I recently watched a video of Ruha Benjamin, a Professor of Sociology and African American Studies at Boston University. In this video, Professor Benjamin is being interviewed about so-called “post-racialism.” She frames post-racialism as a kind of story that Americans are telling themselves about where we are with race and identifies liberal and radical versions of this story. The liberal story is one of transcending race, while the radical story is of class distinctions eclipsing race as the primary point of social conflict.
Listening to Professor Benjamin reminded me of a question that I’ve been thinking about for a long time now. The whole post-racialism debate tends to focus on either arguing that we have achieved a post-racial society or that we have not yet achieved a post-racial society. What I rarely hear asked is whether a post-racial society is in fact a desirable society at all. Is that the ultimate goal of our centuries-long struggle with race and racism?
It depends on how post-racialism is defined. One way of defining it is as abandoning race as a standard for judgment of our fellow human beings. If this is how you define post-racialism, as a Baha’i I can support it wholeheartedly. ‘Abdu’l-Baha (1844-1921), Head of the Baha’i Faith from 1892-1921, put it this way:
“The spirit and intelligence of man is essential, and that is the manifestation of divine virtues, the merciful bestowals of God, the eternal life and baptism through the Holy Spirit. Therefore, be it known that color or race is of no importance…The standard of divine measure and judgment is…intelligence and spirit.”
This kind of post-racialism has institutional and structural implications to the degree that it is translated into policies and practices that eliminate overt racial discrimination or unintentional racial inequities. However, there is a different form of post-racialism that is focused on a kind of radical assimilationism. This kind of post-racialism views racial, ethnic or cultural differences as inherently problematic and a threat to national unity which can only exist if the dominant (White) culture remains dominant. For example, people who hold this view tend to react negatively to expressions of racial or ethnic pride on the part of people of color. In fact, such expressions are often described as “racist” themselves. This approach to post-racialism involves denying, ignoring, or suppressing racial, ethnic, or cultural differences.
This form of post-racialism, what Omi and Winant might refer to as a “racial project,” is not something I can support as a Baha’i. It represents a misdiagnosis of the problem. What we have come to understand as racial differences are not the problem; racism is. ‘Abdu’l-Baha has suggested an alternative way of viewing racial differences: “This variety in forms and colorings which is manifest in all the kingdoms is according to creative wisdom and has a divine purpose.”
An alternative vision of America is one in which we are all striving to understand the “creative wisdom” and “divine purpose” of this “variety of forms and colorings.” Such a society would be less “post-racial” than “multiracial.” Demographic trends tell us that “multiracial” is and increasingly will be the social reality of America. Our challenge is to make it a spiritual and moral reality in our personal lives and social policy.Powered by Sidelines