Beyonce and Colorism

Reading this a year later and honestly I think the best way to describe racism is not name calling or feelings of superiority but how can someone materially effect your life. Black people can hate white folk all day but we are not plugged into the greater system that can effect where you live where you work or if you're exposed to the criminal justice system. Notice in 2018 black people weren't calling the cops left and right just because they felt uncomfortable at the sight of white people. So when darkcurry keeps reiterating a textbook definition its not to be obtuse its to point out nuance its to point out in a country built on race and white supremacy the mechanisms of racism only work for one group in the service capitalistic delusion and misalignment. If we were living in South Africa or some other predominately black country that argument could be made but not in the western world where the people who own the means of production land and policing system only look one way.

 

They sure can be in the service of white supremacy which a lot of Asians are. Its no coincidence there were Asian Nazis

 

As you said above!
I think the black/white situation in America is totally different and your definition certainly makes sense there. You also have the most power-abusing cops in the whole western world imho.
I have met enough Africans either in Africa or who have recently moved abroad out of their own free will who hold racist-ass views and feel way too free to blow it up in someone‘s Face because they believe their skin colour automatically absolves them of racism. Africans in Central Europe aren’t different to other white economic migrants and they aren’t looked at differently either. You also have to understand that European countries are nation states, meaning there is a degree of ethnic homogeneity. Germany for instance has started becoming diverse only after WW2 and that didn’t start with black people. Black people have been coming in larger numbers only since the late 90s. So it’s just not a good comparison to say that black people in Central Europe are in the same shoes as black people in the US.
I just think I look at this issue from a completely different perspective but I understand what you mean and your definition does make sense in the American context.

 

I guess Rev didn't think so....lol she "disliked" my post!

 

That's plain weird

 

My guess is she accidentally clicked the wrong icon. Has happened to me before.

 

What is the # of the post I have disliked?

 

#258 Maybe hit the button by mistake (?)

 

It is gone now.

 

I see what you mean about the particular impact on people of African origin in European/white settings, but I think it's also worth noting that some of it is a bias against labor that exists in many cultures irrespective of contact with African people. In East Asia, dark skin was correlated with peasant/field laborer status, and thus undesirable. I think it even predates European contact in some African cultures - obviously not to the J.Lo/Beyonce extremes, but vis-a-vis brown vs dark skin. I don't think, however, that it is always so extreme as to constitute "deep hatred".

 

Economic disenfranchisement based on skin for whatever reason is violent and based on hatred fam

 

All of human history is the history of dominance and power relationships, interspersed with periods of intra, and at times inter-group, cooperation. I don't think the basis on skin is any worse than other bases for disenfranchisement. I view them all as unjust, but I don't think it is all based on hatred. That comes later, over time, to justify the wrongs done to the subordinate group. The purpose of slavery wasn't to generate hatred of blacks and white supremacy. It was to steal labor from a group without firearms that could be oppressed. Hatred is a byproduct and justification for economic exploitation.

 

I disagree because unlike religion or ideology you can not change your race. Its a prison of the physical body where not matter your location no matter your circumstances or ideology you are still trapped in narrative. Reminds me of when people talk about Irish and Romans being enslaved too but usually that shit lasted for a generation and not centuries and if you managed to escape you could blend in with the general population. No such thing existed for black people

 

All true, but not the basis for black oppression. Profit, not race hatred. It's like having a prisoner who can't lose his orange jumpsuit, no matter where they run to. That makes it easy to track and prevent escape. Nevvertheless, before New World slavery, blacks were able to buy their freedom and assimilate in much the same way as white slaves and indentured servants could. Examples abound in Rome, Byzantium, Moorish Spain amd Ottoman Europe. Mass chattel slavery in the Americas changed all that. But the objective remains - profiteering.

 

Of course but why blacks? The trip from Africa to America is incredibly costly. Someone had to have a deep hatred or at the very least saw blacks as not even human to the point where they ignored healthy poor white people in their own immediate areas.

 

You said it best yourself. They did it because they could. Period. Western African societies didn't have any experience with chattel slavery and those groups forced to lead European slave traders to vulnerable weaker groups for enslavement probably had no cultural context to expect that the type of slavery that would be practiced would be so horrible. It's just as likely that they thought it would be similar to the slavery/indentured servitude various African groups practiced against each other as part of warfare/conquest/etc, which was much more like the slavery of ancient Greece and Rome. Our ancestors were not regarded as human by "Enlightenment" era Europe. An indentured servant can run away and blend in, but an African cannot blend-in in an all-white environment. The Romans and other subsequent European societies engaged in the enslavement of whites from other ethnic groups at different times in history.

The particular use of the chattel slavery institution against blacks after the mass deaths of indigenous peoples who couldn't withstand exposure to European diseases from 1492-onward is unique. Even early black slaves enslaved in Rome, etc, were not subject to antebellum southern or chattel slavery as practiced in the Western Hemisphere. I think the post-Renaissance New World slavery is unique and probably due specifically to the Europeans groups that engaged in it and the New World context.

Sorry for the rambling. I was just throwing ideas out, and not necessarily in a linear fashion.