In
a recent New York Times editorial, entitled, �Ending
the Slavery Blame-Game,� (April 23) Harvard Professor Henry
Louis Gates calls on the United States� first Black president to
end the nation�s sense of responsibility for the legacy of slavery.
It is a pernicious argument, well suited to the so-called �postracial�
moment we are in. Like the erroneous claims of �post-racialism,�
in general, Gates� editorial compromises rather than advances the
prospects for racial justice; and clouds rather than clarifies the
history, and persistent realities, of racism in America.
Gates
essentially absolves Americans of the guilt, shame and most importantly,
financial responsibility for the horrific legacy of slavery in the
Americas. How does he do this? -- Through a contrived narrative
that indicts African elites. And they did collaborate in the trade.
But this is no news flash. Every history graduate student
covering the Atlantic World knows that people of African descent
(like the elites from every other corner of the globe) waged war
against one another, captured enemies in battle, and enslaved their
weaker and more vulnerable neighbors. This is nothing unique to
Africa. What is problematic about Gates� essay is how he frames
and skews this fact.
The
frame is this. Black and White people in the United States should
now �get over� slavery because as we all know, this was not a racial
thing but an economic thing. Since both Blacks and Whites were culpable,
the call for reparations is indeed meaningless and bereft of any
moral weight. If we take Gates� argument to its full conclusion,
we might claim that it is not America or Europe, but the long suffering,
impoverished, and debt-ridden nations of Africa, that should really
pay reparations to Black Americans. �The problem with reparations,�
Gates proclaims, is �from whom they would be extracted.� This is
a dilemma since Africans were neither �ignorant or innocent,� when
it came to the slave trade.
At
its worse, Gates� argument resembles that of some Holocaust deniers
who don�t deny that �bad things� happened to the Jews, but add that
maybe the Nazi�s weren�t the only ones to blame. Maybe the
Jews, in part, did it to themselves. Stories that over-emphasize
the role of the Judenrats (Jewish Councils), for example, who were
coerced into providing slave labor to the Nazis and organized Jews
to be sent to the concentration camps, distorts the real culprits
and criminals of the Holocaust, and in the final analysis, serves
to blame the victims.
Even
though African monarchs did collaborate in the selling of blacks
bodies into slavery, what happened after that was the establishment
of a heinous and brutal system that rested squarely on the dual
pillars of White supremacy and ruthless capitalist greed.
There was nothing African-inspired about it.
It
is with the construction of a racialized slave regime in the Americas
that a new form of the ancient institution of slavery was honed
and refashioned. African slaves in the Americas, unlike most
other places, were deemed slaves for life, and their offspring were
enslaved. Moreover, Black servants were distinguished from white
servants (who were also badly treated) and stripped of all rights
and recourse. As slavery evolved even �free� Blacks were denied
basic rights by virtue of sharing ancestry and phenotype with the
enslaved population.
Racism,
as so many scholars have documented was the critical and ideological
justification for the exploitation, or more accurately, theft, of
black labor for some 300 years. Blacks were deemed inferior, childlike,
savage, and better suited to toiling in the hot sun than Whites,
and innately incapable of governing themselves. These are the racist
myths and narratives that justified slavery in the Americas. It
was indeed different in this way from other slave systems where
the fabricated mythologies of race did not rule the day.
Another
problem with Gates narrative about slavery is that he neglects to
examine the plantation experience itself as the main ground on which
African and African-American labor was exploited. As distinguished
historian, Eric Foner, points out in his letter to the Times on
April
25, in critical response to Gates, the internal U.S. slave trade,
which had nothing to do with Africa or African elites, involved
the buying and selling of over two million Black men, women and
children between 1820 and 1860. Slavery existed for over a
half century after the abolition of the trans-Atlantic trade in
1807. Even if African monarchs were complicit in and benefited individually
from the trade, none of them received dividends from the profits
generated by the production of millions of tons of tobacco, sugar
and cotton by the stolen labor of imprisoned African and African-American
plantation workers (i.e. slaves). It is this appropriation of millions
of hours of uncompensated labor that is the core of the reparations
demand.
Professor
Gates� selective storytelling and slanted use of history paints
a very different picture than does the collective scholarship of
hundreds of historians over the last fifty years or so. A
learned man who commands enormous resources and unparalleled media
attention, why would Gates put this argument forward so vehemently
now? It is untimely at best. At a time when ill-informed
and self-congratulatory commentaries about how far America has come
on the race question, abound, Gates weighs in to say, we can also
stop �blaming� ourselves (�ourselves� meaning white Americas or
their surrogates) for slavery. The burden of race is made
a little bit lighter by Gates� revisionist history. It is curious
that the essay appears at the same time that we not only see efforts
to minimize the importance of race or racism, but at a moment when
there is a rather sinister attempt to rewrite the antebellum era
as the good old days of southern history. Virginia Governor
Bob McConnell went so far as to designate a month in honor of the
pro-slavery Confederacy.
Gates�
essay fits conveniently into the new discourse on post-racialism.
Slavery was long ago, the story goes, and Black Americans have come
such a long way. So, we need to stop embracing �victimhood,�
get over it and move on. We need to stop complaining and �end
the blame game,� with regards to racism. After all, doesn�t
the election of Barack Obama relegate racism to the dustbins of
history? Gates goes even further to suggest that even the worst
marker of American racism, slavery, wasn�t so exclusively racial
after all.
Clearly,
there has been racial progress in the United States since the Civil
War and the Civil Rights Movement. That progress was born
of decades of struggle and protest. But we have not come as
far as some would have us believe. And we don�t escape history
by either tracing common ancestry or blaming others for comparable
crimes. Reconciliation with the past is a long, arduous and
complex process and there are no shortcuts. Moreover, �the
past� is not so long ago. In other words, chattel slavery
ended in the United States in the 1860s but, as Herb Boyd, in yet
another letter to the New York Times in
response to Gates, rightly points out, �the economic disadvantage
of Black workers extended beyond the long night of slavery into
the iniquitous era of Jim Crow� (marked by segregation, legal disenfranchisement,
and rampant violence). Moreover, we don�t have to go back
to Jim Crow to see the ravages of American racism, a racism that
took hold under slavery. Today, millions of young Black men
and women are caged, shackled and dehumanized by a prison system
that is growing rapidly, privatizing and increasingly exploiting
the labor of its inmates. That scenario is far from Harvard
Square, where police harassment lands you in the White House and
on television. But the reality of the 21st century
carceral state suggests that various forms of coercion and containment
are palpably present today. It is not slavery but a powerful
reminder of it. And once again people of color are disproportionately
impacted.
Finally,
despite its flawed and reckless uses of history, and powerfully
disturbing political messages, there are some useful lessons embedded
in Professor Gates� essay. The lessons are about the self-serving
role of certain Black elites, who in slavery times and now, will
sell (or sell out) other Black bodies for their own gain and advancement.
African royalty did it in the 1600s and 1700s. Comprador elites
did it in colonial and postcolonial settings through the Global
South. And certain public figures, in political, cultural
and academic circles, do so today, with a kind of moral blindness
and impunity that rivals the slave sellers of old. As we know,
ideas have consequences. And misleading narratives that fuel and
validate new forms of denial and give cover to resurgent forms of
racism should not be taken lightly.
BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board member Barbara Ransby, PhD is a historian, writer
and longtime activist. She is Professor of African American
Studies, History and Gender and Women's Studies at University of
Illinois at Chicago where she also directs the Gender and Women's
Studies Program. Dr. Ransby serves on the editorial board
of "Race and Class� and is also the author of the award-winning
biography, "Ella
Baker and the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision
(Gender and American Culture)". Click
here to contact Dr. Ransby. |