SUSMITA ROY 10.08.2021 SOCIOLOGY - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

SUSMITA ROY10.08.2021

SOCIOLOGY

Racism cannot be defined without first defining race. Among

social

scientists, ‘race

’ is

generally

understood as a social construct. Although biologically meaningless when applied to humans physical differences such as skin

color

have

nonatural

association with group differences in ability

or

behavior

race

nevertheless has tremendous significance in

structuring

social

reality. Indeed, historical variation in the definition

and

use

of the term provides a case in point

.

The term race was first used to describe peoples and

societies

in

the way we now understand ethnicity or national

identity.

Later

, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, as

Europeans

encountered non-European civilizations,

Enlightenment

scientists

and philosophers gave race a biological

meaning.

They applied the term to plants, animals, and humans

as

a

taxonomic subclassification within

a species

. As such,

race

became

understood as a biological, or natural,

categorization

system

of the human species. As Western colonialism

and

slavery

expanded, the concept was used to justify and

prescribe

exploitation

, domination, and violence against peoples

racialized

as

nonwhite

.

Today

, race often maintains its ‘

natural’

connotation

in folk understandings; yet, the

scientific

consensus

is that race does not exist as a biological

category

among

humans –genetic variation is far greater within

than

between

‘

racial’groups

, common phenotypic markers exist

on

a

continuum, not as discrete categories, and the use

and

significance

of these markers varies across time, place, and

even within

the same individual (Fiske, 2010).

DefinitionsRacism cannot be defined without first defining race.

Among

social

scientists, ‘

race’is

generally understood

as a

social

construct

. Although biologically meaningless when applied

to

humans

–physical differences such as skin

color

have

no

natural

association with group differences in ability or

behavior

race

nevertheless has tremendous significance in

structuring

social

reality. Indeed, historical variation in the definition

and

use

of the term provides a case in point

.

The term race was first used to describe peoples and

societies

in

the way we now understand ethnicity or national

identity.

Later

, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,

as Europeans

encountered

non European

civilizations,

Enlightenment

scientists

and philosophers gave race a biological meaning

.

They applied the term to plants, animals, and humans as a taxonomic subclassification within a species. As such, race became understood as a biological, or natural, categorization system of the human species.

As Western colonialism and slavery expanded, the concept was used to justify and prescribe exploitation, domination, and violence against peoples racialized as

nonwhite

. Today, race often maintains its ‘natural’ connotation in folk understandings; yet, the scientific consensus is that race does not exist as a biological category among humans –genetic variation is far greater within than between ‘

racial’groups

, common phenotypic markers exist on a continuum, not as discrete categories, and the use and significance of these markers varies across time, place, and even within the same individual (Fiske, 2010).

For most social scientists, ‘race

’ is

distinct from ‘ethnicity

’.

A

major distinction is the assumption of a biological basis

in

the

case of race. Races are distinguished by perceived

common

physical

characteristics, which are thought to be fixed, whereas

ethnicities are defined by perceived common ancestry,

history,

and

cultural practices, which are seen as more fluid

and

self-asserted

rather than assigned by others (Cornell

and

Hartmann

, 2006). Thus, Asian is usually considered a ‘race

’,

whereas

Tibetans and Bengalis are considered ethnicities.

Although ethnicity and nationality often overlap, a nationality,

such

as American, can contain many ethnic groups (e.g

.,

Italian-Americans

, Arab-Americans). Yet, all three categories

- race

, ethnicity, and nationality –are socially constructed,

and,

as

such, groups once considered ethnicities have come to

be

seen

as races and vice versa. Moreover, some groups who

are

now

taken for granted as ‘white’, such as the Irish, Italians,

and

Jews

, were once excluded from this racial category. The

definitional

boundaries of race and ethnicity are shaped by the

tug

and

pull of state power, group interests, and other

social forces

.

From

a sociological perspective, it is this social

construction

of

race –not

its ‘

natural’existence

–that is the primary object

of

inquiry

in the study of racism. Bundled up with

eighteenth

century

classifications of various racial groups were assertions

of moral, intellectual, spiritual, and other forms of

superiority,

which

were used to justify the domination of Europeans

over

racialized

others. In the North American context, racist

ideology

served as justification for land appropriation and

colonial

violence

toward indigenous peoples as well as the enslavement

of Africans starting in the sixteenth century. It was later used to

justify

the state-sanctioned social, economic, and

symbolic

violence

directed at blacks and other minorities under

Jim

Crow

laws. In the mid-twentieth century, the American Civil

Rights Movement, global anticolonial movements,

and

increasing

waves of non-European immigration to the

West

changed

how individuals, groups, and nation-states

talked

about

, viewed, understood, and categorized race. A major

task

for

sociologists has been to assess these changes and

their

implications

for racial discrimination and inequality

.

What are the mechanisms of racism? According to

Taguieff

(1997)

,

biological or essentialist racism denies to all human beings the possibility of sharing the same humanity.

Consequently, the difference becomes a stigmatization or a symbolic exclusion that allows a group of people to consider itself as superior by looking down at another group and setting up negative stereotypes. As a result, racism is based on a hierarchy of physical differences. In fact, racism is not only a network of attitudes, beliefs, and convictions; it also refers to

behaviors

, practices, and actions. Racism is a social construction (

Exama

, 2005, Moussa, 2003 ,According to Gould, cited by Pollock (2001)

,

For understanding the mechanisms of racism, we need to consider the roots of prejudices and of stereotypes that are associated with categories we grew up with, learned, and experienced. Stereotypes are connected to attitudes, beliefs, and values, whereas prejudices refer to opinions without any critical judgment (Allport

, 1979). Stereotypes and prejudices are part of the elaboration of social norms. A stereotype is a sort of shortcut, often based on previous experiences or beliefs, whereas prejudice is a preconceived idea, a prejudgment of someone or something. Both stereotypes and prejudices contribute to the elaboration of racism as well as ethnocentrism.

Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism refers to the way we look at the world from our perspective or from our filter of meaning (McAndrew, 1986

)

. Here, we use our as a collective identity. It assumes that our understanding is the only valuable understanding.

As an example, the Western world representing the supposedly universal perspective from the Enlightenment is considered a standard or norm, whereas the non-Western world—constituted of many other worlds—represents the particular: a kind of

suprauniversal

culture versus many peripheral cultures.

Preiswerk

and Perrot (1975) identified ethnocentric biases as the way of putting our sociocultural group and its values in a central position.

Arcand and Vincent (1981) also found that the representation of indigenous peoples in Western history schoolbooks is always stereotyped, prejudiced, and marginalized, because the norm that is used to describe their values and to recognize their contribution refers to this universal norm: It is ethnocentrically biased.

As a result, indigenous peoples are represented as inferior, primitive, savage, uncivilized, barbaric, and so on, incapable of being civilized and incapable of facing the challenges of a modern society. Rather, close to nature and the past, they are always presented away from civilization and the present. Ethnocentrism is the “we and the others” perspective: the way that the “we” looks at the world while looking down at the mimetic others.

The causes of RacismThe perspective of the conflict theory is of great help in understanding the problem of racism. Three basic conditions are necessary for racism to develop according to Noel and Vender

Zanden

. They are stated below.

1. Visible physical or cultural characteristics:

The phenomenon of racism presupposes the existence of two or more social groups, identifiable by their visible physical characteristics or cultural practices. People should be aware of differences between the groups and should be able to identify themselves as belonging to one group rather than another. Only then, racism can develop.

2.

Competition between the groups:

It is necessary for the groups to have competition between themselves for valued resources, such as power, land, or jobs. In this condition of extreme competition, members of one group will be inclined to secure their own interests by denying members of other group full access to these resources.

3. Presence of groups with unequal power:

Another condition of racism is that the group must be unequal in power. In such a condition, one of them is able to make good its claim over scarce resources at the expense of the other group or groups. At this point, inequalities become structured into the society.

Racism is an ideology in the Marxian sense, which is why it is so pervasive. One needs to find the common thread in all forms of racism and their theories by placing them against capitalist society's goals and hegemonic strategies. Debates over racism are truly ideological mystifications. Questions of race effectively come down to questions of ideology. Racism is an ideology that is inseparable from the national or international socio-economic and political situation. A brief study of the Republics of Haiti and South Africa under apartheid illustrates how racial and racist ideologies are manipulated to

cover

up

the exploitation of the masses

.

DEVELOPMENT AND RACISM

IDEOLOGY

Ramsay

Boly

is a full-time graduate student in UC Berkeley’s Master of Development Practice program.

“One of the things I learned when I was negotiating was that until I changed myself, I could not change others”

 – Nelson

Mandela.

Of the many topics in the literature and practice of international development, racism seems to be one of the most relevant and least covered. Racism is a powerful, violent and complex system that will not be given justice in this short post, but I hope to advance the conversation because I perceive it to be a fundamental issue in international development. One of my biggest critiques of development is the apparent lack of concern and urgency to question assumptions. While we acknowledge local participation as progress in development practice, we fail to discuss the original preconceptions that trivialized the identities, knowledge, capabilities and experiences of those individuals and communities.

Cultural Pluralism

Cultural Pluralism can be defined as an arrangement in a society where multiple smaller cultures assimilate in mainstream society but also maintain their cultural uniqueness without being homogenised by the dominant culture

.

The difference in cultural pluralism can be observed between homogeneous societies like Israel, Japan, South Korea which have only one dominant culture and hence no need to accommodate other cultures and heterogeneous societies like United States of America, India, United Kingdom, etc.

However

, while a lot of societies are heterogeneous i.e. they have multiple cultures, that does not necessarily mean that they are also culturally plural because cultural pluralism requires not just the existence of different cultures within a society but also respect for these cultures by the dominant

culture.

For

example

, in Saudi Arabia, while a lot of migrants bring their culture along and the country now has a considerable South Asian diaspora, their cultures are suppressed and relegated to the private realm i.e. they are not allowed to practice their culture openly. Thus Saudi Arabia might be a heterogeneous society but not a culturally plural one.

Often cultural pluralism and multiculturalism are used interchangeably, however, there is one difference. In multiculturalist societies, there is no dominant culture. It is the peaceful coexistence of various small cultures. India has always been proud of its culturally plural society. India has a dominant North Indian, Hindu, Hindi speaking culture however cultures from the south and northeast India like the cuisines (

Idli

, Vada,

Uttapam

), dance forms (Bharatanatyam,

Kathakali

, Bihu), literature (

Sangam

literature) are not only respected in the rest of the country but gets an equal space in the cultural display on Republic Day. Religious pluralism in the form of the prevalence of mosques,

gurudwara

, Buddhist, Jain and

Parsi

temples and their open religious celebration often joined in by their Hindu friends is a testament to India’s religious pluralism.

ReferencesC.N.Rao

Makhan

Jha

Indian Society

Thank You