0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
39 просмотров1 страница
Omi and Winant argue that race emerged as an organizing factor in society due to political actions they call racial projects. These racial projects remain ongoing making race an unstable social category which is constantly changing as evidenced by the changing nature of race relations and as the result of political actions such as the Civil Rights Movement. Still, as Gramsci would predict, the reforms secured during crisis moments like the Civil Rights era serve merely to incorporate resistance. The political project of racial equality remains incomplete. Thus, the fundamental dynamics of race including institutional racism and continued inequality along racialized lines remain in place today, according to Omi and Winant.
Omi and Winant argue that race emerged as an organizing factor in society due to political actions they call racial projects. These racial projects remain ongoing making race an unstable social category which is constantly changing as evidenced by the changing nature of race relations and as the result of political actions such as the Civil Rights Movement. Still, as Gramsci would predict, the reforms secured during crisis moments like the Civil Rights era serve merely to incorporate resistance. The political project of racial equality remains incomplete. Thus, the fundamental dynamics of race including institutional racism and continued inequality along racialized lines remain in place today, according to Omi and Winant.
Omi and Winant argue that race emerged as an organizing factor in society due to political actions they call racial projects. These racial projects remain ongoing making race an unstable social category which is constantly changing as evidenced by the changing nature of race relations and as the result of political actions such as the Civil Rights Movement. Still, as Gramsci would predict, the reforms secured during crisis moments like the Civil Rights era serve merely to incorporate resistance. The political project of racial equality remains incomplete. Thus, the fundamental dynamics of race including institutional racism and continued inequality along racialized lines remain in place today, according to Omi and Winant.
Hey everybody do you want to know how not racist I am?
Im so not racist that I do
nt even see color! Because color is only skin deep. And/or were all pink on the in side, the end. Sure except for no, race actually matters quite a bit for every reason except sk in color. Well, skin color in and of itself. But as Omi and Winant argue, skin c olor isnt and can never be considered in and of itself, and thats precisely the is sue. Specifically, per them, race is politically contested and constructed both on a macro (social) and micro (individual) level. In short, the concept of race, w hich arises out of a particular historical and political and social context, ren ders arbitrary biological traits (i.e. phenotypes) symbolic. Traditional paradig ms of race understood in terms of ethnicity (identity), class (inequality) and na tion (territory) dont take the symbolic into account, thereby reifying the assumpt ion that race is a thing in the world. But its not a thing, is neither epistemologically natural nor ontologically neces sary. You cant count it, you cant hold it. Which doesnt mean it doesnt exist in the ex periential sense (fucking semantics, how do they work). After all, when faced wi th biological difference, our perspectival imperative is to call it race. And wh en we see someone being an asshole in response to biological difference, our neo liberal imperative is to call it racism. That said, what sets off the race bells skin or hair color, facial structure, whatever are not accidental. How and why an d through which channels these particular traits became symbolically loaded is t he ultimate question, and is what the authors argue must be interrogated. Becaus e a lot is at stake! For one thing, unless we know what exactly were dealing with , how might we hope to mitigate the effects of institutionalized inequity? At first glance, this is probably an odd concept to parse. Because wait, race is nt real? Then how come that guys black? And does that mean theres no such thing as Mexicans? not stupid questions, given what racial formation theory asks of its au dience, namely to imagine a world without racial ideology. Its sort of like imagi ning at least, trying to imagine a world without capitalism. Every single thing we see and think and do is tied into nests upon nests of ideological assumptions s o pervasive and so thoroughly naturalized that the very structure and coherency of our world seems to hang in that balance. The concept of I for example, or you, or the fact that by virtue of being me I can never be you. Monads and shit! We tak e these things for granted not because this is really how the world is, but beca use this is how the world ended up. Omi and Winant call this process racial commo n sense; its no surprise that people look at you like you have fifteen penises gro wing out of your forehead when you tell them that race doesnt exist (in the way p eople think it does).