race is endemic to modern state

Published: November 21, 2015 Words: 1711

The critical examination mandated by the present question requires an introductory

note concerning the appropriate definition to be employed regarding the terms

formation and racism.

Formation is suggested to be a less than ideal expression to describe the processes of

modern state development. In this sense the term evolution is preferred as the more

accurate and organic experience of modern state development.

Racism is a more complicated term due to the variance between its dictionary

meanings and etymology on one side, and its popular connotations on the other. The

meaning of racism is both closely associated and intermingled with its near cousins

culture and ethnicity. It is important to bear in mind as this examination is advanced

that racism may be considered as both a scientific term and as a catch -all descriptor

for all manner of conduct and attitudes that fosters the discrimination or antipathy of

one person or group against another.

This review will proceed on three distinct but related lines of examination: (1) how

racism should be conceptualised (2) the legal definition of racism as it has developed

in the UK, the European Union and in other jurisdiction as a pluralistic societal

initiative (3) examples of how racism has contributed to the development path taken

by modern nations. Sports examples are tendered as illustrations of how racism in

modern culture remains a constant in the face of wide ranging legislative schemes

aimed to eradicate it.

The concept of racism

Racism has been explained by way of both science and social perspectives through

history. From a purely biological orientation, debate has raged as to whether there are

distinct physiological differences between various peoples sufficient to permit a

rational, science based differentiation between them; DNA research and the genome

projects confirm this distinction exists to a slight degree in all fundamental human

construction.

In modern times, where Western societies have attempted to formulate a

comprehensive definition of race, an overwhelmingly white / Caucasian identity is

invoked as the societal norm, with others who are not a part of the white definition

cast in the position as a racial ‘other'. Goldberg and other academic commentators

have employed the contrasting analytical devices of racial naturalism, where race is

accepted as an outgrowth of science, and racial historianism, the concept that shapes

and defines race through legal enactment.

The historian view of race implicitly involves a consideration of racism as an

evolving concept. Much academic commentary has considered racism in terms of

outsiders, even where the population subject to racial treatment was born within the

nation. Paul Gilroy had considered a defined ‘new racism' in the UK in the late 1980s

not to be exclusively linked to skin colour or other physiological differences between

humans, but a logical extension of ‘…discourses of patriotism, nationalism,

xenophobia, Englishness, Britishness, militarism and gender differences' - a

sweeping rationale that represents the basis for national anti-racism legislation. It is

submitted that Gilroy's observation is much keener than the ability of the law to

counter the problem.

Racism is rooted in the establishment of separate and conflicting identities within a

society, where a people define themselves as the norm, and those different to them are

automatically presumed to possess all opposite characteristics.

The Enlightment thinking that was powered by the philosophies of Hobbes and

Locke, among others, has also been the subject of significant criticism as the root

cause of racism in modern state evolution. This approach centres upon the

Enlightment era reverence for rationality, where the conclusion that there must be

positions of natural superiority and inferiority between races was regarded as a

scientific outcome. Emphasis upon enlightened and rational thought placed Europe

and the supposed civility its race in contrast with all primitive places.

In contrast, other commentators have placed racism on a different historical footing.

The leaders of the Enlightment did not articulate racial principles or a presumed white

European superiority to a significant degree. Malik places the historical progression

of the racial definition as one of class distinctions, with racial divisions bearing a

greater relation to economic status than physiology.

As nations were elevated in status throughout the nineteenth century, it is suggested

that imperialism is an intrinsically racist concept; the subjugation of another people,

by relatively peaceful colonialism or starker military conquest, requires a national

mindset of superiority.

The encoding of race has also been a distinctly evolutionary process. ‘Black' (or

worse) was a simple blunt force description of the racial distinction between the

Caribbean immigrants to the UK and Canada during the 1950s and 1960s; in modern

times, the code words of immigration and naturalisation carry a subtle but equally

powerful message.

Racism has evolved to both include and modify popular concepts of culture and

ethnicity. Whether one accepts race as a genetic based circumstance, or as a purely

social invention, it clearly exists and prospers in Western culture. In modern societies,

racism has expanded dynamically as a concept to occupy the same ground as

ethnicity, where each has become interchangeable with the other as a means of

differentiation.

Ethnicity occupies this common ground with racism because it relies upon racial

principles in its definition. In each of the five circumstances enumerated as ‘ethnicity'

generated in a society, namely: the existence of an urban visible minority; ethno

national groups, such as the Kurds in Turkey; distinct groups that exist in plural

societies (e.g. Asian and Caribbean peoples who live within the UK); indigenous

minorities, such as North American or Scandinavian native peoples; post-slavery

minorities, such as Afro-Brazilians. Each ethnic definition contains a racial thread.

For the purposes of the legal definition outlined below, ethnicity and racism are

afforded similar treatment.

The legal definition of racism is at once subtle and bluntly constructed. Legislated

definitions, such as those contained in the UK Race Relations Act or the European

Convention of Human Rights, are comprehensive in their scope. It is equally

important to note that such definitions are often an ‘after the fact' response to societal

change, not a signpost for a nation's future.

The UK legislation enacted in 1976 was built upon the legacy of the Notting Hill riots

and the ‘moral panic' associated with black street crime in urban Britain of the early

1970s. It is impossible for modern states to enact laws that map a future treatment of

racism, as ethnic boundaries are in a constants state of flux. Germany's uneasy

relationship with its Muslim minority is generally cast in racial terms that incorporate

the religious, cultural and linguistic differences of the migrant labour attracted to the

formed West Germany in the late 1970s.

Statutes that proclaim as a purpose the eradication of racism are a constant in modern

pluralistic Western nations. The Race Relations Act as interpreted by the House of

Lords in Mandla determined that British Sikh people were a racial, as opposed to a

religious or cultural group within the meaning of the Act; race was defined by the

Law Lords as a combination of a long common history, a distinct cultural tradition,

and any confluence of the factors of geography, language, literature, religion or the

existence of the people within a larger community. The effect of Article 14, ECHR,

combined with Protocol 12 of the Community and the UK Human Rights Act

reinforces this definition.

In this sense, the law dictates race. In 1982 the enshrined constitution of Canada

elevated racial and cultural diversity to a fundamental national status. The Australian

constitution embraces a similar regime. These nations are highlighted here to

illustrate the evolution in racial notions in these states, as both countries had

previously engaged in efforts to assimilate its aboriginal peoples into a mainstream

white culture. Each country was overtaken by the realisation that pluralism and

multiculturalism were desirable societal goals, with pluralism used as its own code for

racial / ethnic diversity. Declining birth rates throughout the Western world have

created a dichotomy between the economic imperative to boost population and labour

forces through immigration, and ethnic / racial attitudes.

It is suggested that simply legislating an end to such societal strife will be

unsuccessful. Fitzpatrick's Mythology of Modern Law and the theories of H.L.A.

Hart share an important explanatory principle as to why racism exists among

peoples. Fitzpatrick's myth basis to modern law and Hart's concepts of pre-legal

societies that are founded upon shared cultural traditions and observances each

exclude those who are different.

The relationship between racism and economic standing mentioned briefly above is

also important in this context. It is contended that a wholesale economic re-ordering

of the world nations would do more to achieve racial harmony than any legislation.

The United States, Brazil and South Africa are prime examples of nations where

modern racism and socio-economic status are indistinguishable.

On one level, sport may seem an odd illustration of racism in the modern state. In the

predominately white cultures of the UK, USA, and Canada, the black athlete is a well

- established figure, particularly in the professional arenas. It is submitted that the

elimination of racism in sport has proved as illusory as with any other segment of

society. Owusu detailed the contradictory aspects of race in UK athletics through the

contention that black athletes are rewarded if they publicly espouse the view that

racism is non-existent in UK sport; those athletes who express contrary opinions as to

the fact of racism are characterised as paranoid or ungrateful. UK sprinter Linford

Christie and boxer Frank Bruno are presented as the opposite ends of this argument -

each man is of Caribbean heritage who achieved success in athletic pursuits. Bruno

never achieved the ultimate success in his sport, but maintained a steadfast image as a

‘mainstream' athlete, while Christie was outspoken throughout his career regarding

the UK athletics establishment. It was Christie who was cast as a disruptor of the

normative codes for the UK black athlete.

There is little question that racism is endemic in the progression of the development

of all Western nations. The period that has followed World War II has been marked

by ever-increasing contact between peoples of different national origin, cultures,

traditions, and heritage. The black letter of the law is not necessarily a stimulus to

changes in racial attitude, as the multi-faceted physiological, ethnic and economic

creature cannot be eliminated by legislation alone.