https://www.scollingsworthenglish.com/uploads/3/8/4/2/38422447/ta-nehisi_coates_pdf.pdf
As we begin reading this week the poignant and stirring memoir, Between the World and Me, by Ta-Nahesi Coates, I would like us to continue with some “prep” work to build up critical theory. I believe the more we are familiar with the critical theory lens, such as the concept of “Anti-Racism” by Ibram X Kendi and the theory of “White Fragility and White Privilege” by Robin DiAngelo, the more this will help us to understand and analyze Coates’ argument in his memoir. Essentially, the memoir is written as an extended letter from a black father to his black son in a time in American society where violence against black males has, as the author argues, become normative, sanctioned, condoned through means such as police excessive use of force, but the violence arises from beliefs, biases, assumptions, rash judgments, a lack of racial understanding, a lack of cultural understanding, and from “systematic racism” inherent within social institutions and implicit racism within interpersonal relationships. The memoir is written from a father’s vantage point, of a wiser, older black male who is giving advice, moral instruction, and sharing harsh realities with his son. The father’s perspective does not soften nor sugarcoat the realities of what it means to be a black male in contemporary American society, nor does it ignore the origins of these problems in the bleakness in American history (beginning with the Transatlantic Slave Movement, the formation of the institution of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, all of which contributed to the formation of racist beliefs in American culture and American society from the inception of the nation until the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s). When was there a time in American history when American laws, legal institutions, social institutions from churches to schools to prison systems, were not engaged in creating a double set of laws, policies, standards on the basis of race? Have those double standards that grew over historical time as the nation’s history grew, have those been replaced with a consciousness of equality or have those double standards been left in tact at their roots and only evolve into different forms in contemporary society?
Part 1: Explain what “Anti-Racism” means and what would a situation be in everyday life where one could hypothetically apply the theory and philosophy of “Anti-Racism?”
Part 2: Write a short reflection of your initial thoughts reading the first one to three chapters of Coates’ Between the World and Me. Here, I just want your reaction, your thoughts as you enter into the memoir, since we are just getting started reading it. Provide one or two specific passages from the memoir to discuss; for example, give a short synopsis or summary of the section you are referring to (this part can be short because presumably we are all reading the book) and then a longer writing section on how the passage you selected where you discuss your personal reaction to the passage. What this should provide is a list of different key passages within the class’s reading of the first parts of the memoir. Advice: scroll through the responses already posted by your peers as you post and if you see a passage already written about a lot, then don’t use that passage; let’s try to avoid an overuse of the same passages. Strive to get different passages out there because something you observe in the opening sections and write about may cause your classmate to see those sections differently too–which would be a good way for us to open up one another’s reading of the memoir. Ideally, we are aiming for the first three chapters this week. But at least make it through the first chapter or two. We will be reading this memoir and discussing it for the remainder of the semester. So next week be prepared for more specific questions on the memoir; this is just to get the ball rolling this week.
What is “Anti-Racism?” Anti-Racism is moral philosophy developed by Dr. Ibram X Kendi. The philosophy argues that when a person claims, “I am not a racist,” that this not enough to combat racism and that such claims do not fully understand or grasp the complex ways that racism exists.
Anti-Racism is a tool one uses in one’s everyday life where one combats and opposes racism wherever one happens to see it, be exposed it, or encounter it. A simple example would be this. Let’s say you sitting at a table outdoors with a few of your friends, two close friends and two you barely know. One of the close friends makes a racist joke. You have a moral choice in that moment–you can either A) allow the close friend to make the joke by either laughing at it (even if you don’t agree with the joke) or ignoring it (pretending the joke wasn’t made and going silent because you don’t agree with it) or B) you can tell your friend that it makes you uncomfortable to hear a racist joke, verbally tell your friend you don’t agree with the content of the joke, verbally call the joke racist, and verbally explain to your friend why it is racist. Option A is not being an “Anti-Racist” because it did not act to oppose racism in that moment. Option B, by definition of what “Anti-Racism” is and means, would be considered being an “Anti-Racist.” But why do so many people go with option A in their daily lives? Probably for a host of reasons–avoid controversy, don’t want to lose the relationship with the friend, don’t want to be seen as causing a problem in a public place, and so on. But option A, according to the theory of “Anti-Racism,” allows the racist act or racist behavior to continue. There was no consequence for the person telling the racist joke so the person will probably do the same thing again. But in option B, the “Anti-Racist,” the person who told the joke knows there is a moral consequence to telling it–that someone will observe it is racist and label it as such and that possibly a relationship is at stake at being lost or damaged.
It takes moral courage to be an “Anti-Racist.” These kinds of scenarios are micro-acts of racialization within socialization–these kinds of acts can occur in friendships, families, in businesses, in work place environments, in educational systems, in every social institution from churches to prison systems. “Anti-Racism” attempts to stop or thwart the spread of racism at the micro-level of how racism embeds itself into social relationships, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, biases, stereotypes, comments, communication, jokes, representations in film, music, media, in social networks, in social institutions. “Anti-Racism” goes far beyond the individual saying, “Well, I am not a racist,” and instead seeks to ask the person, “If you are not a racist, then how you can you act in affirmative ways to speak out against racism when you see it occurring?” This does not mean acts of aggression–to be an “Anti-Racist” does not mean to be aggressive or use physical force or violence to stop racism nor does it condone that as a philosophical approach. Rather, “Anti-Racism,” asks people to engage at communicative levels, legal levels, relational levels to stop racism and prevent it. We have all heard people say, “I am not a racist,” but yet they allow in their presence others to be racist–and, according to the theory of “Anti-Racism,” such allowances gives permission to others to be racist. “Anti-Racism” is about stopping the silent forms of permission that are given (or sometimes not silent forms of permission given) to people, businesses, and institutions that are either covertly or overtly racist.
Another example would be this: let’s say your favorite ice cream shop, a national chain, makes national headlines in the news for allowing its employees to engage in racist comments to customers or to each other. You have another moral dilemma on your hands. A) You keep eating at your favorite ice cream shop, or B) You boycott eating at your favorite ice cream shop until the company corrects the racist allegations such as offering more training on diversity, engaging in diverse hiring practices, offers a national apology, etc. According to and if applying the moral theory of “Anti-Racism,” then the theory would advocate you go with option B and the theory would argue that option A is a form of permission to the ice cream shop that silently condones the racism that occurred within the company. Think of the theory of “Anti-Racism” as a philosophical, yet practical and pragmatic, moral philosophy. Essentially, “Anti-Racism,” is a public philosophy that is changing the ways in which social institutions, businesses, and individuals think about and approach the sensitive matters of racism.
There are many philosophical questions one can potentially ask about “Anti-Racism” such as, “Where does the moral responsibility of one individual begin and end?”, but first it is important to understand the theory and what it advocates.
Here are a few articles on “Anti-Racism” that I would like you to read this week.
Article #1: “What is Anti-Racism” by VeryWellMind
Article #2: “Being Antiracist” by the National Museum of African American History and Culture (Smithsonian) THIS SECOND ARTICLE IS A MUST READ FOR THIS WEEK’S UNIT. Please pay close attention in it to the part on different types of racism and about the formation of implicit biases.
APA
CLICK HERE FOR FURTHER ASSISTANCE ON THIS ASSIGNMENT
The post Explain what “Anti-Racism” means and what would a situation be in everyday life where one could hypothetically apply the theory and philosophy of “Anti-Racism?” appeared first on Apax Researchers.
