Cap Against Race Affs—UMich 2013



Download 0.96 Mb.
Page17/30
Date conversion16.05.2016
Size0.96 Mb.
1   ...   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   ...   30

Root Cause (Wilderson)

Race is a construction of capitalism—differences can be overcome after dismantling capitalism


Mullings 05 (Leith, Professor of Anthropology at the City University of New York, “Interrogating Racism: Toward an Antiracist Anthropology”, Annual Review of Anthropology 34, 2005, University of Michigan Libraries)//AS

There is consensus that modern racism emerged in the context of European expansion. In fact, Wade (1997) suggests that the physical differences that are cues for contemporary racial distinctions may be seen as social constructions built of phenotypic variations, which correspond to the “geographic encounters of Europeans in their colonial histories” (p. 15). One interesting theme is the mutability and historical contingency of the meaning of these perceptions and distinctions and how they are organized. English, French, and Dutch travelers portrayed Pacific Islanders differently at various points in time depending on prevailing global and regional agendas. Gailey (1996) notes that their willingness to reduce judgment to skin color was associated with the rise of capitalist slavery in West Africa and settlement colonization elsewhere. Hence, the skin color of Pacific Islanders is depicted as markedly darker over 35 years as colonialism develops (Gailey 1996). Similarly, Daniel (1996) describes a gradual process of “aryanization” of the Sinhala people during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as they appropriated Western racial categories in the context of colonialism and the spread of scientific racism. In the recent massacres in Sri Lanka, conflicts were at times framed in the discourse of race. Along with enslavement, conquest, and colonialism, modern racism is frequently intertwined with both early and later stages of nation building and the drive for national consolidation. Although the variety of racism developed in the West had the greatest impact on the rest of the world, racial systems are simultaneously national and international projects. Racial projects as they appear in different parts of the world are constructed, in part, from tools and symbols already existing within local cultural repertoires as well as from new encounters and conflicts. As states make race, they do so from beliefs, symbols, practices, and conflicts, transmitted from the past yet interpreted in new ways.



Using race to explain history is inaccurate and dangerous—slavery existed before capital but racism did not


Fields 90 (Barbara Jane, professor of American history at Columbia University, “Slavery, Race and Ideology in the United States of America”, New Left Review 181, May/June 1990, JSTOR)//AS

Nothing so well illustrates that impossibility as the conviction among otherwise sensible scholars that race ‘explains’ historical phenomena; specifically, that it explains why people of African descent have been set apart for treatment different from that accorded to others.12 But race is just the name assigned to the phenomenon, which it no more explains than judicial review ‘explains’ why the United States Supreme Court can declare acts of Congress unconstitutional, or than Civil War ‘explains’ why Americans fought each other between 1861 and 1865.13 Only if race is defined as innate and natural prejudice of colour does its invocation as a historical explanation do more than repeat the question by way of answer. And there an insurmountable problem arises: since race is not genetically programmed, racial prejudice cannot be genetically programmed either but, like race itself, must arise historically. The most sophisticated of those who invoke race as a historical explanation—for example, George Fredrickson and Winthrop Jordan—recognize the difficulty. The preferred solution is to suppose that, having arisen historically, race then ceases to be a historical phenomenon and becomes instead an external motor of history; according to the fatuous but widely repeated formula, it ‘takes on a life of its own’.14 In other words, once historically acquired, race becomes hereditary. The shopworn metaphor thus offers camouflage for a latter-day version of Lamarckism. Race is not an element of human biology (like breathing oxygen or reproducing sexually); nor is it even an idea (like the speed of light or the value of _) that can be plausibly imagined to live an eternal life of its own. Race is not an idea but an ideology. It came into existence at a discernible historical moment for rationally understandable historical reasons and is subject to change for similar reasons. The revolutionary bicentennials that Americans have celebrated with such unction— of independence in 1976 and of the Constitution in 1989—can as well serve as the bicentennial of racial ideology, since the birthdays are not far apart. During the revolutionary era, people who favoured slavery and people who opposed it collaborated in identifying the racial incapacity of Afro-Americans as the explanation for enslavement.15 American racial ideology is as original an invention of the Founders as is the United States itself. Those holding liberty to be inalienable and holding Afro-Americans as slaves were bound to end by holding race to be a self-evident truth. Thus we ought to begin by restoring to race—that is, the American version of race—its proper history. As convenient a place as any to begin a brief summary of that history, along with that of plantation society in British North America, is in seventeenth-century Virginia. Virginia foundered during its early years and survived only through the good will and, when the colonists had exhausted that, the extorted tribute of the indigenous Indians. But during the second decade of the seventeenth century, Virginia discovered its vocation: the growing of tobacco. The first boom in what would eventually become the United States took place during the 1620s, and it rested primarily on the backs of English indentured servants, not African slaves. Not until late in the century, after the boom had passed, did landowners begin buying slaves in large numbers, first from the West Indies and, after 1680, from Africa itself.16 During the high years of the boom it was the ‘free-born’ Englishman who became, as one historian put it, ‘a machine to make tobacco for somebody else’.17 Indentured servants served longer terms in Virginia than their English counterparts and enjoyed less dignity and less protection in law and custom. They could be bought and sold like livestock, kidnapped, stolen, put up as stakes in card games, and awarded—even before their arrival in America—to the victors in lawsuits. Greedy magnates (if the term is not redundant) stinted the servants’ food and cheated them out of their freedom dues, and often out of their freedom itself, when they had served their time. Servants were beaten, maimed, and even killed with impunity. For expressing opinions unfavourable to the governor and the governing council, one man had both his arms broken and his tongue bored through with an awl, while another lost his ear and had to submit to a second seven-year term of servitude— to a member of the council that had judged his case.18 Whatever truths may have appeared self-evident in those days, neither an inalienable right to life and liberty nor the founding of government on the consent of the governed was among them. Virginia was a profit-seeking venture, and no one stood to make a profit growing tobacco by democratic methods. Only those who could force large numbers of people to work tobacco for them stood to get rich during the tobacco boom. Neither white skin nor English nationality protected servants from the grossest forms of brutality and exploitation. The only degradation they were spared was perpetual enslavement along with their issue in perpetuity, the fate that eventually befell the descendants of Africans.

I: Commodification

Capital creates blacks as nothing more than property to be sold and abused


Farley 12 (Anthony Paul, James Campbell Matthews Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence at Albany Law School, “CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND MARXISM: TEMPORAL POWER”, Columbia Journal of Race and Law 1:3, University of Michigan Libraries)//AS

The New World was not new before the killing. The blacks were not black before the killing. The colonized were not colonized before the killing. The murders constitute and mark a new species. The production of race is the production of a race that is to have and another race, subordinate to the first, that is to have not. The abundance belonging to the One and the lack that is the chief property of the Other are conjoined twins, born of the same unspeakable event. The black can trace its origin only as far back as a bill of sale. James Baldwin, speaking in London, was clear on this point: I tried to explain that if I was originally from [an African point of origin] I couldn’t find out where it was because my entry into America was a bill of sale. And that stops you from going any further. At some point I became Baldwin’s Nigger.30 But is the same for the white? The bill of sale is the official screen memory of the mass murder that is the origin of capital. The bill of sale is the alpha and omega of law. The bill of sale is a death certificate, ours. The bill of sale is the recording angel assigned to the children of slaves and children of slavemasters. The legality of that bill of sale is what keeps the chains, the genealogies of property that bind now to then, and all of us to the repetitions, together. Law is the work of screening the original accumulation from consciousness. The bill of sale, a paper that somehow connects a person to a property, is an atomic proposition of law. To see the connection between a person and a property as legal requires us to see that connection, the legal connection, as something other than “pain and terror.”31 This is so even though the connection is in fact nothing other than pain and terror, nothing but the why of the mass murders that gave rise to the first capital, nothing more than talon and tooth, and nothing other than a matter for the Furies. The bill of sale is part of a system. The bill of sale, its system, designates haves and have-nots. Those who have, have. Those who have not, have not. Like law and right, having and not having are inherited. The original sin of property—the original accumulation—thus repeats itself in our progeny. What does the slave inherit upon legal emancipation? The slave inherits nothing. The ex-slave, now a laborer, enters the marketplace with nothing. Having nothing, the ex-slave has nothing by way of bargaining power. The move from chattel slavery to wage slavery is therefore not a move at all. Legal emancipation is not progress. The wage system is not progress. The movement from status to contract is not progress. All of this is only slavery repeated as wage-slavery. We are still within the time of the spectacle, the time of slavery, the time of the undiscovered country. Slavery to contract is the non-progress of white-over-black to white-over-black. White over black is slavery, slavery is death, death only, and that continually. The slave, having nothing of her own, finding herself in the world that regards her labor-power as a commodity among other commodities, is compelled to go to the marketplace to sell her skin, her skin is what her labor power is wrapped in. Because the slave has nothing by way of bargaining power, the slave can expect nothing from the marketplace, as Marx observed, “but a hiding.”32

Capitalism commodifies racial identity—degrades individuals and justifies slavery—only dismantling capitalism solves


Leong 13 (Nancy, Assistant Professor of Civil Rights ,Constitutional Law, and Criminal Procedure at the University of Denver, “Racial Capitalism”, Harvard Law Review 126:8, June 2013, Infotrac)//AS

Racial capitalism -- the process of deriving social and economic value from the racial identity of another person -- is a longstanding, common, and deeply problematic practice. This Article is the first to identify racial capitalism as a systemic phenomenon and to undertake a close examination of its causes and consequences. The Article focuses on instances of racial capitalism in which white individuals and predominantly white institutions use nonwhite people to acquire social and economic value. Affirmative action doctrines and policies provide much of the impetus for this form of racial capitalism. These doctrines and policies have fueled an intense legal and social preoccupation with the notion of diversity, which encourages white individuals and predominantly white institutions to engage in racial capitalism by deriving value from nonwhite racial identity. Racial capitalism has serious negative consequences both for individuals and for society as a whole. The process of racial capitalism relies upon and reinforces commodification of racial identity, thereby degrading that identity by reducing it to another thing to be bought and sold.Commodification can also foster racial resentment by causing nonwhite people to feel used or exploited by white people. And the superficial process of assigning value to nonwhiteness within a system of racial capitalism displaces measures that would lead to meaningful social reform. In an ideal society, racial capitalism would not occur. Given the imperfections of our current society, however, this Article proposes a pragmatic approach to dismantling racial capitalism, one that recognizes that progress must occur incrementally. Such an approach would require a transition period of limited commodification during which we would discourage racial capitalism. Moreover, we would ensure that any transaction involving racial value is structured to discourage future racial capitalism. I briefly survey some of the various legal mechanisms that can be deployed to discourage racial capitalism through limited commodification. Ultimately, this approach will allow progress toward a society in which we successfully recognize and respect racial identity without engaging in racial capitalism.

I: Genocide (Prisons)

Capitalism exacts modern genocide on Black Americans and other marginalized groups via the prison-industrial complex


Smith and Hattery 08 (Earl and Angela J., professors of sociology at Wake Forest University, “INCARCERATION: A TOOL FOR RACIAL SEGREGATION AND LABOR EXPLOITATION”, Race, Gender, and class 15:1-2, 2008, ProQuest)//AS

As powerful an analytical tool as this framework is, one of the shortcomings of the use of the race, class and gender paradigm by other scholars is the tendency to focus on the individual level rather than the structural level. In other words, often the analysis focuses on the race, class, and gender of individual actors and how these status locations shape experiences. We focus our analysis on the structural level and the ways in which different systems of domination are mutually reinforcing: patriarchy is woven with racism (or race supremacy) both of which are woven with capitalism. For example, we are not focused on the social class or race of individual inmates, but instead examine the ways in which capitalism and the system of racial domination collude to exploit the labor of male and female inmates thus increasing profits for shareholders while simultaneously reducing competition for scarce jobs in an increasingly tenuous domestic labor market.Of particular importance to the argument here is a focused examination on capitalism as a core organizing structure of the raced and gendered PIC [Prison Industrial Complex]. Wright's work on exploitation (1997), though not developed with the express purpose of explicating the processes in prisons offers an important framework for understanding the role of capitalism in the PIC. Pointing out, as others do, that prisons are nothing more than catchments for the undesirables in our society (Chang &Thompkins, 2002; Chasin, 2004:234-239), Wright (1997:153).extends the argument and links it directly to the "needs" of capitalist economic system:In the case of labor power, a person can cease to have economic value in capitalism if it cannot be deployed productively. This is the essential condition of people in the 'underclass'...above all [they lack] the necessary means to acquire the skills needed to make their labor power saleable. As a result they are not consistently exploited...the underclass consists of human beings who are largely expendable from the point of view of the logic of capitalism. Like Native Americans who became a landless underclass in the nineteenth century, repression rather than incorporation is the central mode of social control directed toward them. Capitalism does not need the labor power of unemployed inner city youth. The material interests of the wealthy and privileged segments of American society would be better served if these people simply disappeared. However, unlike in the nineteenth century, the moral and political forces are such that direct genocide is no longer a viable strategy. The alternative, then, is to build prisons and cordon off the zones of cities in which the underclass lives.According to Wright, prisons can be seen as a modem day substitution for genocide, a strategy for removing unwanted, unnecessary, un-useful members of a capitalist society. Incarceration provides a mechanism whereby the privileged can segregate or cordon-off these unwanted members of society, thus increasing the efficiency of the capitalist economy and its insatiable desire for expansion, without the moral burden of genocide. It is easy to see how prisons accomplish this goal: they remove individuals from society and they permanently (in many states) disenfranchise them from the political realm (Uggen&Manza, 2002). Prisoners and ex-convicts become virtual non-citizens, unable to challenge the economic, social or political power structures. And, the very fact of cordoning off some individuals means that the goods and riches of society are accessible only to those citizens who are not cordoned-off. As Baca Zinn and Thornton Dill (2005) note, every system of oppression has as its reflection a system of privilege. That which cordons some off, cordons others in. Put another way, along with any accumulation of disadvantage comes an accumulated advantage for someone else (Zinn& Dill, 2005). For example, Whites, especially White men, implicitly or explicitly, benefit from the sending of hundreds of thousands of African American men to prisons; specifically, high levels of incarceration effectively remove African American men from the competitive labor force and upon release they are disenfranchised in the political system (Uggen&Manza, 2002) and permanently unemployable (Pager, 2003).

Capital developed the prison system as modern slavery to remove the “unproductive” and “undesirable” from society


Smith and Hattery 08 (Earl and Angela J., professors of sociology at Wake Forest University, “INCARCERATION: A TOOL FOR RACIAL SEGREGATION AND LABOR EXPLOITATION”, Race, Gender, and class 15:1-2, 2008, ProQuest)//AS

Many scholars exploring the question of the purpose of the criminal justice system have underscored the role that the economy plays in incarceration (Chang &Thompkins, 2002; Parenti, 1999; Western, 2006). For a variety of reasons-including the history of chattel slavery and intensive agriculture-this relationship is particularly profound in the southern region of the US (Sellin cited in Hartnett n.d.). Prison labor became a more significant part of modern capitalism during Reconstruction because the Civil War... left the U.S. economically devastated, and deprived capitalism of its lucrative slave labor. One of the responses to these crises was to build more prisons and then to lease the labor of prisoners, many of whom were ex-slaves, to labor-hungry capitalists. An examination of the economy of the Mississippi Delta region, where one of the largest and quintessential examples of penal agriculture-The Mississippi State Penitentiary at Parchman, or simply "Parchman"-explicates this relationship.Oshinsky( 1997) argues convincingly that Parchman was established to ease the transition for Mississippi Whites between the end of slavery and the development of sharecropping. In this setting Parchman served two main functions: social control and forced labor. Whites who feared the demise of their social order were pacified by the role that Parchman could play as a mechanism of social control over "Negroes" who might otherwise run about uncontrolled and destroy not only property but also the southern way of life. Wright's argument underscores the point; just as Whites in the post-bellum South were worried about "Negroes" running amok, Wright carefully articulates the role that prisons and urban ghettos play in modern day America by housing unwanted, unruly, violent, drug users and thus removing them from nearby White, middle class neighborhoods and from public life. Second, planters had serious labor concerns in an economy dominated by labor dense crops such as cotton and rice. Very shortly after Parchman was established-and it is important to note that it was developed out of a plantation-the convict leasing system was implemented. This system allowed Parchman to lease out the labor of convicts to local planters. Oshinsky (1997) provides clear evidence for this relationship between incarceration and exploitable labor by noting that the inmate population fluctuated along with the labor needs of local planters; the police would conduct "sweeps" and make arrests-specifically targeting African American men-just prior to planting, cutting, and harvest, thus creating the labor pool necessary for the convict leasesystem and the continuation of the plantation economy (Browne, n.d.). In 1865, the 13th Amendment officially abolished slavery for all people except lhose convicted of a crime and opened the door for mass criminalization. Prisons were built in the South as part of the backlash to Black Reconstruction and as a mechanism to re-enslave Black workers. In the late 19th-cenrury South, an extensive prison system was developed in the interest of maintaining the racial and economic relationship of slavery. When slavery was legally abolished, a new set of laws called the Black Codes emerged to criminalize legal activity for African Americans. Through the enforcement of these laws, acts such as standing in one area of town or walking at night, for example, became the criminal acts of "loitering" or "breaking curfew," for which African Americans were imprisoned. As a result of Black Codes, the percentage of African Americans in prison grew exponentially, surpassing whites for the first time. The relationship among race, the economy, and incarceration is complex and deeply rooted in the peculiarities of US history: namely the wedding of slavery, the plantation economy, and capitalism. For 250 years the system of chattel slavery provided the most exploitable form of labor (Williams, 1944; Wright, 1997). Regardless of individuals' moral perspectives on slavery, it was an incredibly efficient tool of capitalism that had it disappeared completely would have devastated the social-political economy of the entire southern region of the US. And, though northerners don't like to believe this, would have had a negative impact on the regional and national economy as well. Thus, this morally repugnant system was quickly replaced by the system of Jim Crow segregation which, according to Wacquant (2001:98), was important in sustaining two key aspects of the plantation slave economy: labor extraction and social segregation. Though the Jim Crow system of segregation endured chinks for many, many years, its symbolic, if not real, demise occurs in a series of legislative and judicial decisions beginning with Brown v. Board (1954) and perhaps ending with the Civil Rights Act of 1965. Curiously, though perhaps not serendipitously, another set of legislative and judicial decisions, beginning in the administration of Richard Nixon and continuing until today, result in the racial transformation of prisons (Wacquant, 2001:96). Since 1989 and for the first time in national history, African Americans make up a majority of those entering prison each year. Indeed, in four short decades, the ethnic composition of the U.S. inmate population has reversed, turning over from 70 percent white at mid-century to nearly 70 percent black and Latino today, although ethnic patterns of criminal activity have not fundamentally changed during that period. Wacquant argues that the current system of incarceration has developed to sustain the goals of slavery and Jim Crow segregation: labor extraction and social segregation (Wacquant, 2001:99). By employing Wright's theory of cordoning off we extend not only Wacquant's argument but also Chang and Thompkins'. As Wright notes, we can't enslave people anymore or commit genocide, so the system of ghettos and incarceration provide the mechanism for eliminating the unexploitablewho are, by definition, threats to capitalism. This cordoning off serves as both a removal from social life, as noted by Wacquant, and ultimately, through reconceptualizing inmates as "exploitable" creates a pool of extractable labor.

Modern capitalism’s inexhaustible profit drive is embodied in the prison system—causes civic death for huge numbers of Black Americans


Smith and Hattery 08 (Earl and Angela J., professors of sociology at Wake Forest University, “INCARCERATION: A TOOL FOR RACIAL SEGREGATION AND LABOR EXPLOITATION”, Race, Gender, and class 15:1-2, 2008, ProQuest)//AS

The goal of this paper was to advance and extend the work of scholars writing about the prison industrial complex by incorporating the work of neoMarxist Erik Olin Wright into the discussion. Specifically, we synthesized the work of Wright (1997) and Wacquant (2001) in order to demonstrate that mass incarceration is in the best interest of capitalism. Specifically it removes unwanted competition from the "free labor" market and reconstitutes this unexploitable labor as exploitable in order to facilitate the extraction of surplus value of inmates by both state prisons and multi-national corporations. Furthermore, we suggest that mass incarceration is a "permanent" solution to the labor-work crunch experienced by working class White men because a felony results in both disenfranchisement (Uggen&Manza, 2002) and long-term unemployability (Pager, 2003). Just as bondage imposed "social death" on imported African captives and their descendants, mass incarceration induces civic death for those it ensnares. (Wacquant, 2001:119) We contend that the changes in the drug laws provide the judicial mechanism or justification for incarcerating such a significant portion of the inmate population. Yet, the changes in the drug laws mask a more insidious and complex goal: the removal of men (and to a lesser degree women) from the "free market" labor pool and the relocation of these individuals to a "captive" labor pool that is highly exploitable by capitalists.3 One clear illustration of this link arose in our examination of the membership of the board of directors of the largest private prison corporation, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). We identified at least one member of the board of directors with ties to the government-specifically serving a tenure as a staff member of the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control-a committee clearly linked to the development of drug laws and policies. And, we identified several members who served as CEO of the types of manufacturing companies that frequently contract with prisons for inmate labor. These links across government, business, and the prison industry are similar to the kinds of links President Eisenhower identified when he coined the term "Military Industrial Complex."4 This makes it difficult to believe that prisons are designed for the pure motive of rehabilitating citizens as opposed to making profits. Like the military industrial complex, once the relationships are established a pre-determined set of actions are set into place, all built around the need to maintain the relationships among the government, big business, and the system of incarceration. Indeed, much as the military-industrial complex fueled the economic juggernaut of the Reagan/Bush era's redistribution of wealth and resources, so now we are witnessing the production of a correctional-industrial complex in which society's already limited resources and funds are redistributed away from social justice-based forms of spending in favor of imprisonment...the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that state spending on prison construction increased 612% between 1979 and 1990. California is a particularly cogent example.." Its budget for fiscal year 1996/97, for the first time ever, appropriated more money for prisons (9.9% of the budget, up from 2% in 1980) than for the University of California and California State University systems combined (9.5% of the budget, down from 12.6% in 1980). Put more simply, since 1980 California has slashed educational spending by roughly 25%, while raising prison spending by roughly 500%. (Hartnett, n.d.) Added to this is the fact that prisons in the US are filled with African American men. Thus, to use the language of Wright (1997), the PIC can be understood as a tool whose consequences-both intended and unintended-effectively cordon-off African Americans much as they were cordoned-off during slavery and Jim Crow segregation and exploit their labor for individual and "class" gain. Effectively prisoners have been identified and reconstituted as the latest, greatest captive group whose labor can be exploited. And, while inmates may see small benefits associated with the opportunities for work, as the inmates at Twin Rivers Correctional Facility so eloquently articulate, the PIC is a complex system that is not about rehabilitating inmates but is about making money for a host of national and multinational corporations. Just as the U.S. became the richest nation on earth by its extensive 250-year reliance on exploiting slave labor, today one of the ways U.S. based corporations secure their place as the richest companies in the world is by exploiting vulnerable, mostly African American male, prison labor.

I: Social Death

The project of neoliberalism corrupts positive social movements’ discourse and uses it to exacerbate violence—causes social death for marginalized groups


Ferguson and Hong 12 (Roderick A. and Grace Kyungwon, professor of American Studies, Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies, and African American & African Studies at the University of Minnesota and Associate Professor of Women's Studies at the University of California at Los Angeles respectively, “The Sexual and Racial Contradictions of Neoliberalism”, Journal of Homosexuality 59:7, 2012, Taylor and Francis)//AS

To begin with, we follow Duggan (2003), who argues that neoliberalism denotes the distortion of the social movements of the 1960s, exploiting the language of social justice forged within these movements to call for the upward, rather than downward, redistribution of resources. Similarly, Hong (2011) argues, “In the contemporary [neoliberal] moment, certain aspects of 1960s and 1970s social movements have been mobilized for the aims of power and rendered legitimate, albeit in contingent and constantly vulnerable ways” (p. 263). As Hong implies, conferring legitimacy has arisen as one of the strategies of neoliberal mobilization. As Ferguson (2012) observes in The Re-Order of Things: The University and Its Pedgagogies of Minority Difference, affirmation of previously degraded forms of subjectivity became a part of the apparatus of power. He describes the emergence of a new “political entity and object of love, a new article called minority culture” (p. 111). Yet, this was not an example of power receding, but of its redeployment: “the arrival of this new object did not usher in a season of unbridled liberation but provided the building blocks for a new way to regulate” (p. 111). In Represent and Destroy: Rationalizing Violence in the New Racial Capitalism, Melamed (2011) contextualizes this shift by observing that, in the period after World War II, White supremacy began to lose the explanatory and legitimating force it had previously had, and that White liberalism became the dominant state rhetoric. Liberal anti-racism at various points in the post-War period legitimated U.S. global ascendancy and countered charges of U.S. racism in the context of the Cold War, rationalized de-industrialization and the dismantling of the welfare state through notions of individual achievement and responsibility, and advanced the notion of freedom as free trade and free markets. As such, White liberalism’s statesponsored anti-racism in actuality erased and exacerbated racial violence, dispossession, exploitation, and impoverishment, and in so doing, facilitated racial capital as much as—or, perhaps more accurately, in even more brutal and efficient a manner as—White supremacy did in an earlier era. As such, neoliberalism’s projects of upward redistribution and legitimacy have been underwritten by formations of violence and social death, formations that disproportionately impact devalued communities minoritized by race, class, gender, and sexuality.


I: Oppression

Neoliberal policies oppress the black population and manipulate public sentiment, perpetuating racist ideology


Roberts and Mahtani 10 (David J. and Minelle, PhD in Geography at the University of Toronto and Associate Professor of Geography and Planning at The University of Toronto, “Neoliberalizing Race, Racing Neoliberalism: Placing “Race” in Neoliberal Discourses”, Antipode 42:2, March 2010, Wiley Online)//AS

Neoliberalism has a long history in geographical thought. For this paper, we limit much of our analysis of neoliberalism to the work that has directly examined the concept in relation to race. Geographers have focused on the impacts that neoliberalization has had on institutions and governmental policies (see Peck and Tickell 2002, Cope 2001, Theodore 2007). New scholarship has begun to map the impacts of neoliberal policy reforms in terms of their racially differentiated impacts. Nik Theodore’s work, Closed Borders, Open Markets: Immigrant Day Laborers’ Struggle for Economic Rights, in its analyzing of the impacts of neoliberal policy reforms on the lives of day laborers provides an interesting example of this new direction. Theodore’s work provides a compelling look at how neoliberal policy reforms can have significantly racialized impacts. As Theodore explains, “In the name of greater labor market flexibility, the neoliberal regulatory project has sought to dismantle or seriously weaken labor market insurance programs and job-protection legislation, and undermine trade unionism and worker collective action.” (2007: 252-253). The result has been the emergence of an informal economy of day laborers, who are largely comprised of ’illegal immigrants’, and due to their precarious legal position bear the brunt of such social change as their access to legal recourses in regards to unfair employment practices are circumscribed. Day labors, as a notably racialized group, provide a compelling example of the ways in which neoliberal policy reforms disparately impact certain racialized populations. Theodore is not alone in mapping eruptions of racism that occur as a result of neoliberalization. David Wilson’s book, Cities and Race: America’s New Black Ghetto (2006) also examines the connection between race and neoliberalism. Wilson explores in impacts of neoliberal policy reform on the entrenchment and expansion of the racialized ghetto within the American rust belt. He introduces readers to a cast of characters, such as ‘Welfare Queens’, ‘welfare-hustling men’, and ‘black youth gangbangers’ that Ronald Reagan used to capitalize upon the fears of the country and direct them at the ghetto. In each of these terms, race, specifically blackness, coupled with anti-market behaviors become intertwined in the construction of the antithesis of the ideal neoliberal citizen in the black ghetto resident. In his analysis, race is mobilized to show that racialized subjectivities are essential in justifying certain impacts of neoliberalization that are experienced disproportionately within racialized communities. However, Cities and Race fails to provide a precise examination of how these black ghettos are connected to a wider racialized system within U.S. (or Western) society. In fact, at several points in the book, Wilson quotes the language used to describe the ghetto that is highly evocative of the history of racism, such as “the inner city as primitive engulfers of societal resources,” (2006:62) contrasting this with other ‘spaces of civility’ within the city (2006:60), but he never fully unpacks the use of this language to explain how it historically connects global tropes to the dehumanizing history of race.

Neoliberalism uses the discourse of merit to mask racism and oppression of minorities


Roberts and Mahtani 10 (David J. and Minelle, PhD in Geography at the University of Toronto and Associate Professor of Geography and Planning at The University of Toronto, “Neoliberalizing Race, Racing Neoliberalism: Placing “Race” in Neoliberal Discourses”, Antipode 42:2, March 2010, Wiley Online)//AS

Neoliberalism in Canada has effectively reshaped the ideal conception of the relationship between the citizen and the society (and the corresponding obligations that each has to the other). As Dana-Ain Davis explains in Narrating the Mute: Racializing and Racism in a Neoliberal Moment: “Neoliberal practices pull into its orbit a market of ideas about a lot of things including the family, gender, and racial ideology. It is, as Lisa Duggan (2003) notes, “saturated with race” (xvi) using capitalism to hide racial (and other) inequalities by relocating racially coded economic disadvantage and reassigning identity-based biases to the private and personal spheres. (Davis 2007: 349)” Specifically, it has meant the establishment of a market orientation to this relationship. Ideally, within a neoliberal theorization of society, the success of the individual is directly related to the work output of that individual. Under this ideal, modalities of difference, such as race, no longer predetermine one’s success as each individual is evaluated solely in terms of his or her economic contribution to society. What becomes clear, however, with an examination of the discourses of neoliberalism in the contemporary Canadian context, is that this ideal relationship is obviously not ideal for everyone – certainly not for immigrants. Herein lies the double-edged sword of neoliberalism. Constituting the immigrant as not-quite Canadian allows for the continued disconnect between their ability to play the neoliberal game and the rewards that they receive for successful play. This can be seen through policies that continue to disregard foreign degrees or other credentials that is at the heart of the deskilling process, for example. Yet, as immigrants are racialized within the economy of Canada, claims of racism under neoliberalism are fundamentally ruled as outside of the way in which society – especially Canadian society - is structured. Davis, again, provides a useful articulation of this process: “Under neoliberal racism the relevance of the raced subject, racial identity and racism is subsumed under the auspices of meritocracy. For in a neoliberal society, individuals are supposedly freed from identity and operate under the limiting assumptions that hard work will be rewarded if the game is played according to the rules. Consequently, any impediments to success are attributed to personal flaws. This attribution affirms notions of neutrality and silences claims of racializing and racism. (Davis 2007: 350)” As a consequence, neoliberalism effectively masks racism through its value-laden moral project: camouflaging practices anchored in an apparent meritocracy, making possible a utopic vision of society that is non-racialized. David Theo Goldberg’s articulation of racist culture is particularly useful in understanding how race is both evoked and suppressed under neoliberal discourse. Goldberg’s project in Racist Culture: Philosophy and the Politics of Meaning is to “map the overlapping terrains of racialized expression, their means and modes of discursive articulation, and the exclusions they license with the view to contending and countering them.” (Goldberg 1993: 9) His central thesis is that modern racist culture is marked, fundamentally, by its refusal to acknowledge the role that racism plays in everyday structures of society and how these structures work to fundamentally disguise and, simultaneously, reify the power of racism within society. He intricately describes the ways liberalism sanctions racist institutions and reproduces racial knowledge with every outwardly progressive gesture, which works to normalize racism as just an aspect of life.

I: Genocide

Capitalism devalues black labor and legitimizes genocide


Bonacich 76 (Edna, Professor of Sociology and Ethnic Studies at University of California Riverside, “Advanced Capitalism and Black/White Race Relations in the United States: A Split Labor Market Interpretation”, American Sociological Review 41:1, February 1976, JSTOR)//AS

The rise in relative unemployment among blacks raises a question regarding the role of race in advanced capitalism. While black slav- ery and share-cropping were of unambiguous benefit to the owners of land and capital, the gains from high unemployment in one seg- ment of the population are less evident. Two approaches to this question can be distin- guished in the literature. One sees a continued advantage to the employer in keeping blacks as a marginal workforce, useful for dealing with economic fluctuations and helping to divide and weaken the working class (e.g., Baron, 1971:34; Gordon, 1972:53-81; Reich, 1972; Tabb, 1970:26-7). The other, exempli- fied by Willhelm (1971), asserts that the tech- nology of advanced capitalism has lessened the need for unskilled labor, which was the primary role played by blacks in the past. Blacks have become useless to the economy and to the capitalist class and, combining this fact with persistent racism, may even face gen- ocide. (It should be noted that some authors, e.g., Baran and Sweezy, 1966:263-8; Bailey, 1973, hold both of these apparently contra- dictory positions simultaneously.)

The endless march of capitalism inflicts modern genocide on the black population—relegating them to ghettos and removing them from view


Wilhelm and Powell 93 (Sidney M. and Edwin H., assistant professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and associate professor of sociology at the State University of New York respectively, “Who Needs the Negro?”, Conquering Books 1993, University of Michigan Libraries)//AS

The Negro movement is merely the advance turbulence of a general tempest. At the moment that the Negro passes a major milestone in his struggle for full citizenship our society shifts from an industrial to an automated economy. He is like the breathless runner in the nightmare who, no matter how he strains, can only see his goal recede farther in the distance. Even if he won his demands for civil rights he could not keep up with the spreading effects of the introduction of total machine production. The "Negro Problem" therefore is not only one of civil rights but is also one Trans-action of economic and human rights: How are we to re-arrange our social life in response to the rapid alterations in economic production? On the face of it the idea of a "Negro Revolution" is absurd. The Negro is not challenging basic American values. He wants to join the white man's system, not upset it; he wants to come into the house, not bomb it. Rather than being engaged in a revolution to overthrow an oppressive system, the Negro is being disengaged by the system. The Ne gro flees the South-one region to another. He abandons the country for the city. And the white's response? He flees the Negro, abandoning the city to him. The usual explanation is that the Negro leaves his rural birthplace because the city needs his labor, especially after the cutting off of European immigration. But if this is so, why is the Negro's unemployment rate in urban centers so high? Basically, 20,000,000 Negroes are unwanted. Our values inhibit genocide-so we discard them by establishing new forms of "Indian reservations" called "Negro ghettos." We even make them somewhat economically self-sufficient through an "Indian hand-out." One out of every four Negroes in Chicago, for example, receives some form of public welfare assistance. Is it an exaggeration to suggest that the deteriorated city has now become the junk heap upon which the economically worthless are thrown? Urban renewal is often offered as a remedy, a medication which can help check the spreading blight of slum neighborhoods and slum lives. But what in fact has urban renewal brought about? Isn't the Negro simply being shuttled around turned over to the onward rush of economic interests as the Indian was? Reservation lands were once thought worthless-so they were given to the Indian; when this turned out to be wrong economically, they were taken away again. So with Negro slums as they become less profitable than middleclass urban renewal. The Negroes--and the slums -are being moved from one part of the city to another, while their old neighborhoods are converted into bulldozer wastelands ("Hiroshima flats" as one famous project has been nicknamed) until more prosperous tenants finally arrive. Presumably the bulldozers can then move to the "new" Negro neighborhoods, by then probably sufficiently blighted to require a new urban renewal project. One writer comments: "Planners endeavor to improve city life by property improvement: to upgrade property values rather than human values." "Urban Renewal" becomes "Negro Removal."

I: Forgetting

Capital is in the process of rendering the black population invisible because it no longer has a use for them


Wilhelm and Powell 93 (Sidney M. and Edwin H., assistant professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and associate professor of sociology at the State University of New York respectively, “Who Needs the Negro?”, Conquering Books 1993, University of Michigan Libraries)//AS

A discontented, restless generation of American Negroes, anxious to abandon a history of enslavement for equal participation in our society, has abruptly ended centuries of seeming lethargy. But is their.demand for "Freedom NOW" a genuine Negro revolt? Is there actually a civil rights struggle? Is the fundamental conflict between black and white? The tendency to look upon the racial crisis as a struggle for equality between Negro and white is too narrow in scope. The crisis is caused not so much by the transition from slavery to equality as by a change from an economics of exploitation to an economics of uselessness. With the onset of automation the Negro is moving out of his historical state of oppression into uselessness. Increasingly, he is not so much economically exploited as he is irrelevant. And the Negro's economic anxiety is an anxiety that will spread to others in our society as automation proceeds. The tremendous historical change for the Negro is taking place in these terms: he is not needed. He is not so much oppressed as unwanted; not so much unwanted as unnecessary; not so much abused as ignored. The dominant whites no longer need to exploit him. 1f he disappeared tomorrow he would hardly be missed. As automation proceeds, it is easier and easier to disregard him.


I: Poverty

Ongoing capitalism perpetuates a wealth gap that condemns billions to lives of poverty, starvation, and wage slavery—Marxist critiques is more essential now than ever


Scatamburlo-D’Annibale and McLaren 04 (Valerie and Peter, associate professor in the Department of Communication, Media and Film at the University of Windsor and Professor in the Division of Urban Schooling, the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies at UCLA, “Class Dismissed? Historical materialism and the politics of ‘difference’”, Educational Philosophy and Theory 36:2, April 2004, Wiley)//AS

The grosteque conditions that inspired Marx to pen his original critique of capitalism are present and flourishing. The inequalities of wealth and the gross imbalances of power that exist today are leading to abuses that exceed those encountered in Marx's day (Greider, 1998, p. 39). Global capitalism has paved the way for the obscene concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands and created a world increasingly divided between those who enjoy opulent affluence and those who languish in dehumanizing conditions and economic misery. In every corner of the globe, we are witnessing social disintegration as revealed by a rise in abject poverty and inequality. At the current historical juncture, the combined assets of the 225 richest people is roughly equal to the annual income of the poorest 47 percent of the world's population, while the combined assets of the three richest people exceed the combined GDP of the 48 poorest nations (CCPA, 2002, p. 3). Approximately 2.8 billion people—almost half of the world's population—struggle in desperation to live on less than two dollars a day (McQuaig, 2001, p. 27). As many as 250 million children are wage slaves and there are over a billion workers who are either un- or under-employed. These are the concrete realities of our time—realities that require a vigorous class analysis, an unrelenting critique of capitalism and an oppositional politics capable of confronting what Ahmad (1998, p. 2) refers to as ‘capitalist universality.’ They are realities that require something more than that which is offered by the prophets of ‘difference’ and post-Marxists who would have us relegate socialism to the scrapheap of history and mummify Marxism along with Lenin's corpse. Never before has a Marxian analysis of capitalism and class rule been so desperately needed. That is not to say that everything Marx said or anticipated has come true, for that is clearly not the case. Many critiques of Marx focus on his strategy for moving toward socialism, and with ample justification; nonetheless Marx did provide us with fundamental insights into class society that have held true to this day. Marx's enduring relevance lies in his indictment of capitalism which continues to wreak havoc in the lives of most. While capitalism's cheerleaders have attempted to hide its sordid underbelly, Marx's description of capitalism as the sorcerer's dark power is even more apt in light of contemporary historical and economic conditions. Rather than jettisoning Marx, decentering the role of capitalism, and discrediting class analysis, radical educators must continue to engage Marx's oeuvre and extrapolate from it that which is useful pedagogically, theoretically, and, most importantly, politically in light of the challenges that confront us.



I: Laundry List

Capital leaves behind nothing but slavery, racism, genocide, war, and despair—postmodernists ignore this march toward extinction


McLaren and Farahmandpur 00 (Peter and Ramin, Professor in the Division of Urban Schooling, the Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles and Professor of Education at Portland State University, “Reconsidering Marx in Post-Marxist Times: A Requiem for Postmodernism?”, Educational Researcher 29:3, April 2000, JSTOR)//AS

As we cross the mine-sown threshold of a new millennium we can hear the earth groaning behind us. The portal through which the human race has dragged itself over the last few centuries is ominously decorated with the blood-soaked trophies of capital: slavery, racism, sexism, homophobia, starvation, genocide, imperialist conquest, war, disease, unemployment, alienation, and despair. These historical "souvenirs" tacked above our heads as we pass through the entrance to another thousand years should reveal to current generations that the Lords of Commerce-the newly ordained saviors of civilization-are nothing more than paper saints, contemporary Lords of the Flies. We've seen their likes before. Unfortunately we still mistake the disease (capitalism) for the cure (democracy). Such persistent misrecognition, mutatis mutandis, brings to the fore a world-historical dilemma: Will we continue to interpret our defeats as victories, to reaffirm our conditioned reflexes, or will we finally see the writing on the wall? Marx's description of capitalism as the sorcerer's dark power that has now become uncontrollable is even more apt today than it was in Marx's time, despite the fact that Marxism has been relegated by the postmodernists to the Icarian status of failed aspirations. No other individual has been able to analyze the Frankensteinian dimensions of capital accumulation with the same intensity and foresight as Marx, who wrote: "If money ... 'comes into the world with a congenital blood-stain on one cheek,' capital comes dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and dirt" (1959, p. 760). Never before has a Marxian analysis of capitalism been so desperately needed than at this particular juncture in history, especially since the global push towards finance and speculative capital. It is becoming increasingly clearer that the quality of life in capitalist nations such as the United States is implicated in the absence of freedom in less developed countries. Global carpetbaggers profiteering on human suffering and bargain basement capitalists with a vision of transforming the environment into Planet Mall are bent upon reaping short-term profits at the expense of ecological health and human dignity and drawing ever more of existence within their expanding domain, cannibalizing life as a whole.

Capitalism perpetuates enormous wealth gaps, ecological degradation, abject poverty, and sex slavery


Cole 03 (Mike, senior lecturer in education, University of Brighton, “Might It Be in the Practice that It Fails to Succeed? A Marxist Critique of Claims for Postmodernism and Poststructuralism as Forces for Social Change and Social Justice”, British Journal of Sociology of Education 24:4, September 2003, JSTOR)//AS

I would like to begin with a few recent and current facts about the state of globalised capitalism in the US, the UK and the 'developing world'. As far as the US is concerned, during the 1980s the top 10% of families increased their average family income by 16%, the top 5% increased it by 23%, and the top 1% increased it by 50%. At the same time, the bottom 80% all lost something, with the bottom 10% of families losing 15% of their incomes (George, 2000, cited in McLaren & Pinkney-Pastrana, 2001, p. 208). The poverty rate rose from 11.3% in 2000 to 11.7% in 2001, while the number of poor increased also by 1.3 million to 32.9 million (US Census Bureau, 2002). In the UK, the latest figures show that the wealthiest 1% own 23% of wealth, while the wealthiest 50% own 94% of wealth (Social Trends, 2002, p. 102). This means that the poorest half of the population own only 6% of all wealth (Hill & Cole, 2001, p. 139). With respect to income, in Britain, the bottom one-fifth of people earn less than 10% of disposable income and the top fifth earn over 40% (Social Trends, 2002, p. 97). Over one in five children in Britain do not have a holiday away from home once a year because their parents cannot afford it (Social Trends, 2002, p. 87). As far as the 'developing world' is concerned, poverty in Africa and Latin America for two decades has increased, both in absolute and relative terms. Nearly one-half of the world's population are living on less than $2 a day and one-fifth live on just $1 a day (World Development Movement, 2001). The turning over of vast tracts of land to grow one crop for multinationals often results in ecological degradation, with those having to migrate to the towns living in slum conditions and working excessive hours in unstable jobs (Harman, 2000). There are about 100 million abused and hungry 'street kids' in the world's major cities; slavery is re-emerging, and some 2 million girls from the age of 5 to 15 are drawn into the global prostitution market (Mojab, 2001, p. 118). It was estimated that over 12 million children under 5 years old would die from poverty-related illness in 2001 (World Development Movement, 2001). Approximately, 100 million human beings do not have adequate shelter and 830 million people are not 'food secure' (i.e. hungry) (Mojab, 2001, p. 118). It has been estimated that, if current trends persist, in the whole of Latin America apart from Chile and Colombia, poverty will continue to grow in the next 10 years, at the rate of two more poor people per minute (Heredia, cited in McLaren, 2000, p. 39).

1   ...   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   ...   30


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page