Article

Whiteness and Class Struggle

Authors:
  • Mass. College of Art
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... Damit stehtHund den Ideen von W.E.B. DuBois (1985[1935) und den frühen, marxistisch inspirierten US-amerikanischen Critical Whiteness Studies (CWS) nahe (vgl.Allen 2014aAllen [1994Allen ], 2014bAllen [1997;Ignatiev 2003;Roediger 1999Roediger [1991), die in der deutschsprachigen Rezeption jedoch weitgehend ignoriert werden. Hier dominieren privilegientheoretische und identitätspolitische Varianten der »Weißseinsforschung« (vgl.Karakayalı 2015).4 ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper explores punishment philosophy and practices in the United States from a critical criminological perspective, utilizing a racial capitalism framework to illustrate forces that impede prison abolition. The paper examines historic and contemporary punishments implemented against ‘others’ to show how such practices help to sustain white capital accumulation and white privilege. The paper also discusses a number of the individual social-psychological theories that assist in the maintenance of that system. Finally, the paper calls for the eradication of racial capitalism through a stronger revolutionary consciousness.
Article
Full-text available
The concept of whiteness has been formally recognized in academia over the last two decades as a means to address a significant and missing dimension within discussions of race and ethnicity. However, notions of white racial identity have long been significant in the writings of scholars of color. Among the many examples include, William J. Wilson, who in 1860 wrote "What Shall We Do with the White People?" analyzing presumptions of whiteness in the Declaration of Independence and during the early years of the United States nation (Roediger 1998, 58). Similarly, Frederick Douglass critiques the centering of the white experience in his famous speech, "What to the Slave Is Your Fourth of July?" (Douglass 1970, 349). In 1861 Harriet Jacobs describes the annual practice of "muster," a time when armed whites terrorized the enslaved population in anticipation of revolts. She suggests that this institution served to unite whites across class lines (Roediger 1998, 336). In 1891 Anna Julia Cooper examined the naturalization of whiteness in the women's organization Wimodaughsis (Cooper 1998, 88). Mia Bay’s The White Image in the Black Mind thoughtfully uncovers discussions of whiteness in eighteenth and nineteenth century writings in slave narratives and by African American scholars (2000). However, "Discounting and suppressing the knowledge of whiteness held by people of color was not just a by-product of white supremacy but an imperative of racial domination" (Roediger 1998, 6). Drawing from the intellectual tradition that these and other works established, this essay will summarize current trends in scholarship, broadly defined as “whiteness studies”.
Article
Full-text available
The paper presents an empirical analysis of education policy in England that is informed by recent developments in US critical theory. In particular, I draw on ‘whiteness studies’ and the application of critical race theory (CRT). These perspectives offer a new and radical way of conceptualizing the role of racism in education. Although the US literature has paid little or no regard to issues outside North America, I argue that a similar understanding of racism (as a multifaceted, deeply embedded, often taken‐for‐granted aspect of power relations) lies at the heart of recent attempts to understand institutional racism in the UK. Having set out the conceptual terrain in the first half of the paper, I then apply this approach to recent changes in the English education system to reveal the central role accorded the defence (and extension) of race inequity. Finally, the paper touches on the question of racism and intentionality: although race inequity may not be a planned and deliberate goal of education policy neither is it accidental. The patterning of racial advantage and inequity is structured in domination and its continuation represents a form of tacit intentionality on the part of white powerholders and policy‐makers. It is in this sense that education policy is an act of white supremacy. Following others in the CRT tradition, therefore, the paper’s analysis concludes that the most dangerous form of ‘white supremacy’ is not the obvious and extreme fascistic posturing of small neo‐nazi groups, but rather the taken‐for‐granted routine privileging of white interests that goes unremarked in the political mainstream.
Article
This paper identifies the common themes in 245-plus refereed articles on whiteness studies that were published in academic journals after 1992 in an attempt to assess the implications of whiteness studies for the discipline of sociology. Of special interest is the relationship between whiteness studies and Michael Burawoy’s call for public sociology. I argue that the emerging field of whiteness studies identifies itself as a public sociology that is infused by the moral vision of critical sociology. Nevertheless, the field does not accept professional sociology as Burawoy defined it. The ontological, epistemological, and soteriological foundations of whiteness studies encourage the field to pander to one segment of the public—the marginalized—and condemn another segment of the public—“privileged whites,” thus rendering impossible a democratic dialogue on one of the most basic social issues of our time. Conflating Western epistemology with whiteness encourages a misreading of American social scientific work on race relations, thus opening the door to a so-called hermeneutics of suspicion. The result is not an innocuous “pop” sociology, but a partisan sociology, whose implications should caution sociologists against an uncritical embracing of public sociology. KeywordsPublic sociology-Whiteness studies-Race relations
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this study was the investigation of the possible relationship between sport participation and moral functioning between Greek handball team athletes. The instrument that was used was developed by Gibbons, Ebbeck, and Weiss (1995). The sample consisted of 204 athletes, 107 men, 97 women. Factor analysis revealed 4 factors. Cronbach’s varied from .81 up to .88. Statistical significant differences were indicated in the dependent variables of: (1) lying, (2) violation of a rule, (3) intentional injury, and (4) deliberately hurting. Conclusively, the results support the use of the instrument for measuring moral functioning among Greek athletes.
Scholarship on whiteness has grown dramatically over the past decade, affecting nu- merous academic disciplines from literary criticism and American studies to history, sociology, geography, education, and anthropology. Despite its visibility and quantity, the genre has generated few serious historiographical assessments of its rise, development, strengths, and weaknesses. This essay, which critically examines the concept of whiteness and the ways labor historians have built their analyses around it, seeks to subject historical studies of whiteness to overdue scrutiny and to stimulate a debate on the utility of whiteness as a category of historical analysis. Toward that end, the essay explores the multiple and shifting definitions of whiteness used by scholars, concluding that historians have employed arbitrary and inconsistent definitions of their core concept, some overly expansive or metaphorically grounded and others that are radically restricted; whiteness has become a blank screen onto which those who claim to analyze it can project their own meanings. The essay critically examines historians' use of W. E. B. Du Bois's reflections on the “psychological wage”—something of a foundational text for whiteness scholars—and concludes that the “psychological wage” of whiteness serves poorly as a new explanation for the old question of why white workers have refused to make common cause with African Americans. Whiteness scholars' assertions of the nonwhite status of various immigrant groups (the Irish and eastern and southern Europeans in particular) and the processes by which these groups allegedly became white are challenged, as is whiteness scholars' tendency toward highly selective readings of racial discourses. The essay faults some whiteness scholarship produced by historians for a lack of grounding in archival and other empirical evidence, for passive voice constructions (which obscure the agents who purportedly define immigrants as not white), and for a problematic reliance upon psychohistory in the absence of actual immigrant voices. Historians' use of the concept of whiteness, the essay concludes, suffers from a number of potentially fatal methodological and conceptual flaws; within American labor history, the whiteness project has failed to deliver on its promises.