Racism white supremacy

New York Times, July 17, 1863, p. 4 Rev. B. Peters, Discourses on the Late Riots in New York City (Brooklyn Broach and Herring, 1863), pp. 5-6 New York Tribune, July 14, 1863, p. 1 July 15, 1863, p. 8 July 16, 1863, p. 8 July 17, 1863, pp. 1, 8 Anon., The Bloody Week, p. 1 Tomas Almaguer, Racial Fault Lines The Historical Origins of White Supremacy in California (Berkeley University of California Press, 1994), p. 108 Alden Vaughn, The Roots of American Racism Essays on the Colonial Experience (New York Oxford, 1995), pp. 3-54. 

Precisely because of this impurity, this profound and inextricable historical intertwining, because of this togetherness, racism exists, not despite that fact. How else could it operate, and why else would it be, as it were, necessary It seems that even by Hall s own reckoning, such prophetic statements about the impurity of the future might be tempered. Impurity and hybridity in and of themselves, are no guaranteed challenge to the racial orders of white supremacy and antiblackness—such are their conditions of possibility. 

Second, pessimism toward the demise of white supremacy and antiblackness implies in some way a belief in or an argument for the impermeability of the Racial Divide. In fact, it does not, and for at least two reasons. First, there is no necessary relationship between the two postulates (because the Racial Divide can be permeable while white supremacy and antiblackness remain robust) and, additionally, the second claim (re the impermeability of the Racial Divide) is deeply ambiguous in its own right. That is to say, it is unclear whether this ascribed imperviousness is put forward by the authors in question as descriptive (i.e., the divide can-not be breached) or as normative (i.e., the divide should not be breached). More to the point, Stephens fails to indicate where or how those purportedly pessimistic scholars of race and racism under scrutiny actually deny... 

This suggests something more complex than notions of internalized racism. It is to recognize the ways in which white supremacy is constitutive (not merely contingent) not only to whiteness and something called white racial identity but also for the subjectivity of blacks. Frantz Fanon stands as the most well-known theorist in this regard, but see also more recent departures from his and other work in Marriott (2000). 

---