The Philosophical Definition of Racism - Book Report/Review Example

-Isms In sociology and philosophy, the suffix –ism de s a distinct system of doctrine, belief, theory, or myth,which guides a group, institution, social movement, or class (Berman 7). Tunisian political-cultural theorist and psychoanalyst Albert Memmi, in his book, The Colonizer and the Colonized, emphasizes on several forms of –isms, including colonialism, racism, sexism, and classism (Memmi 3). The book is a personal experience of the author in North Africa at a time when Algeria was fighting the disintegrating French Empire. The book is a psychological study rather than an economical study of the effects of colonialism. Nonetheless, Memmi acknowledges fundamental importance of colonialism in economic aspect, but does not explore further the issue. The author highlights the dynamics and relationship between the colonizer and the colonized, and the consequential psychological impacts to the protagonists. According to Memmi, the world of the colonizers enjoys enormous privilege, from economic to social issues, while the colonized suffer all the colonialism injustices, from racism to sexism. The book quotes Cecil Rhodes on his comment concerning land and niggers (the blacks) to highlight the colonial issue of racism. Arguably, all stereotypical colonialism undermines the colonized race with dark and brutal methods of governance. The philosophical definition of racism, with emphasis on the suffix –ism, is the belief that the primary determinant of capabilities of humans is based on their race (Berman 32). With this perception, therefore, the colonists viewed the colonized as a weaker race who would work under them. The author thus expresses the opinion that the colonized do not exist individually, but rather as a mass in the eyes of the colonialists (Memmi 12). This creates the concept of classism, where the colonizers set a different social class for themselves, and a much lower one for the colonized. In essence, classism entails the systematic oppression of minority, or weaker groups (in this case the colonized) to strengthen dominant groups (colonizers). Memmi asserts that colonialism led to the loss of the history, language, and memory of the colonized. The authors claims that all institutions of power for the enforced the colonizers’ language, thus, the native tongues were neither written nor read, rusting in the course of the colonialism (Sartre 20). The result was an uprising against the colonial rule that contributed to the re-instatement of the culture, religion, and tradition of the native society. According to him, revolt is the only solution to end the brutality of dictatorship and resolve the contradiction of the oppressed and the oppressor. The chapters in the book that contain arguments on the colonized are free of debate to a certain degree, but the earlier sections concern the literature on the colonizer is scathing. Despite writing the book from personal experience in North Africa, Memmi believes that there is no middle ground fro Europeans. According to him, all the Europeans in all the colonies are de fact colonizers and either all of them will return to Europe (at the time) or will ultimately become colonizers themselves (Sartre 22). It is true that the Europeans were enjoying privileges not similar to the colonized; it does not conclusively mean that all of them were upholding or supporting the colonial system. In contrast, there were certain minority colonial outposts that supported the colonized liberation efforts, thus, opposing the rule of the mother country. In one of his quotes, Memmi says, “the entire weight of the Europeans perpetuates the colonial oppression, whether intentional or otherwise”. This argument is ancient, similar to stating that all the people in the Western nations support and benefit from oppression of poorer, which is simply incorrect. Later in the book, the author contradicts his earlier stand by stating that Europeans who originate elsewhere other than the colonizing country are neither colonizers or colonized. He gives an example with Italy, arguing that Italians do not create a space between themselves and the colonized; a fact that colonized Ethiopians would vehemently disagree with (Memmi 103). This points the faulty analysis of Memmi in the book, which may be an effect of extrapolating colonial situations across the world. Another example is his assumption that the colonialists did not contribute to religious conversion of the natives, which opposes the fact that most London churches are full of colonized descendants. Evidently, Memmi’s analysis presents a certain degree of biased account of historical events, which does not reflect the exact dark and brutal European colonial empires. In the book The Language of Oppression, Haig Bosmajian, a speech Communication professor at the University of Washington and a winner of the Orwell Award in 1983 for the same book, identifies and critically analyzes the issues of anti-Semitism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, White racism, among others (Dirven, Frank & Illie 36). The author examines the decadence of our language, with emphasis to the language that leads to degradation and dehumanization of individuals in the world. He uses instrumental and strong examples to pass across his views, like the Nazi language labeling Jews as “parasites” and “vermin”, and the American Indians’ definition as “savages” and “barbarians”. Bosmajian uses the examples to argue his position on the ethnic slurs, sexism, and racism ideologies that still exist in the current society. In the book, the author first explores the value of a name, arguing that a name elevates an individual to the status of a human being, thus without a name, the identity of an individual is in query. In this regard, therefore, a name is the identifying character of an individual. Nonetheless, Bosmajian points out that a name may be a source of curse. He explores the ways in which a name can be used to dehumanize individuals (Dirven, Frank & Illie 42). In similar manner to which a thought can affect our language, a language may reciprocate the effect, that is, affect our thoughts and thus our behavior and actions. The Nazis, according to Bosmajian, were able to accomplish the dehumanization and extermination of Jews using oppressive language. The Nazi extremists nicknamed Jews using such terms like parasites, bacilli, plague, disease, and demon. Their careful implementation of these names made the people under the rule of the Nazi regime to believe that indeed the Jews were such people, and led to the extermination of approximately six million Jews. It is evident how language affects all aspects of our lives, considering the importance of communication and the fact that all forms of communication use languages, however different. Languages and names may be a source of motivation or belittlement, depending on the criteria of use. The author further cites Stocky Carmichael in his definition of masters as people who can define. In the chapters of the book, from anti-Semitism to War, Bosmajian identifies and analyzes the terms and language that particular groups of individuals use to define another group in their strategy to maintain some form of power imbalance in that particular society. On racism, the author quotes the judging verdict for Mildred Jeter (a black woman) and Richard Loving (a white man) on their crime for getting married. According to the Caroline County Circuit Court Judge, God created the different races and placed them on different continents, an intentional act for the non-mixture of the races. Thus, their marriage made them partners in “crime” (Dirven, Frank & Illie 37). Such language is what the author highlights as oppressive linguistic. From the book, racism and sexism are the common examples of oppressive or linguistic violence in the society. Racist languages rationalize and justify isolation through formation of groups, thus, creating the concept of classism where a particular group is more powerful or privileged than the other, in perception or reality. The author discusses this case in the white racism chapter. Accordingly, individuals are judged based on their race. On sexism, the author highlights the patriarchal association of derogatory language and female oppression. The myth of linguistic determinism that states that men control meaning follows the patriarchal belief that language cannot express women’s experiences to the same extent that it expresses men’s experiences. According to the author, this is incorrect. Another area of concern for the author is heterosexism (Dirven, Frank & Illie 38). Derogatory terms often dominate this sexuality field. The terms, some not worth mentioning on ethical grounds, contribute to the difficulty of organizing an open discussion on the matter in societal setup. The issue of heterosexism is often immoral in the eyes of many a society, a heavy contribution from the use of terms and languages that describe the issue. Bosmajian uses powerful and compelling examples of language oppression, but some of the examples are somewhat antiquated, like the issue of heterosexism, which now receives some degree of embracement in society as evidenced by passage of same sex marriage legislations in several countries. Critically analyzing and reviewing both books, the –isms concern is common. Memmi’s focus in The Colonizer and The Colonized is colonialism, with other issues that surround the concept of colonized and colonizers. Bosmajian dedicates a whole chapter of his book to white racism, a topic of similar interest to Memmi. In this regard, both authors identify and present their opinions on the issue of racism and its psychological impact to the colonized people. Both the authors oppose the concept of basing the race of an individual in whatever form of evaluation or judgment, arguing that the race of an individual is simply a matter of pigmentation. Racism, particularly white racism that was present in the colonial days, was a form of oppression strategy to create different standards for the colonizer and the colonized in order to establish and maintain a society in their favor. The two authors also share the same opinion concerning sexism. Gender inequality, both in colonialism and linguistic oppression context, are some the beliefs and practices that are ailing the society (Memmi 43). Equality in both genders would create a balanced society. Nonetheless, the platform of argument for the authors is completely different. Memmi utilizes the concept of colonialism to base his views and opinions on the several forms of –isms including sexism and racism, while Bosmajian uses the concept of language to explore the issue of oppression, which include white racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, and war. Again, Bosmajian further explores language oppression with regards to war; a factor that is not dominant is Memmi’s argument. Despite the differences, both books provide vast knowledge on the impacts of racism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, and others in the society. The authors explore the contribution of these systems of belief to oppression, and highlight their opposing with compelling facts. From a personal perspective, these two books have further enlightened my position on the –isms concept. Works Cited Bergman, Gregory. Isms: From Autoeroticism to Zoroastrianism- An Irreverent Reference. Avon, MA: Adams Media, 2006. Print. Dirven, Rene, Frank, Roslyn & Illie, Cornelia. Language and Ideology: Descriptive Cognitive Approaches. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co, 2001. Print. Memmi, Albert. The Colonizer and the Colonized. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd, 2003. Print. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Colonialism and Neo-Colonialism. New York: Routledge, 2001. Print. Read More