What started White Supremacist Thinking?

[Raisa]

Allright.

Every nation thought it was better in history.

The Greeks simply called every non Greek a Barbarian and ended it there.
To the Ancient Greeks the whites in the north and the Blacks in the south were equally considered Barbarians.
But that was because of their culture not being Greek much more so then how they looked, as the Ancient Greek thinkers were some of the first who simply attributed skin color to the climate that people are from, and that was the end of the story with it.
In the ancient mediterranean socities, race really was not as big an issue at all as it became in the later years.

Ancient Greek and Roman civilizations are said by the founders of modern western ones, to have been so influencial. Yet more modern societies payed a whole lot of attention to someone's color.

So what made racism what it is today?

Some people attribute the white europeans thinking they were racially superior to the Africans, to religion. Becasue they were so used to seeing their own people and their own culture, which was enveloped in their Christian faith, that when they saw people who were not like them, they believed those people were savages and not on their level.

What do you think took racism to the level it has reached in more modern times?

[monkeydust]

A major factor had to be the spread of civilization in the "developed" world, the expansion and colonization of those areas inhabited by asians or blacks, and the ensuing belief that - these natives being "uncivilized" - whites were somehow intrinsically better.

If I'm honest, however, I don't really know, nor do I think it is an easy question to answer in a short space of time...I just felt I needed to post something on-topic before I got on to this...


Greek thinkers were some of the first who simply attributed skin color to the climate that people are from, and that was the end of the story with it.


Yes, we get a lot of this from Herodotus.

Interestingly, he also thought blacks had black semen...though I have no idea how he came to that conclusion. Oh, and they also thought that giant ants inhabited Africa...but that's another story for another day.

[RedAnarchist]

It is important that we understand why white supremacist thinking began - that way, we can have a better understanding of how to put an end to it once and for all.

[monkeydust]

What's with all the fancy colours all of a sudden?

[RedAnarchist]

Going offtopic for a while, its to make my posts more unconventional - make the board a bit more interesting to look at.

[h&s]

A major factor had to be the spread of civilization in the "developed" world, the expansion and colonization of those areas inhabited by asians or blacks, and the ensuing belief that - these natives being "uncivilized" - whites were somehow intrinsically better.
I think that is the view that the people who came up with supremecist thinking used to spread it.
If you look at this from a class perspective you can see that all through human history where there has been a ruling class that class has always had to use tricks to maintain their power.
Spreading the illusion that there are 'sub-human' people out there who are a threat to the area under their rule dissipates any resistance in the subserviant classes, thus maintaining the power of the ruling class as anger will be diverted away from exploitation towards other races.
As history progressed however, just like religion, people forgot that what they were spreading was made up, leading to groups like the Nazis and the KKK.

[romanm]

Anyone interested in this topic should check out John Sakai's _Settlers:the mythology of the white proletariat_.

[xnj]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 04:10 PM
Anyone interested in this topic should check out John Sakai's _Settlers:the mythology of the white proletariat_.
Is that on the web anywhere?

[Severian]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 14 2005, 09:37 AM
If you look at this from a class perspective you can see that all through human history where there has been a ruling class that class has always had to use tricks to maintain their power.
Spreading the illusion that there are 'sub-human' people out there who are a threat to the area under their rule dissipates any resistance in the subserviant classes, thus maintaining the power of the ruling class as anger will be diverted away from exploitation towards other races.
But as Raisa points out, it's not "throughout history" that people have been identified as subhuman races. The ancient Greeks regarded anyone who didn't share their language and culture as barbarian - similarly Romans, Egyptians, Chinese, most other civilizations and empires.

It wasn't based on skin color, if you learned the language and culture you were Greek or whatever.

With the rise of capitalism and the west European conquest of the world, much of it was initially justified with religion not racism. Conquering the Mexica in order to save their souls. Buying slaves in Africa in order to save their souls - there was a rule at one point that every slave had to be baptised before going on the ships. (The real motive is profit of course, we're discussing the justifications.)

The problem with this justification was that after people converted, how did you justify continuing to enslave them? Skin color lacked this defect. Nobody could get rid of it. It was the perfect excuse.

[bolshevik butcher]

As Europeans were able to dominate the world they viewed themselves as superiour. In ancient times the romans would happily tlak with black people.

[Andy Bowden]

I think white supremacism is a product of the thinking imperial regimes encouraged to justify their invasion and colonisation of Africa, Latin America and Asia - that whites are bringing "civilisation" to the blacks.

[this space for sale?]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 09:22 AM
Allright.

Every nation thought it was better in history.

>snip<

So what made racism what it is today?
It&#39;s not a book about ultimate origins, but if you&#39;re interested in American constructions of racial identity - how they came to be & are used as the building blocks for white supremacist "thought," here&#39;s a good cite:

IMAGINED COMMUNITIES (Arnold)

Specifically, it historicizes the development of racial categories by European expansionists during colonial and imperial conquests, tracing the category of undifferentiated "mass of darkness that envelops it" into the more "manageable" racial categories that dominates our thinking about identity today.

I&#39;m from a "Cultural Theory" background, & found it difficult but first rate.

Unfortunately, like a lot of high level (as opposed to merely "high brow") academic writing, that book may be fairly difficult going for people not in the field, because of the writing style, language, and the alienness of some of the arguments&#39; structure.

Worth the hard work, though, IMO. If you start it and find it discouraging going, maybe just read the first few chapters and the last one.

[this space for sale?]

Another answer might be (IMO): whatever the origins of modern racism are, probably the most crucial period to look at in American history is the period from colonization through Reconstruction and "Redemption."

By looking at that extended period - the "crucible" of white supremacist language and grammar (intellectual grammar, as well as literal grammar) - one gets a clear picture of the material needs that made chattel slavery the basis for the entire nation&#39;s (i.e. not just the South&#39;s, as in our fairytale versions of American history) economy, how Emancipation gave rise to "The Negro Problem," and what actually was done popularly and in all our social institutions in an effort to maintain the racialized social order that was created during slavery.

Interrogations of the media (just one institution, or aggregate of them within the larger superstructure) within those periods are just as interesting, topical and productive as interrogations into media and representation in the present. Not only does the media of that time behave much in the way ours does today - except with newspapers, print media, and venues for minstrelsy being the main outlets of racial ideology, instead of newspapers, magazines, TV and film - but understanding the role and tactics of media of that time makes the roles and tactics of modern media relatively easy to decode.

[Clarksist]

Slavery, which began as a way to not work, started a lot of it. The idea that these other races were able to be bought and sold and not "equal" to the race of ownership sunk in after generations.

To end white supremacy, you would need to seperate children from white supremecist influences.