This was interesting, and the comments are just as engaging. Check out the discussion of the role of indigenous people in the comments section, which challenges Nakagawa's argument that black people are the "fulcrum."
http://www.dominionofnewyork.com/2012/05/07/why-i-an-asian-man-fight-anti-black-racism/#comment-14893
Scot Nakagawa
This article originally appeared at Racefiles.wordpress.com.
I’m often asked why I’ve focused so much more on anti-black racism
than on Asians over the years. Some suggest I suffer from internalized
racism.
That might well be true, since who doesn’t suffer from
internalized racism? I mean, even white people internalize racism. The
difference is that white people’s internalized racism is against people
of color, and it’s backed up by those who control societal institutions
and capital.
But some folk have more on their minds. They say that focusing on
black and white reinforces a false racial binary that marginalizes the
experiences of non-black people of color. No argument here. But I also
think that trying to mix things up by putting non-black people of color
in the middle is a problem because there’s no “middle.”
So there’s most of my answer. I’m sure I do suffer from internalized
racism, but I don’t think that racism is defined only in terms of black
and white. I also don’t think white supremacy is a simple vertical
hierarchy with whites on top, black people on the bottom, and the rest
of us in the middle.
So why do I expend so much effort on lifting up the oppression of
black people? Because anti-black racism is the fulcrum of white
supremacy.
A fulcrum is defined by Merriam-Webster as “the
support about which a lever turns” or, alternatively, “one
that supplies capability for action.” In other words, if you want
to move something, you need a pry bar and some leverage, and what gives
you leverage is the fulcrum – that thing you use so the pry bar works
like a see-saw.
The racial arrangement in the U.S. is ever changing. There is no
“bottom.” Different groups have more ability to affect others at
different times because our roles are not fixed. But, while there’s no
bottom, there is something like a binary in that white people exist on
one side of these dynamics – the side with force and intention. The way
they mostly assert that force and intention is through the fulcrum of
anti-black racism.
Hang in there with me for a minute and consider this. Race slavery is
the historical basis of our economy. Yes, there was/is a campaign of
“Indian removal” in order to capture natural resources and that
certainly is part of the story. But the structure of the
economy is rooted in slavery.
Our Constitution was written by slave owners. They managed to muster
some pretty nice language about equality, justice, and freedom for “men”
because they considered Africans less than human. Our federal system is
based on a compromise intended to accommodate slavery. Our concept of
ownership rights, the structure of our federal elections system, the
segregated state of our society,the
glut of money in politics, our conservative political culture, our
criminal codes and federal penitentiaries all evolved around or were/are
facilitated by anti-black racism.
And this is not just about history. Fear of black people drives our
national politics, from the fight over Jim Crow in the 50s and 60s, to Willie Horton and
the Chicago
Welfare Queen in the 80s, and the War on Drugs, starting in 1982
right up to the present. Since 2001, the U.S. has spent about 1.3
trillion dollars on war. Since 1982 we’ve
spent over 1 trillion dollars on the drug war.
About 82% of drug busts are for possession, while about 18% are for
trafficking. Sound like an irrational way to wage a war on drugs? Not if
it’s a war on black people.
According to Human
Rights Watch, black males are incarcerated at a rate more than six
times that of white males resulting in one in 10 black males aged 25-29
being held in prison or jail in 2009. The same report states:
Blacks constitute 33.6 percent of drug
arrests, 44 percent of persons convicted of drug felonies in state
court, and 37 percent of people sent to state prison on drug charges,
even though they constitute only 13 percent of the US population and
blacks and whites engage in drug offenses at equivalent rates.
And why a war on people? The war on drugs is the cornerstone of the
“tough on crime” messaging campaign that is key to the Republican
Southern Strategy. It suggests that extending civil rights to
African-Americans resulted in the crime wave of the 1970s, (and not the
baby boom as is suggested by sociologists) in order to drive white
Southerners into the Republican Party.
And that “tough on crime” thing, that’s not just against black
people. It’s a propaganda war that is weakening civil rights and civil
liberties for all of us.
There’s no hierarchy of oppressions where race is concerned, but
anti-black racism is the fulcrum of white supremacy.
About the Author
Scot Nakagawa
I am a lifelong political activist,
community organizer, organization builder, and trouble-maker currently
serving as a senior partner in the grassroots racial justice think tank
ChangeLab.