Robert Young’s, “Putting Materialism back into Race Theory” argues that “the recent work by African-American humanists, or discourse theorists, or even left-liberal intellectuals, these various groups—despite their intellectual differences—form a ruling coalition and one thing is clear: capitalism set the limit for political change, as there is no alternative to the rule of capital. In contrast to much of contemporary race theory, a transformative theory of race highlights the political economy of race in the interests of an emancipatory political project.” Explain his argument and flesh out his critiques of Asante, Mills, Goldberg, Collins, et al. Put in your own words what his theory of race entails and how it leads to a different kind of political work.

See also his “Postpositivist Realism and the return of the Same: The Rational Subject and the Post(post)modern Liberalism.” Cultural Logic (2002): 39 pars. 15 November 2002.

Dr. Robert M. Young, professor of English in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Alabama, passed away Sunday, Jan. 31, 2010, after a four year battle with cancer.

In The Souls of Black Folk (1903) W.E.B. DuBois writes that “The problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color-line—the relation of the darker to the lighter races of men in Asia and Africa, in America and the islands of the sea.” Is the problem of the color-line the problem of the 21^st century too?

In “White Supremacy as a Sociopolitical System” Charles Mills argues that in the major areas of American society (and in some respects the entire world)—such as in the juridical system, the economic and cultural spheres—white people dominate and are privileged in ways that are racially discriminating.

1. To conceptualize this state of affairs Charles Mills uses the term white supremacy—a term that after the civil rights laws of the 1960s fell out of vogue as a depiction of American society. (a) How is Mills use of the term “white supremacy” similar to the uses of the terms “class society” and “patriarchy”, and how do these three terms challenge what the (liberal) mainstream typically counts as political? (pp. 36 and 39-40) (b) Why does Mills think that the term “white supremacy” still applies to American society despite the absence of State-sanctioned segregation since the 1960s? (pp. 36-37) (c) How does Mills, following Law Professor Frances Lee Ansley, broadly define “white supremacy”? (p. 37) (d) Why does he think that in our current postcolonial era we can still be said to be living in an age of global white supremacy? (pp. 37-38)
2. What is the origin of white supremacy as a system, or set of systems, according to Mills—the original racial “big bang”, as he calls it? (p. 38)
3. What are the four reasons why Mills thinks that white supremacy as a concept entails a radically different understanding of political reality, pointing us theoretically toward the centrality of racial domination and subordination (and effecting what he thinks is no less than a fundamental paradigm shift)? (pp. 40-42)
4. According to Mills, white supremacy should be seen as a multidimensional system of domination not merely encompassing the “formally” political that is limited to the juridico-political realm of official governing bodies but extending to white domination in economic, cultural, cognitive-evaluative, somatic, and in a sense even “metaphysical” spheres. Briefly describe how, according to Mills, there is white supremacy in each of these spheres. (a) The juridico-political sphere. (b) The economic sphere. (c) The cultural sphere. (d) The cognitive-evaluative sphere. (e) The somatic sphere. (f) The metaphysical sphere. (pp. 42-48)

***The like to the Tues Feb 23 reading – Charles Mills, “White Supremacy as a Sociopolitical System” is repaired. Thanks Alex.***

Social Contract Theory is an answer to the question of what justifies the existence of States and what their roles should be. With his version of Social Contract Theory, John Locke argued for the justification of Liberal States. Thomas Jefferson was tremendously influenced by Locke in writing the Declaration of Independence and described him as one the three greatest men ever to have lived (the other two being Francis Bacon and Isaac Newton).

• What does Locke mean by the following?:

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions… (p. 12 in the reading)

• And how is the idea that Locke expresses here, and some of his other ideas, expressed in the following passage from the American Declaration of Independence?:

We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Ps. Some important clues will be given in class on Thursday.

In the chapter, “Whiteness as Ambush and the Transformative Power of Vigilance”, George Yancy describes ways in which white antiracists, against their best intentions, may be “ambushed” by their own whiteness and fail to be truly antiracist.

1. Give some examples of such “ambush” (Yancy, pp. 229-230 [paragraphs 3 + 1-3], 232 [paragraph 2], 234-5 [paragraphs 1-2 + 1-2], 236 [paragraph 1], 237 [paragraph 2])
2. Why does Yancy think that being a white antiracist is never completely in one’s control (p. 231 [paragraph 2])
3. Why does Yancy think that dismantling whiteness is a continuous project (Yancy, p. 232 [paragraph 3]?
4. Why does he think that there must be a call “to disarticulate whiteness from those juridico-political, economic, institutional, aesthetic, and other locations that will resist disarticulation to ensure the maintenance of white power” (Yancy, pp. 238 [paragraph 2], 242 [paragraph 2])?
5. Why does Yancy think that white antiracists should be thankful for being “ambushed” (p. 241 [paragraph 1])?

Here are the questions for seminar discussions this Tuesday and Thursday. Answer the first one for Tuesday and the second one for Thursday! Before you answer the questions below, please read W.E.B. Du Bois’ “Of Our Spiritual Strivings” paying especially close attention to what he has to say about being seen as a problem, being shut out by a vast veil, and double-consciousness. Also, go to READINGS tab to get the newly added essay by Frantz Fanon.

1.    How can double-consciousness—“this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others”—be described as an internalized “white gaze” and how is this related to George Yancy’s frequent reference to the experiences of “having one’s (black) body returned to oneself” and ”having one’s here (as a black person) be a there”? (see Yancy, pp. 66-68, 70-71, 75, 83, 86) [And how does Frantz Fanon express similar ideas in the following quotes?: “For not only must the black man be black; he must be black in relation to the white man. Some critics will take it on themselves to remind us that this proposition has a converse. I say that this is false. The black man has no ontological resistance in the eyes of the white man” (Fanon, p. 257), and “In the white world the man of color encounters difficulties in the development of his bodily schema” (Fanon, p. 258)]

2.    How are “black people” a figment of the imagination of white people (when racialized by them), how does this imagination render black people as persons invisible (by a “vast veil”, if you like) and white people as “white”; as well as how this imagination is taught? (See Yancy, pp. 68-69, 72-74, 75-79, 82-84, 88-89, 91) [How does Fanon express similar ideas about the racialized imagination about black people in the following quotes?: “The white world, the only honorable one, barred me from all participation. A man was expected to behave like a man. I was expected to behave like a black man—or at least like a nigger” (Fanon, p. 260), and “When people like me, they tell me it is in spite of my color. When they dislike me, they point out that it is not because of my color. Either way, I’m locked into the infernal circle” (Fanon, p. 261)]

NEED HELP? Read the Wiki entry on “Phenomenology” — it might help you better understand Yancy’s project. Also, see http://www.duq.edu/philosophy/faculty-and-staff/george-yancy.cfm for info on Yancy. On Fanon, see: http://www.postcolonialweb.org/poldiscourse/fanon/fanonov.html
http://www.english.emory.edu/Bahri/Fanon.html and this piece by our own William Strickland,
http://scholarworks.umass.edu/afroam_faculty_pubs/8/ (PDF download)

1. What is “racism,” in the strict sense of the word, according to Dummett? (p. 28)

2. Dummett thinks that racial prejudice (“racism” in the strict sense of the word) is irrational. Why? (pp. 28-9)

3. Dummett also thinks that the mere belief in the intellectual inferiority of a racial group cannot rationally lead to racism. Why? (p. 29)

See wiki entry on SIR Mike Dummett http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Dummett

1. (a) Why does Kant think that there are four human “races” and which are they? (Kant, pp. 40-41) (b) What does he think causes racial variations in humans? (Kant, pp. 43-45)
2. Which were the two ways in which one could study the nature of “man,” according to Kant? (Eze, p. 105)
3. (a) What, according to Kant, makes us humans and persons? (Eze, pp. 106-107) (b) Why did he think that human nature is in essence a moral nature? (Eze, p. 112) (c) Why did he think that civilization marks man’s essential nature? (Eze, p. 113)
4. (a) Why did Kant think that the supposed innate psychological differences between human “races” are essentially moral differences? (Eze, pp. 115-116) (b) And why did he think that black people lack “true” character? (Eze, p. 116)
5. What does Hegel mean by the sentence, “The stage of self-consciousness which the spirit has reached manifests itself in world history as the existing national spirit, as a nation which exists in the present…”? (Hegel, p. 110)
6. (a) What is the connection between nature and human freedom and development, according to Hegel? (Hegel, p. 111) (b) What does he mean by the claim that, “The torrid and frigid regions, as such, are not the theatre on which world history is enacted. In this respect, such extremes are incompatible with spiritual freedom”? (Hegel, p. 112) (c) How does he characterize the spiritual character of the three continents Africa, Europe and Asia? (Hegel, p. 122) (d) And how does Hegel characterize Africans and their relation to history, morality and slavery (Hegel, pp. 127-128, 133-135).

   KANT  HEGEL  EZE  FYI, see http://www.multimedia.ualberta.ca/index.cfm?cfnocache&type=2&feed=10130 (QuickTime)