Raoul Wieland digs into the nitty gritty details of how even seemingly harmless stereotypes lead to outright racism and oppression.
One way to think about how systems of oppression are created and maintained in society is to imagine a ‘staircase of oppression’. Oppression, as defined by common Sociology textbooks, describes a relationship of dominance and subordination between groups of people in which one benefits from the systematic abuse, exploitation and injustice directed toward the other. We give names to such systems and call them sexism, racism, ageism, colonialism, classism, etc. Systems of oppression have long historical lineages and are often so complex and subtle that we become blind to them. The systems become unconscious or buried below our everyday, seemingly normal routines and habits.
Yet another phenomenon is the internalization of such oppression. “The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed” wrote Steve Biko, one of South Africa’s most prominent anti-apartheid activists. The National Resource Center to End Violence Against Native Women writes that internalized oppression occurs “when we come to believe and act as if the oppressor’s beliefs system, values, and life way is reality… The result of internalised oppression is shame and the disowning of our individual and cultural reality. Internalised oppression means the oppressor doesn’t have to exert any more pressure, because we now do it to ourselves and each other. Divide and conquer works.”
♦◊♦
Now, imagine a staircase that starts with stereotypes and ends with oppression. We all know what stereotypes are. Women are emotional; men are leaders; black men play basketball; Asian students are intelligent over-achievers; poor people are lazy; the British have bad teeth and so on. These are all generalizations that we attribute to particular groups. Despite that some stereotypes appear positive, they are always negative; individuals are judged according to the norms of their group instead of personal merit and can have unhealthy expectations leading to low self-esteem. No, not all black men need to be able to play basketball and not all Asians need to perform well academically. We are more complex than this and it is this complexity and uniqueness that gets obscured by blanket generalizations.
Once we start to believe in stereotypes, internalize them and no longer question their validity, we then may very well start to carry with us particular prejudices. We ‘pre-judge’ people and interact not with unique individuals but with labels. Acting on our prejudice leads to discrimination. No, I will not support giving support to the poor because they are, by nature, lazy no-gooders. No, I will not issue pain-killers to someone of Indigenous decent because, as everyone knows, they are more prone to addiction. No, I will not support a women for political office because women are irrational, emotional and weak.
We discriminate on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, ability, age and class as well as in regards to language, religion, politics, appearance and size. Discriminating on the basis of age is, for example, one of the most widely tolerated practices in Canada. We assume that after a certain age a person becomes incompetent and has nothing to contribute. Invisibility and a sense of low self-esteem is often the result. Finding work becomes more and more difficult.
♦◊♦
The final step from discrimination to oppression requires the addition of institutional power. This is the ability or official authority to decide what is best for others, to give or withhold access to resources and to control groups of people. It is the ability to name, to create language and to enforce norms and practices based on one particular worldview; it is the ability to codify and reward acceptable behaviors and punish unacceptable ones. Anyone can be discriminated against on the basis of race or gender, for example, but not everyone can exhibit racism or sexism. Racism requires power.
Reverse racism – the idea that racism can be directed at majority groups by people in minorities does not exist precisely due to an inherent power imbalance in that relationship. Political correctness is often criticised because of the tendency for someone with power, political power, to decide what a particular group should be referred to. Toni Morrison writes that the political correctness debate is about the power to be able to define. “The definers want the power to name. And the defined are now taking that power away from them.”
We are all aware how, perhaps the most extreme example of initial stereotypes and prejudices leading to systemic oppression, played out during the second world war. Philip Zimbardo, author of The Lucifer Effect wrote “What does it take for the citizens of one society to hate the citizens of another society to the degree that they want to segregate them, torment them, even to kill them? It requires a ‘hostile imagination,’ a psychological construction embedded deeply in their minds by propaganda that transforms those others into ‘The Enemy’. The use of stereotyped conceptions of Jews as lecherous old men seducing young Aryan women, of dirty Jewish butchers, unscrupulous Jewish lawyers, hard-hearted Jewish landlords, rich Jewish business men and their wives ignoring the poverty around them, all combined to create a hate-filled image of Jews that eventually led to the ‘final solution'”.
While this is an extreme example of how the staircase of oppression operates, there are countless of other examples in society that speak to this building upon and creating of stereotypes to suppress a particular group of people ,whether we are aware of it or not. There is the ‘School to Prison Pipeline’ that leads to mass incarceration of minorities. There are controversial anti-immigration bills. There is racial profiling at airports. There is the pervasiveness of sexual assault of women, youth and vulnerable populations.
♦◊♦
To understand how such systems operate and are maintained, appreciating what links seemingly benign everyday stereotypes to oppression, may be important. Some introspection will probably lead to the recognition that we are all implicated to some degree. I say this not to blame, shame or discourage but to hint at the idea that change will need to involve all of us. Haile Selassie once wrote that “Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for [bad things] to triumph.”
The ball therefore rests in our court and we are responsible. Change will most likely not be fast or be the result of grand actions or policies. As Angela Davis says, change will most probably take the form of multiple small everyday acts of courage and compassion that may often remain unseen. They are and will be, however, absolutely necessary and invaluable.
Photo: Flickr/jscoke
Why does the term racism only get brought in at the institutional level?
In my opinion (and in lots of people’s opinions from what I can gather) “racism” is present even at the stereotyping stage. There is no such thing as reverse racism, indeed – because it’s just more racism.
Racism in social justice speak = prejudice + power. Basically what you are saying is just called prejudice, racism means it has the power so the political majority can be racist to the minority group but minorities can’t be racist to the majority. They can however be prejudice.
Personally I think they should just call it racism either way, and use qualifiers for when there is a power issue.