Abstract
Karen and Barbara Fields are sisters and according to US racial convention – the principal object of analysis of this book, its openly iconoclastic ending, and the indignation of the authors –, are ‘Afro-Americans’ by definition. However, in this book they do not intend to dispute the use of other words in racial and original terminologies. Much to the contrary, the prefer to leave clear that as an intellectual project, rather than the freedom of choice between typologies, they defend the uprooting of the ideology of the ‘social construction of race’ (racecraft) from political discourse and social proposals. In an analysis which intends to illuminate how this ideology has updated and kept itself contemporary since the American Revolution, the authors emphatically seek to demonstrate what they consider to be at the same time an irrationality, an intellectual fraud, a historiographic evasion, a political crime, and an ethical problem. From a centenarian family in South Carolina, based in Charleston – a city emblematic in Southern memory thanks to the importance of illustrious citizens in the Confederacy and the defense of slavery –, they problematized their intellectual apprenticeships and family memories to show that the manipulation of racial classification has strategic and ethical limits. Heirs of a now practically defunct tradition, anti-racism as a program with roots in the New Left in an age of liberal agendas and multi-culturalisms, they talk from within this tradition which reached them in the 1960s in the long history of struggles and civil disobedience against Jim Crow1 and the racism reproduced in the ideology of the ‘social construction of race.’
Highlights
Against the expectations and intentions of Barbara J. None of her works became as influential as her 1982 essay, Ideology and Race in American History
Since she has fought against the fame of this text and the assessment that it offers support to visions of US history as a trajectory of intermixing and the construction of distinct arrangements of ‘racial relations.’. It can be said, is her most recent attempt to explain, to the exponents these readings, that studying Jim Crow does not correspond to accepting its grounding in the truism of the ‘social construction of race’ as an analytical assumption
The books demolishes the argument that ‘race’ is always a predicate of racism, and that historiography, as opposed to anachronism, has to take into account that race and racism belong to different modalities of ‘social construction.’
Summary
Against the expectations and intentions of Barbara J.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.