This week I read "How to be an antiracist" by Ibram X. Kendi. In this book, the author takes the reader through how many different ideas intersect with racism, including power, biology, culture, behaviour, class, gender, failure, success, and more. It is filled with Kendi's own personal journey to become antiracist, as well as a thorough collection of historical anecdotes, stories, and facts.
Two ideas have stuck with me above the rest. The first is that racist and antiracist are not fixed identities. We can think something, say something, or do something that is racist in one situation, and then think, say or do something antiracist the next. Kendi separates the action from being - racist is not something you are, but something you do. This thought is important because it both alleviates the label (which can cause people to stick in the mud) and gives a more true picture of the complexity of racial realities.
The second idea is related to our history of dealing with racism - ideologies and policies that have focused on one of three areas: segregation, assimilation, or antiracism. This idea has been pivotal in my learning this week. I have found this to be a simple lens with which to judge my own thoughts and actions, and those of others around me, or policies, or systems, or really anything. In short, segregation is when we decide that the races are just too different and should not be together. Assimilation is when we decide that one race and culture should be given up in favour of another. Segregation and assimilation are necessarily tied to hierarchy. It requires that one race and culture is placed above the other, that is it more desirable, more profitable, more civilized, more attractive, etc. Antiracism, however, is the idea that all racial groups are equal, that the differences are not better or worse, and that no changes are necessary.
Kendi takes the opposite view of Ijeoma Oluo (So You Want to Talk About Race) in his definition of racism. He rejects the idea that racism must also include power, and so he affirms that Black people can indeed be racist even in a White power society. Reading both sides of this argument was interesting, and gave me pause to really consider what both these passionate authors have to say on the subject. Truly, as we are learning, it is a messy topic, but we must not be afraid of the mess.
Finally, here are some of Kendi's own words:
(on education)
"What if these well-meaning efforts at closing the achievement gap have been opening the door to racist ideas? What if different environments lead to different kids of achievement rather than different levels of achievement? What if the intellect of a low-testing Black child in a poor Black school is different from - and not inferior to - the intellect of a high-testing White child in a rich White school? What if we measured intelligence by how knowledgeable individuals are about their own environments? What if we measured intellect by an individuals' desire to know? What if we realized the best way to ensure an effective educational system is not by standardizing our curricula and tests but by standardizing the opportunities available to all students?"
"Either racist policies or Black inferiority explains why White people are wealthier, healthier, and more powerful than Dark people today."
"Institutional power" or "systemic racism" or "structural power" is the policy making and managing power of people, in groups, or individually. When someone says Black people can't be racist because Black people don't have "institutional power" they are flouting reality. The powerless defense strips Black policymakers and managers of all their power...like every other racist idea, the powerless defense underestimates Black people and overestimates White people. It erases the small amount of Black power and expands the already expansive reach of White power."
No comments:
Post a Comment