In Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of
White Supremacy, Andre Smith is proposing an alternative to the
Heteropatriarchal racial system. Smith
adopts an alternative framework for peoples of color called the “Three Pillars
of White Supremacy”. The first pillar is
Slavery/Capitalism. Here Smith argues
that the logic of slavery is an anchor of capitalism and the racial hierarchy
of slavery is incorporated in the commodification of people. “This racial hierarchy tells people that as
long as you are not Black, you have the opportunity to escape the commodification
of capitalism.” (68) The second is Genocide/Colonialism,
where non-Native peoples can justify settler-colonialism through a logic that holds
that “Indigenous people must disappear”. (68) The last pillar is Orientalism/War, Smith
utilizes Edward Said’s concept of Orientalism more broadly to include all
nations or civilizations that are deemed as threats to the well-being of the empire
and white supremacy. For instance,
anti-immigrant movements flourish during war time and treat all immigrants of
color (regardless of length of stay) as the “other” and subsequently a
threat. Essentially, Orientalism justifies
the United States perpetual state of war to protect it from the “other(s)”.
Therefore, the
old model meretriciously seduces certain oppressed peoples to comply in
exchange for a rite-of-passage to participate in other pillars. Smith argues that it would be beneficial if peoples
of color make strategic alliances “based on where we are situated within the
larger political economy.” (69) For instance,
it would be counterintuitive for Native peoples that organize against genocide
in their own homelands to fight other US Imperial wars through the military
recruitment. One model of liberation
should not be one of oppression for others.
Smith also criticizes the centrality of black/white binary and its propensity
to flatten the different dynamics of white supremacy in relation to other peoples
of color. Furthermore, she argues that
status differences of Natives and Blacks are “informed by different economic
positions African Americans and American Indians have in US society.” (71) So since African Americans have been valued
for their labor, the dominants want to expand the label “Black” to as many
people as possible. On the other hand, since
American Indians are valued for their land, the dominants want to minimize the
label “Indian” as much as possible. Ultimately,
Smith is pointing out that striving for racial justice within the normative
model is not beneficial since the options are either assimilation into white
America or the reproduction of other oppressive nationalisms.
Dean Itsuji Saranillio,
utilizes Smith’s Three Pillars of White Supremacy in Colliding Histories. Saranillo
traces the “opposing histories” of Hawaiians and Asians and the political realities
and battles that ensue, as illustrated on Admission Day. Saranillo traces two competing projects, one
being the post-WWII project of combating the classification of Japanese
Americans as “ineligible to citizenship” and the other project combating the designation
that Native Hawaiians are “unfit for self-government”. Within Smith’s framework we see how liberal multiculturalism
has a flattening and counterintuitive effect in relation to historical and
political differences. For example, “the counter hegemonic strategies of Asian Americans
against haole supremacy challenged, modified, and yet renewed a
hegemonic U.S. colonial system.” (296) Similarly,
those in opposition to statehood like Alice Kamokilaikawai Campbell, worked
within the same white supremacy framework and implied that Japanese-Americans
would control Hawaii if it were to be a state.
“In combating the notion that Hawaiians were destined to disappear and
thus be replaced, she resisted this by heightening fear that Japanese Americans
were foreign threats “ineligible to citizenship.” (301) In both cases we see prime examples of Smith’s
argument that oppressed peoples effort’s against oppression can lead unwittingly
to oppressing others.
I couldn’t help but think of the effect 9-11 had in
relation to Smith’s third pillar of Orientalism/War. It seems that 9-11 and the events following
that event, for example the invasions of Iraq & Afghanistan, has greatly strengthened
the third pillar of white supremacy. In
this case, perhaps “fighting against them” or maybe simply supporting imperialistic
policies, immediately grants marginalized/oppressed peoples a rite-of-passage
into the white supremacy framework. Has
the black/white
binary been surpassed by a Muslim/Judeo-Christian or East/West binary? If so, how has this affected indigenous peoples
fight for self-determination within the Heteropatriarchal racial system?
No comments:
Post a Comment