Blog Post 6: What factors shape the new racisms of a post-racial world?

Van Dijk describes 'old racism' as slaver, segregation, apartheid, lynchings, systematic discriminaton, White superiority, clear exemptions in public discourse and everyday conversations. 'New racism', the author describes as democratic and respectable, denies that it is racism, minorities are not inferior – but different. Societal practices have a cognitive dimension, on beliefs people have regarding knowledge, attitudes, ideologies, norms and values. In the system of racism, this explains how and why individuals engage in discriminatory practices – believing Others are inferior, less intelligent, less competent, less modern, and so forth – thereby Others should have fewer rights, or taking a 'We' first attitude and approach.

Media elites are responsible for the continuation of this discourse. This is because there is a lack of alternative sources, opponents to mainstream media are weak, allowing media to abuse their power, creating the 'new racism'. Minorities are rarely asked to speak along in media, and a White person is typically there to essentially validate or reject the minorities' opinions; opinions of minorities are less asked for or found less credible. Furthermore, the 'new racism' avoids racist labels, but it uses negative words to describe minorities.

Bonilla-Silva's article highlights how Whites express their racial views, while avoiding racist language, using 'semantic moves'. Using such language, the dominant party is able to project their own views to implicate the minority party, and at times become incoherent. Certain phrases, such as “I am not racist...but...” and “some of my best friends are Black...” are used to justify beliefs. The article goes on to examine President Obama, how he has become an example of a 'post-racial America', deconstructing this myth with examples of Black youth getting shop by police, and economic disparities between Whites and Blacks and Latinos.

As a person of colour, minority, Other, whatever people want to know me as, a lot of what I read was not 'new' information – most people with a critical lens can see the actions of the media, the dominant group at play. I could draw upon example after example in my own life to highlight this. I find that many Canadians believe that these issues are not prevalent in here, and look south of the border, and believe it is an American problem. This is probably because most studies on race issues come out of the States. Recently, CBC Marketplace has been doing a terrific job with their Are we racist? Series, bringing the Canadian reality to the forefront. Also, with the rise of cell phone cameras, we are now able to arm ourselves by creating our own 'media', broadcasting our experiences through blogs, vlogs, and so forth.

I don't exactly agree with Bonilla-Silva's call for mobilization of people of colour as the key to “challenging the emerging racial order” - I do believe it is important, but, to put it bluntly, no one cares when a person of colour gets shot, or arrested for protesting or anything – sorry when a person of colour protests, it's called rioting, or disturbing the peace. We have not changed much since the 1960s. Only when Whites see people that look like themselves get shot or arrested, do they take notice, so I would rather call upon our White friends to assist in the struggle. Every White person seems to have that 'one Black friend', surely, every Black person must have the 'one White friend' then?

References:

Van Dijk, T.A., New(s) racism: A discourse analytical approach.

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2015). The structure of racism in color-blind, “post-racial” America. American Behavioral Scientist, 59 (11), 1358-1376.

Blog Post 5: How is Aboriginal Literature Anti-Racist Education?

The first three chapters of The Inconvenient Indian, are an intense and intriguing read. In the first chapter, emphatically titled Forget Columbus, chooses to not start telling the history of Indigenous peoples with the arrival of Columbus. Columbus is mentioned, but the chapter focuses on what is not written in history texts, and how history texts came about and are viewed. North American history wants people to remember the hindrances Native people posed to Europeans. Even when contributions made by Indigenous people is brought up, they are not typically recognized nor appreciated. Furthermore, most of Indigenous history is forgotten, and what we are left with is a collection of artifacts for our entertainment. King showcases several examples of this: the Battle of Little Bighorn (1876), where Custer was re-imagined as heroic and brave, when we are unsure of the actual events; another; Pocahontas, with the White hero and dusky maiden narrative; the Almo, Idaho massacre, which never occured.

In chapter two, The End of the Trail, King showcases how Indigenous people are depicted by Hollywood. Kind writes how Native people were made for film, as they were erotic and exotic, and it was simple to collect images to place together into cliches. Three types of Natives was created by Hollywood: bloodthirsty savage, noble savage, and dying savage. Non of these portrayals were a threat, as the White heroes always won and the Natives eventually and reluctantly accepted Christianity and commerce. Natives were also portrayed as if they would not survive in a modern world. There are two Natives on the Hollywood Walk of Fame: Will Rogers and Jay Silverheels. Rogers never played an Indigenous character, while Silverheels only played Indigenous characters. Tomson Highway argued that Native roles should not be given to Native actors, as it “silences Native drama and starves Native playwrights”. King appears to satirically argue against this notion, providing an example where he played a Mexican in a Christmas commercial, and the Mexican actor played a Native, making up a term for “Merry Christmas”.

Chapter 3, Too Heavy to Lift, showcases “dead Indians”, “live Indians”, and “legal Indians”. “Dead Indians” are used as marketing devices – for sports teams, businesses, retreats, cleaning products, and so forth. For the most part, Native people do not buy any of that stuff, but then again, those products are not marketed for them, it's marketed towards a mostly White audience, who are okay with “dead Indians”. Kind writes how “dead Indians” are authentic – are seen as dignified, noble, silent, suitably dressed, and dead, whereas “live Indians” are invisible, unruly, disappointing, and alive. “Legal Indians” are Natives with legal rights as a result of treaties – the group that is most hated by North Americans, due to misunderstandings and stereotypes.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian is a fictional story about Arnold Jr., who leaves the reservation he was born on for a better life. Arnold goes through many trials and tribulations, is seen as a traitor by his community, his relationship with his best friend is strained, but survives and is stronger as a result.

While reading The Inconvenient Indian, I almost stopped reading in the second chapter. Tomson Highway's perspective on how anyone can and has the right to play a Native person in Hollywood made me quite frustrated. As I forced my self to read on – to see where King was heading with this notion – I realized King was deconstructing this notion. Redface, Blackface, Brownface, whatever it is, having a person of another race/ethnicity play the part of a group he/she is not part of takes away from the authenticity of the story. This is what King was trying to make the reader realize. What we view while watching Hollywood movies is not factual, it is a myth, a creation made for our entertainment. However, having Natives play roles of Native characters creates employment and promotes the Native community as well. Perhaps more Native children will turn towards acting, dancing, singing, hoping to have their voices heard by mainstream society.

This is where Aboriginal literature comes in – it gives Indigenous people a venue to tell their own story, in their own way. It allows Native people to show the world that they are just like most other people in the world – having ambitions, emotions, fears, and needs. They are no longer seen as the Other, “dead Indian”, “legal Indian”, stereotypes. Questions do arise though when examining this narrative: can a Native only 'succeed' by leaving their reservation, turning their back on their community?

Reference:

King, T. (2012). The Inconvenient Indian: A curious account of Native people in North America. Toronto: Anchor Canada.

Alexie, S. (2007). The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian. New York: Little, Brown & Co.

Blog Post 4: How does anti-colonialism challenge normative research paradigms

Stanley (2014) discusses the MacDonald's beliefs and actions in the mid- to late-1800s with regards to Chinese people in Canada and the First Nations, Inuit and Métis people. MacDonald wanted to create and Aryan Canada by controlling Indian Affairs and immigration. He argued the Chinese might control the vote in British Columbia, thus creating a risk for European dominance. Essentially, Stanley states that Canada was created with the 1885 Chinese Immigration Act (to limit the number of Chinese people into the country), Electoral Franchise Act (to keep Chinese people out of politics), and the pacification of First Nations, Inuit and Métis people from their land.

MacDonald used “biological racism” - alleging that ethnic Chinese people have a natural, unchangeable and inescapable racial makeup – to create the Canada he envisioned. This differed from previous racism, which was built on alleged cultural characteristics that could change over time. The idea that entire races have an inherent trait, that prevents them from adapting to various environments is, as we now know, flawed.

Dei (2013) discusses Indigenous research practices in great detail, and how it differs from conventional academic research. Conventional academic research is compromised because of its ties to colonialism, which makes it incompatible with Indigenous communities. Indigenous research stresses building relationships, developing knowledge ethically to positively affect changes in research participants.

In the past, researches would typically enter a community, without knowing much about the people, their cultures and values. I would argue that the past research practices is what led to “biological racism” - making large scale allegations against community groups without knowing any individual stories. The past method does support colonial beliefs, as it creates a White vs. Other mentality. Anti-colonialism challenges normative research paradigms this way. By acknowledging and centring local knowledge, dominant research approaches are challenged.

In almost every research article I have read discussing Indigenous peoples, the researcher has taken on Indigenous research practices – embedding themselves in the community, respecting individuals and their experiences, building relationships, and creating positive change. However, I have found that this is not the case for many articles I have come across on other historically marginalized groups. Why would one not apply these effective strategies elsewhere?

References:

Dei, G. (2013). Critical perspectives on Indigenous research. Social Studies, 9(1), 27-38.

Stanley, T. (2014). John A. MacDonald and the invention of white supremacy in Canada. Canadian Issue, 29-32.

Blog Post 3: How can we understand the impact of collective White guilt?

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nx9-nJ4QVC_F7G1rvW4ttMq6GVwxtlvZmvG4aHd2fmA/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=60000