You're welcome to publish this article free of charge
provided:
- you include the byline
- byline includes a functioning link to www.divinewrite.com
- you don't change the article in any way
- you provide a courtesy copy once published
Race and Racism – Some Concepts Defined
By Glenn Murray*
Despite adamant claims to the contrary, racism continues to
plague many peoples around the world. The first step toward
resolving issues of racial intolerance and prejudice is to
develop an understanding of the underlying concepts and
their labels.
This (rather long) article touches on the following topics:
· Stereotypes, Race, and Racism
· Culture and Cultural Imperialism
· Nationalism and National Imaginary
I hope you find these articles helpful.
Stereotypes
According to Stroebe and Insko (1989), the term
'stereotype' originated in 1798 to describe a printing
process that involved casts of pages of type. The term was
first used in relation to the social and political arena in
1922 by Walter Lippman, referring to our perception of
different groups.
Since then, the meaning of the term has been vigorously
debated. Stereotyping was considered by some as the
oversimplified, biased cognitive representations of
"undesirable rigidity, permanence, and lack of variability
from application to application" (ibid, 1989, p.4). Others,
such as Brown (1965), considered it a natural fact of life
like any other generalisation; "many generalisations
acquired by hearsay are true and useful" (cited in Stroebe &
Insko, 1989, p.5).
Stroebe and Insko (1989) settle on a simple definition which
sits somewhere in between these two schools of thought. They
define a stereotype as the "set of beliefs about the
personal attributes of a group of people" (p.5). They
obviously accept that stereotypes are not necessarily rigid,
permanent, or invariable, but they do still distinguish
between stereotypes and other categories, claiming that
stereotypes are characterised by a bias towards the ingroup
and away from the outgroup (p.5).
Yzerbyt, et al (1997) attempt to explain the existence of
stereotypes, suggesting that stereotypes provide not only a
set of (often unjustified) attributes to describe a group,
but also a rationale for maintaining that set of attributes.
This allows people to "integrate incoming information
according to their specific views" (p.21).
Race
When used in everyday speech in relation to
multiculturalism, the term `race' has come to mean any of
the following:
· nationality (geographically determined) - e.g. the Italian
race
· ethnicity (culturally determined, sometimes in combination
with geography) - e.g. the Italian race
· skin colour - e.g. the white race
The common usage of `race' is problematic because it is
esoteric, and because it implies what Bell (1986) calls
"biological certainty" (p.29). When we talk about race,
there is always a common understanding that we are also
talking about common genetic characteristics that are passed
from generation to generation. The concept of nationality
is generally not so heavily tarred with the genetics brush.
Likewise, ethnicity allows for, and gives equal weight to,
causes other than genetics; race does not. Skin colour is
just a description of physical appearance; race is not. The
concept of race may masquerade as a mere substitution for
these terms, but in actual fact, it is a reconstruction.
Further, there is the question of degree. Are you black if
you had a black grandmother? Are you black if you grew up
in a black neighbourhood? Are you black sometimes, but not
others? Who makes these decisions?
Racism
Having established the problems associated with the term
`race', we can now discuss how these problems contribute to
issues of racism.
Jakubowicz et al (1994) define racism as "the set of values
and behaviours associated with groups of people in conflict
over physical appearances, genealogy, or cultural
differences. It contains an intellectual/ideological
framework of explanation, a negative orientation towards
`the Other', and a commitment to a set of actions that put
these values into practice." (p.27)
What this definition fails to address is the framework of
explanation. Perhaps it should say "…framework of
explanation based on various notions of race and racial
stereotypes…". This would bring us back to our discussion
of the concept of race.
Because race is almost impossible to define, racial
stereotypes are even more inappropriate than other kinds of
stereotypes. Racism is an infuriating phenomenon because,
irrespective of this, behaviour is still explained, and
actions are still performed, based on these racial
categorisations.
Culture
"Culture" is a term we're all familiar with, but what does
it mean? Does it reflect your nationality? Does it reflect
your race? Does it reflect your colour, your accent, your
social group?
Kress (1988) defines culture as "the domain of meaningful
human activity and of its effects and resultant objects"
(p.2). This definition is very broad, and not particularly
meaningful unless analysed in context. Lull (1995) talks of
culture as "a complex and dynamic ecology of people, things,
world views, activities, and settings that fundamentally
endures but is also changed in routine communication and
social interaction. Culture is context." (p.66)
As with other categorisation techniques, however, cultural
labels are inherently inaccurate when applied at the
individual level. No society is comprised of a single
culture only. There are multitudes of sub-cultures which
form due to different living conditions, places of birth,
upbringing, etc. The concept of culture is useful because
it differentiates between different groups of people on the
basis of learned characteristics rather than genetic
characteristics. It "implies that no culture is inherently
superior to any other and that cultural richness by no means
derives from economic standing" (Lull, 1995, p.66).
This last may help explain the so-called "intellectual
aversion to the idea of culture" (Carey, 1989, p.19) that
has been encountered in America (probably the West in general,
and, I would say, definitely in Australia). Other reasons
suggested are individualism, Puritanism, and the isolation
of science from culture.
Cultural Imperialism
In 1971, Johan Galtung published a landmark paper called "A
Structural Theory of Imperialism". Galtung conceptualises
the world as a system of centres and peripheries in which
the centres exploit the peripheries by extracting raw
materials, processing these materials, and selling the
processed products back to the peripheries. Because the
processed goods are bought at a far greater cost than the
raw materials, the periphery finds it extremely difficult to
find enough capital to develop the infrastructure necessary
to process its own raw materials. Therefore, it is always
running at a loss.
Galtung's model is not limited to the trade of raw materials
such as coal, metals, oil, etc. To the contrary, it is
designed to incorporate the transformation of any raw value
(such as natural disasters, violence, death, cultural
difference) into a valuable processed product (such as a
news story, or a tourism industry).
Galtung's approach is inherently problematic, however,
because it superimposes a centre-periphery relationship onto
a world where no such relationship actually physically
exists. In other words, it is a model which attempts to
make sense of the intricate relationships between cultures,
but by the very fact that it is a model, it is limiting.
Admittedly, all theories are necessarily models, or
constructions, of reality, but Galtung's is potentially
harmful because:
a) it positions underdeveloped countries and their cultures
in the periphery. In order for such countries/cultures to
try to change their position, they must first acknowledge
their position as peripheral; and
b) it implies that the world will always contain
imperialistic centre-periphery relationships; "A Centre
country may slip into the Periphery, and vice versa"
(Galtung &Vincent, 1992, p.49), but no allowance is made for
the possibility of a world without imperialism. Therefore,
if a country/culture wishes to change its position it must
become an imperialistic centre.
In recent times, the term `Cultural Imperialism' has come to
mean the cultural effects of Galtung's imperialism, rather
than the process of imperialism as he sees it. For example,
Mowlana (1997) argues that cultural imperialism occurs when
"the dominant center overwhelms the underdeveloped
peripheries, stimulating rapid and unorganized cultural and
social change (Westernization), which is arguably
detrimental" (p.142).
The issue of language decline due to imbalances in media
structures and flow is often claimed to be the result of
cultural imperialism. Browne (1996) theorises that "the
rapid rise of the electronic media during the twentieth
century, along with their dominance by the majority culture,
have posed a tremendous challenge to the continuing
integrity, and even the very existence, of indigenous
minority languages… (p.60)"
He suggests that indigenous languages decline because:
· new indigenous terminology takes longer to be devised, and
may be more difficult to use, thus `majority' terminology
tends to be used;
· media monopolies have historically determined acceptable
language usage;
· schools have historically promoted the use of the
`majority' language;
· indigenous populations around the world tend to rely quite
heavily on electronic media because they have greater
literacy problems. As a result, they are more heavily
influenced by the `majority' language than they realise;
· the electronic media are inappropriate for communication
in many indigenous languages because many such languages
employ pauses as signs, and the electronic media remove
pauses because they are regarded as "time wasted and as an
indication of lack of professionalism" (Browne, p.61); and
· television reinforces majority culture visual conventions,
such as direct eye contact.
Similarly, Wardhaugh (1987) discusses how the majority of
medical and scientific articles are published in English.
"While English does not completely monopolize the scientific
literature, it is difficult to understand how a scientist
who cannot read English can hope to keep up with current
scientific activity." (p.136) More books are published in
English than any other language, and "much of higher
education in the world is carried out in English or requires
some knowledge of English, and the educational systems of
many countries acknowledge that students should be given
some instruction in English if they are to be adequately
prepared to meet the needs of the late twentieth century."
(Wardhaugh, 1987, p.137)
There are definitely uncounted instances of one culture
suffering at the hands of another, but there are still
problems with explaining this in terms of Cultural
Imperialism. In addition to those outlined above with
relation to Galtung, there are a number of other problems.
the Cultural Imperialism approach:
· does not allow for the appropriation or select cultural
values by the `minority' culture in order to empower, or in
some other way, benefit, that culture;
· presupposes some degree of natural change, it does not
discuss where the line between natural change and
imperialism can be drawn. (When is the change a necessary
part of the compromise of living in a multicultural
society?); and
· overlooks the changes to `dominant' cultures which
necessarily occur as it learns about the `subordinate'
culture.
Atal (1997) asserts that "[f]orces of change, impinging from
the outside, have not succeeded in transforming the
[non-West] cultures into look-alike societies. Cultures
have shown their resilience and have survived the onslaught
of technological changes." (p.24) Robertson (1994) talks of
Glocalisation, with the local being seen as an aspect of the
global, not as its opposite. For example, we can see "the
construction of increasingly differentiated consumers… To
put it very simply, diversity sells" (p.37). It is his
contention that "we should not equate the communicative and
interactive connecting of… cultures with the notion of
homogenisation of all cultures" (p.39).
This article does not suggest that we should be complacent
about the effects cultures may have on each other. Rather,
it suggests Cultural Imperialism is somewhat flawed as a
tool for cultural and social criticism and change. Instead,
each problem should be identified as an individual problem,
not as a part of an overall phenomenon called cultural
imperialism.
Nationalism
In his discussion of culture and identity, Singer (1987)
argues that nationalism is a relatively modern phenomenon
which started with the French and American revolutions.
Singer asserts that "[a]s the number and importance of
identity groups that individuals share rise, the more likely
they are to have a higher degree of group identity" (p.43).
Using this premise, he suggests that nationalism is a very
powerful identity because it combines a host of other
identities, such as "language, ethnicity, religion, and
long-shared historic memory as one people attached to a
particular piece of land" (p.51).
It's not surprising then, that Microsoft's Encarta Online
(1998) defines nationalism as a "movement in which the
nation-state is regarded as the most important force for the
realization of social, economic, and cultural aspirations of
a people."
National "imaginary"
Anne Hamilton (1990) defines national imaginary as "the
means by which contemporary social orders are able to
produce not merely images of themselves but images of
themselves against others. An image of the self implies at
once an image of another, against which it can be
distinguished (p.16)"
She argues that it can be conceptualised as looking in a
mirror and thinking we see someone else. By this, she means
that a social order transplants its own (particularly bad)
traits onto another social group. In this way, the social
order can view itself in a positive way, serving to "unite
the collectivity and maintain its sense of cohesion against
outsiders" (Hamilton, 1990, p.16).
It seems, however, that the process can also work in the
reverse direction. Hamilton suggests that in the case of
Australia, there is a lack of images of the self. She
asserts that the social order has appropriated aspects of
Aboriginal culture as a result. In terms of the mirror
analogy, this would be the self looking at another and
thinking it sees itself.
References
Atal, Y., (1997) "One World, Multiple Centres" in Media &
politics in transition: cultural identity in the age of
globalization, ED. Servaes, J., & Lie, R., (pp.19-28),
Belgium: Uitgeverij Acco.
Bell, P., (1986) "Race, Ethnicity: Meanings and Media", in
Multicultural Societies, ED. Bell, R., (pp.26-36).
Browne, D.R., (1996) Electronic Media and Indigenous
Peoples, Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Galtung, J., (1971) "A Structural Theory of Imperialism" in
Journal of Peace Research (8:2, pp.81-117).
Galtung, J., & Vincent, R.C. (1992) Global Glasnost,
Hamptom Press, USA.
Hamilton, A., (1990) "Fear and Desire: Aborigines, Asians
and the National Imaginary" in Australian Perceptions of
Asia (No.9, pp.14-35).
Jakubowicz, A., Goodall, H., Martin, J., Mitchell, T.,
Randall, L., & Seneviratne, K. (1994) Racism, Ethnicity
and the Media, Allen & Unwin, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.
Kress, G., (1989) Communication and Culture: An
Introduction, New South Wales University Press, Australia.
Lull, J., (1995) Media, Communication, Culture: A Global
Approach. Polity Press.
Mowlana, H., (1997) Global Information and World
Communication: New Frontiers in International Relations,
Sage Publications Ltd.
Robertson, R., (1994) "Glocalisation" in The Journal of
International Communication, 1,1, (pp.32-52).
Singer, M.R., (1987) Intercultural Communication: A
Perceptual Approach, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey.
Stroebe, W., & Insko, C..A., (1989) "Stereotype, Prejudice,
and Discrimination: Changing Conceptions in Theory and
Research" in Stereotyping and Prejudice: Changing
Conceptions, ED. Bar-Tal, D., Graumann, C.F., Kruglanski,
A.W., Stroebe, W., (pp.3-34), Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
Wardhaugh, R., (1987), Languages in Competition: Dominance,
Diversity, and Decline, Basil Blackwell Ltd., Oxford, UK.
Yzerbyt, V., Rocher, S., & Schadron, G., (1997)
"Stereotypes as Explanations: A Subjective Essentialistic
View of Group Perception" in The Social Psychology of
Stereotyping and Group Life, ED. Spears, R., Oakes, P.J.,
Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S.A., (pp.20-50), Blackwell
Publishers Ltd.
* Glenn Murray heads copywriting studio Divine Write. He has
a Master of Arts in International Communication and a
Bachelor of Arts in Linguistics and English Literature. He
can be contacted on Sydney +612 4334 6222 or at
glenn@.... Visit www.divinewrite.com for further
details.
URGENT PLEA -- TAIWAN ISSUES.
Dear Caring friend,
The US Congress is going to decide whether to provide the
"Advanced" radar weapons system to Taiwan separatist
Chen ShuiBien this coming week. The Pentagon has already
approved it. Now it is at the hands of US Congress.
Taiwan Chen's pro-independence separatist dangerous moves
may draw America into a Civil War between mainland China
and Taiwan due to loopholes filled, outdated "Taiwan Relations Act".
Clearly that would be also a big disaster for Asia and World peace.
It is very Urgent for all of us to write an important letter
to the White House and Congress to demand them to terminate
the Taiwan Relations Act and stop selling advanced weapons to
Taiwan which sends the wrong message to Taiwan separatists.
Enclosed is an important SAMPLE LETTER and ALL
IMPORTANT CONTACT Information follows the sample
letter. EVERY CONTACT IS SO IMPORTANT TO REACH !!
Thanks so much for your efforts for the Peace and Humanity.
@@@ Please Remember, you are also welcome to write Your
Own letters, express your own opinions on this most important issue.
Or you may modify a little bit of our Subject line if you wish.
P.S. : ADDITIONAL MESSAGE :
We urge you and your friends please do not vote for the following
Congress members any more. They are some members of the Taiwan
Caucus, a Taiwan separatist Chen Shuibien's Political Lobby Group
in Washington. They promote Taiwan separatists agenda which
endangers the Peace and Stability in the Taiwan Straits.
They jeopardizes the very important US-China relationship.
Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH ), Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH ),
Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA ) , Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R- CA. )
Rep. Robert Wexler(D-FL ), Senator George Allen (R-VA)
Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) , Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS),
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY),
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Now, back to the campaign letter :
SAMPLE LETTER : (Please place your Name, Address ,
City , State, Zip , and Your Country Name at the BEGINNING
and END of your letter.
------------------------------------------------------
Subject : URGENT PLEA -- TAIWAN ISSUES.
From: Your Name,
Your Address ,
Your City,
Your State, and Your Zip code
Your Country Name ,
Dear Mr. President,
In light of many dangerous, provocative issues on Taiwan,
we as Citizens and Voters are presenting our Urgent Requests
to our President, our Congress and our Government here :
1: Please STOP the 1979 US "TAIWAN RELATIONS ACT".
Please Stop Selling "ADVANCED" WEAPONS to Taiwan .
Because they incite Taiwan's separatists "independence" Plot.
On the contrary, it will Not protect citizens in Taiwan.
The Taiwan Relations Act and selling Advanced Weapons are
sending dangerous wrong messages to Taiwan separatists. This
outdated Act is a major factor of breeding Separatists in Taiwan
over the past decades. Taiwan separatist Chen ShuiBien is using
America's ACT to relentlessly push for his independence plot .
The Taiwan Relations Act is protecting no one in Taiwan. It incites
the Danger and Instability in the Region. China's President Hu Jintao
lately stated that China would Spare No Effort on Peaceful
Reunification. : http://china.org.cn/english/2003/Dec/83379.htm
Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. China do have the duty to
protect her Territory sovereignty. Please review the Taiwan history :
http://www.china.org.cn/english/taiwan/7891.htmhttp://www.china.org.cn/english/taiwan/7774.htm
A good, stable US-China relationship will promote stable, peaceful
Economic, Diplomatic, and Anti-Terrorism societies. To supply
Taiwan with "Advanced" weapons is dangerously sabotaging the
important US-China Relationship, Peace and Stability in the Region.
2: Please Abolish the "US-CHINA Economic and Security Review
Commission.". They are the true Cancer of US-China Relationship.
The commission is appointed by Congress. However, it is dominated
by the Anti-China "Blue Team" extremists. Their purpose is to strike
China in every possibility. They madly call for Tightening Controls on
US high tech exports to China, even including a system for monitoring
each and every US investment in China. The Anti-China "Blue Team"
Extremists are the ones responsible for US-China Trade Imbalances.
A major priority of this anti-China "Blue Team" is to transfer
high-tech Arms to Taiwan that will make its military and intelligence
capabilities more compatible with Washington's. They also promote
close Military Ties between the U.S. and Taiwan and the inclusion
of Taiwan in Washington's provocative missile-defense plans.
Such Anti-China "Blue Team" is a group of prominent Washington
think-tankers, lobbyists and Congressional staffers both inside and
outside the administration. For example: Arthur Waldron and Gary Schmitt,
the director of ultra extreme hard-line Neo-Cons Project for the New
American Century (PNAC), are the members of the "Blue Team".
Ref : http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/EA09Ad02.html
3: We Oppose H.R.4019 , H.R, 3793, S 2092 .
We Oppose Taiwan's participation of World Health Organization,
(WHO). This is another political conspiracy plot played by
Taiwan separatist Chen. The WHO is an entity of the United Nation.
The membership of the WHO is meant for all of the sovereign
countries. Taiwan is not a country. Taiwan is China's "Province".
Taiwan does have adequate health coverage from WHO's
"country office" in Beijing. Sadly, Chen ShuiBien rejected China's
eager help in the last SARS outbreak. Chen has no concern for the
people in Taiwan other than madly pushing his separatist agenda.
Congressman Steve Chabot appears relentlessly pushing such a
bill to promote for Taiwan joining the WHO as one of Chen's
stepping stones towards independence. Mr. Chabot is a member of
the "Taiwan Caucus". The bottom line is that " Taiwan Caucus "
is Chen ShuiBien's Political Lobby in Washington. Such an entity
uses the US Congress to achieve Taiwan's "independence" plot
as well as striking US-China relationship in every way it can. We
urge all mis-led US Congress members to quit such membership
and to BAN "Taiwan Caucus" in US permanently.
4 : We Oppose any of the US Congress members to celebrate
Taiwan's "presidential inauguration" on May 20 for Chen ShuiBien's
allegedly "stealing" the Presidency . Chen not only allegedly steals
Taiwan's Presidency but also Chen wants to "use" the US Congress
to "endorse" his stealing. Chen's shameful behavior is worse than
Imperialism. Congressman Sherrod Brown and Steve Chabot both
are promoting such provocative endorsement for Taiwan Chen.
Both congressman are clearly Anti-China and they are also members
of the "Taiwan Caucus". Many citizens wonder how much
benefits they got from "Taiwan Caucus" ?
5: We Oppose congressman Tom Lanto's proposal to welcome
Chen ShuiBien in "Washington". That clearly means the US
government is accepting Chen ShuiBien as a "Legitimate" winner
of the last election while hundreds of thousands of people in
Taiwan are repeatedly, angrily protesting Chen's allegedly
stealing the presidency. Well, Congressman Lanto again is
also a Member of Taiwan Chen's "Taiwan Caucus" .
Taiwan has only 21 million population.
On March 27, according to the police, it had nearly 500,000
citizens who protested Chen Shuibien stealing the Presidency.
More than 1,000 riot police rounded up the protesters
On April 4, another 60,000 citizens took to the Taipei street
to protest Chen Shui Bien's allegedly cheating :
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/04/content_320488.htm
On April 10, more than 300,000 people protested Chen's stealing
the Election. There were 8,000 police wielding wood batons and
shields against protesters :
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/12/content_322407.htm
With all of these continuous massive Protests, Chen shamefully
rejected the independent investigation of his allegedly "staged"
assassination to steal the "Sympathy votes" for him.
While we praise the "True" and "Honest" Democracy, however,
we completely Oppose the "Stealing" or "Robbing" the presidency.
It is the most serious Crime in the true Democratic society.
More importantly, US government can Not convince China for
more meaningful reform if Taiwan Chen continues such stealing
and occupying the Presidency. Because it is a Fake democracy.
America should Never sacrifice the most important US-China
Relationship for the Taiwan separatists. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Your Name,
Your Address ,
Your City,
Your State, and Your Zip code
Your Country Name ,
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
THE IMPORTANT CONTACT INFORMATION :
There are about 10 categories of the CONTACTS.
EVERY CONTACT IS SO IMPORTANT TO REACH.
Please spend some time to write to ALL of them. Please
EMAIL to all of them if they have the email addresses. Thanks.
1: CONTACT PRESIDENT BUSH :
Please politely address to: Dear Mr. President ,
Tel: a: 202-456-1111 , b: 202-456-1414,
Fax: 202-456-2461 (in U.S.A.)
Whitehouse Website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
EMAIL : president@... (@whitehouse.gov )
* It is very important to also send your letter to the key Cabinet
members : Copy the following list and paste the list to BCC field
in your email. In the TO field, fill in with President Bush's email
address above. Note: it must have comma between addresses.
first.lady@..., (@whitehouse.gov )
dcfo@... , (@do.treas.gov )
info@... , (@who.int )
feedback@..., ( @www.whitehouse.gov )
AskDOJ@..., devans@... ,
webmaster@..., whitman.christine@...,
ann.veneman@... , agsec@...,
Secretary@..., The.Secretary@...,
Rod.Paige@... , adela.backiel@... ,
contactustr@... , hhsmail@... ,
contact-oasp@... ,