In the aftermath of George Floyd’s killing and the ensuing Black Lives Matter protests that have jolted the nation, important questions regarding what racism is, how to root it out, and what an anti-racist future would look like have come to the forefront of mainstream political and cultural discourse.
A wave of scholars, activists, and pundits with the explicit intention of expanding the concept of racism have gained footing in mainstream society across the West. To alter a phrase from the late sociologist and politician Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the aim is to “define racism up” to meet the increasing demand for racial justice.
Among these figures is the celebrated author and historian Ibram X. Kendi, whose two major books—How To Be An Anti-Racist and Stamped From The Beginning: A History Of Racist Ideas—have recently skyrocketed to the top of The New York Times best-sellers list and quickly become a staple of the American conversation about race. Kendi, the youngest writer to ever win the national book award, has been rewarded for his efforts with glowing profiles in both liberal and conservative outlets alike, and his work has been foundational to changing how racial inequality and racism are framed in popular culture.
Kendi’s central intellectual contribution has been a redefinition of “racism” and how it works. As he argues in his most recent book How To Be An Anti-Racist, there is no such thing as being a “not-racist”—there is only anti-racism and racism. Indeed, simply claiming to not be racist is a form of denial, the very “heartbeat of racism.” For Kendi, “anti-racism” means supporting and instituting policies and ideas that level racial disparities of socio-economic outcome, while “racism” consists of any policy or idea that results in racial inequity.
For instance, if black Americans have less wealth than whites en masse, that disparity is prima facie evidence of racism under Kendi’s articulation—whether past or present, overt or subtle, conscious or unconscious, intentional or inadvertent—and the goal of “anti-racism” is to eliminate the gap. To argue that wealth disparities are rooted in cultural holding patterns or internal group factors, rather than descrimination per se, is ultimately to express a “racist” idea.
Moreover, while most Americans proceed from the assumption that racism is a form of prejudice that derives from either hatred or ignorance, Kendi posits that we have it totally backwards: in his view racist policy derives from majoritarian socioeconomic self-interest from which comes racist ideas to justify the unequal outcomes created by those policies, while ignorance and hatred are just the interpersonal fallout of racist policies and ideas.
In his own words,
The opposite of “racist” isn’t “not-racist.” It is “anti-racist.” What’s the difference? One endorses either the idea of a racial hierarchy as a racist, or racial equality as an anti-racist. One either believes problems are rooted in groups of people, as a racist, or locates the roots of problems in power and policies, as an anti-racist. One either allows racial inequities to persevere, as a racist, or confronts racial inequities, as an anti-racist. There is no in between safe space of “not racist.” The claim of “not racist” neutrality is a mask for racism.
...
More:
https://newdiscourses.com/2020/07/de...on-antiracism/
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Anti Federalist
Connect With Us