It’s been a
while since I last posted. It’s not because I haven’t wanted to. So much has
happened that I wanted to comment on. However, I was working through my
response to a number of racist-sexist emails and tweets I received in response to the
Trayvon Martin Social Justice Award I organized.
I will not post
the correspondences I received. What I will tell you is that some went so far
as to wish death to my family and I. Some felt inclined to tell me that I was
racist, ignorant…. I’m at the point where I actually feel sad for these
individuals. Sad that they cannot see how what they “condemn” they actually
perpetuate.
There were a few
issues that I address before I speak to my experiences as a Black woman living
in a so-called post-racial world. My
sister-colleague, Professor Janni Aragon, and
I will blog about post-racialism around claims such as “We have a Black
President” in the near future.
Silence Perpetuates Racism
I was asked why
not name the award in honor of Martin Luther King. I smiled; it was clear to me
that this individual seemed to have embraced a rather deracialized understanding of the
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. In the 1960s he was not a “hero” in the eyes of a few. Oh, but in this
so-called post-racial society some seem to have forgotten this. In the whitening
of Martin Luther King (whitening in the sense that his image is often used to
assuage White guilt) some have forgotten that his message involved a form of
radical racial justice.
In deed I decided on Trayvon Martin because his death, in part, embodies the radical racial justice
calls of Dr. Martin Luther King—not the sanitized recitation we engage in every
January. For many of the young individuals I encounter, Trayvon Martin’s murder resonated with them. But some would never
know that because like the White liberals Martin Luther took to task in his
“Letter from Brigham Jail” they refuse to listen. They refuse to allow
minoritized and marginalized individuals to speak. And when we speak they often
work to discredit our claims.
As Martin Luther
King Jr. articulated in his letter “I am in [all states and cities] because injustice
is here.” Yet, some deny it’s existence because they want to believe that
we are existing in a post-racial state, where racism in a thing of the past.
Those of us who dare speak of racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression are
told that we are simply agitators who need to stop engaging in “destructive”
and “divisive” efforts. This is part of a muting/silencing project
that must be resisted in the same way that Jim Crow laws were resisted.
Everyday I
encounter stories of racism from the young people I serve. I see first hand how
others go out of their way to tell them that they don’t belong. Black men are
stopped and frisked, no not in NY, but on college campuses. They are treated as
criminals because of the color of their skin. Students of color are called
“nigger” and told to “go home” and that they "don’t belong.” Faculty members of
color are treated with suspicion. If this is not racism, then clearly I don’t
know what is.
Yet, their and
my experiences are met with silence. We are told that while some individuals
might be “bias” that life is better for us. I guess that we should be happy
that we are no longer working on the plantation. However, I ask, when one is
the recipient of such hate, when we are being terrorized on a daily basis, what
exactly is better? And who is it better for?
Some are so
caught up with defining racism by focusing on specific acts or at individual level behavior that
they have lost sight of the fundamentals of racism. Racialized bodies might not
be hanging from Southern trees. But that is not an indicator of a post-racial
state. Racism may be direct, indirect, individual and/or institutional. Indeed
as Dr. Eduardo Bonilla-Silva argues we don’ need racist actors to have racist
outcomes.
Racism is not a
simple bias neither is it simply prejudice. Yet, some continue to conflate
racism with these concepts. Racism involves the transformation of prejudice and
bias, at an individual and/or institutional level, passively or actively,
through the exercise of POWER
against racialized groups deemed as inferior.
Racism, in the
words of, Carmichael and Hamilton is "the predication of decisions and policies
on considerations of race for the purpose of SUBORDINATING a racial group and
maintaining control over that group." (Black Power: The Politics
of Liberation, pg. 3)
Many, in an
attempt to put the legacy of slavery behind them in hopes of achieving the
utopian post-racial state, ignore everyday racialized-gendered practices that
terrorize some of us.
As I live
through my current experiences with gendered-racism I find myself fighting to
have my voice and the voices of those who experience systematic racism on an
everyday basis heard. I cannot pretend that these past few weeks have been
easy. I’ve had a range of emotions. However at the end of the day I’ve decided
to speak—to break the silence that is complicit with notions of post-racialism
Post-racialism is
designed to render us silent or to mute our claims. It is because it requires silence
that indeed post-racialism perpetuates racism. Here are just a few examples of how
post-racialism perpetuates racism via silence:
- Silence does not allow us to challenge the deracialization of Martin Luther King’s dream. Consequently we accept for example “A Day of Service” often with little thought to issues of equality, justice, and peace.
- Silence allows us to ignore issues of joblessness, HIV/AIDS, food insecurity and their relationship to race. We become silent when we use universal terms for fear of offending.
- Silence harms us when we deploy terms, such as “colored” and “nigger” that are steeped in historical a legacy of racial harm and crime and then claim “innocence” or “ignorance” when we are asked why.
- Silence harms us when we allow racialized actions to take place on a consistent basis and then simply say “sorry” and engage in no actions designed to implement institutional change.
Silence is
sometimes the best response. However silence can also be an act of racism. When
we claim at an individual and/or institutional level that we are committed to
anti-racism and we remain silent in the face of racism our actions beg the
question: Who or what does our silence protect?
Audre Lorde
poignantly wrote, “Your silence will not protect you.” None of us are protected
when we remain silent in the face of racism. So how do we respond to the
silences that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. warned us against? Those of us
who experience racism, overt and covert, must speak. Yes, we are at times
intimidated, but our silence does not promote change. It is only when we consciously work to unmask the often hidden
structures of power, of which silence is one, can we begin to challenge power
structures. Those in the majority, who benefit at various levels from
privilege, directly and indirectly, must also break their silence. The pleas of
ignorance or that it’s not my problem, or the claim that I’m not racist, are
inadequate and are not enough! The onus of fighting racism must not be placed
on the laps of marginalized and minoritized communities. It is a problem that
we must all raise our voices against. We
cannot lament on how our speech will be responded to and/or interpreted.
Scour my memory bank as I might, despite numerously delving into actual history transcripts & historical records, I cannot find even ONE mention the Reverend Dr Martin Luther King made to lionizing, glorifying & elevating a racist meme/narrative such as the one you choose to promote via the "trayvon martin award'. King, in his eminent wisdom encouraged us all to focus on the content of one's character, rather the color of one's skin--a motto which you should perhaps heed.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment. I encourage you to actually read the entire speech given by Dr. Martin Luther King on that day. In addition, also consider reading his "Letter from Birmingham Jail". We must be careful of self-selecting bits and pieces of people in an attempt to justify ideological positions and in an attempt to silence those we disagree with.
ReplyDelete