Three Pillars of White Society, Smith

I found Andrea Smith’s main point of Three Pillars of White Supremacy” to be buried near the end of the article and before the conclusion.  Smith asserted, “Any liberation struggle that does not challenge heteronormativity cannot substantially challenge colonialism or white supremacy.”  72

Smith provides a framework for understanding this main point through the three pillars defined as:
·      Slavery/Capitalism
·      Genocide/Colonialism
·      Orientalism/War
Smith then elaborates on each of these pillars and helps us to understand how victims in each of the categories are later used to against victims in other the other categories.

Slavery/Capitalism
She explains the relationship between slavery and capitalism founded on the premise that black slaves were viewed as private property essentially turning human beings into a commodity to be exploited in a capitalist economy.  However, Smith makes the slavery analogy relevant today by recognizing the role of prisons and the disparate number of incarcerated African-Americans.  Although she may not have mentioned it specifically, for me this was enough to provoke images and concerns of the privatization of prison systems.

Genocide/Colonialism
Smith then explains that colonialism requires the genocide of indigenous peoples for purposes of acquiring land.  Land acquisition was pursued historically through violence against indigenous peoples and later through cultural assimilation.  What I appreciated from Smith was her ability to explain how people of color are used to suppress other peoples of color.  Smith accomplishes this here when she explains how African-American participation in the military furthers the genocidal policies of a colonizing government.  This part of the Smith’s article evoked  images and memories of the Buffalo Soldiers in the American Indian Wars.

Orientalism/War
Smith explains, “orientalism serves as the anchor for war, because it allows the United States to justify being in a constant state of war to protect itself from its enemies.”  Orientalism or orient, as used in this article includes the Arab or broader mid-East region and the people who come from there.  Given the current war conflict/occupation and war on terror, Smith helps us to view some racial-profiling within this framework.  The pillar is also useful in viewing U.S. relations with China and so-called concerns with it becoming a super power.

It was disappointing to read about heteropatriarchy.  Although it was initially unclear to me where it fits among the three pillars (because sexual orientation discrimination is another separate complex issue), I came to understand how it fits into the Orientalism/War pillar.  The disappointment is not at all in Smith’s discussion of the subject, but rather the logic of the conservative asserting that “we must preserve traditional marriage in order to protect the United States from those who would use our depravity to destroy us.”