we are an inferior race of humans.
Additionally, the term racism doesn’t point us to the reality of what so-called racial group exercises the lion’s share of power and control, nor does it identify the so-called racial group from which the manufacturers of what we know as racism came. This ambiguity makes it easy for those who wish to keep us ignorant of the substance, or essence, of our subjugation by Europeans to accomplish this objective. It paves the way for them to bombard us with all kinds of distraction and subterfuge; Black racism, reverse racism, prejudice, etc, in order to keep us, as Omowale Malcolm X said, “hoodwinked and bamboozled.” My name is Mondo. Full Name, Wopashitwe Mondo Eyen we Langa.
These commentaries are recorded by Noel Hanrahan of Prison Radio.
