A colleague once told me that to acknowledge the preponderance of race in everyday life would be the equivalent of a fish realizing that it is surrounded by water. Regardless of our intuitions, theories, definitions, or beliefs, race is an inevitably pervasive element of the American imagination; it is at once a Miner's Canary, The Problem of the Century. Not surprisingly, few topics of social reality have been subject to as much academic discourse and postulation as race. At varying times and depending upon one's political stance, it has assumed labels of political race, racial formation, racial essentialism and so on. But does academic discourse on race and its promise of a more egalitarian future even remotely capture the reality of what it means to live in a racialized society? Do we even gain anything from studying the metaphysics and politics of race without listening to how it operates in people's lives?
Framing the Debate: The Example of Colorblindness
Although colorblindness is in no way exhaustive of the academic theatre of race, the debate that continues to rage over it is exemplary of the polarizing dogmas that characterize modern scholarship on race. At present, we see two distinct camps emerging: advocates of colorblindness, who criticize the divisive effects of recognizing race as a social category, and defenders of race-consciousness, who seek to restore the nexus between race and the allocation of resources and power.
Once the trench-lines are dug and the stage is set, the analysis begins. Individual stories begin to form patterns and trends when viewed amidst the experiences of others. Themes emerge and theories abound. Arguments from numerous disciplines - sociology, psychology, history, etc. - are drawn upon in attempt to make sense of the phenomena. What was once isolated, everyday experience becomes the springboard for new scholarly thought and theory. But what of the individuals who are at the heart of these frameworks? Do they reap the benefits of these new academic advancements or are they merely the nameless sources for an intriguing dissertation?
The Need for a Game Plan
When looking to answers questions regarding the function of scholarly discourse on race, my mind automatically jumps to the metaphor of war. Armies do not walk blindly on the battlefield with out some kind of plan of attack. Their generals spend timing devising the appropriate tactics, consulting the necessary individuals, and weight the costs against the benefits for each potential move. Strategy is key. Without it, one may win the battle but ultimately lose the war. Critical race theorists provide some of the necessary consultation necessary for people like political activists, social reformers, and grassroots organizers to ultimately effectuate change. As I admitted earlier, race is deeply rooted in the mechanics and identity of this nation. With the realization of the complex interactions race has with all levels of society, it would be foolhardy to attempt fixing a problem without some kind of game plan. Racial frameworks and discourse provides assistance to those who want to take action but need a better understanding of the bigger picture.
But What of the Common Man?
But if we recognize race and racism, what more is there to discuss? How does this assist the common man who encounters race on a daily basis. As I think Felix Cohen would see it, constructing abstract systems out of the things we see and do on a regular basis are not fruitful inquiries that get us any closer to a more racially inclusive society. Let us look to racial profiling, for example. If we see a cop unreasonably abusing and detaining a juvenile black, does it matter whether one labels this an individualized expression of a stereotype (colorblindness) or the reinforcement of hierarchies of privilege (race-consciousness)? Resolving the debate certainly does not help the juvenile, who ends up in prison regardless of how we codify his experience. Even from the standpoint of the enraged observer, the reality that she has experienced race in a way that solidifies her conviction to fight racism is not adequately captured by some abstract theory of racial progressivism. But as the flood of emotions begin to subside and the rage gives way to reflection, where does the observer go from there? What can guide her in her quest for justice? This is where the scholarship's importance becomes evident. Yes, the observer is moved to action and action is definitely needed on this front but in order to make a significant change, she must have an understanding of the issue at hand. The reality of race informs the study of race and this study ultimately cycles back into a plan of action that can allow for a smarter, strategic attack on the problem at hand.
The View from the Ground: Toward a Functional Approach
As a student, I have always prided myself on my ability to apply frameworks of analyses to racial projects at the individual and macro-level. Two months ago, however, I found myself in San Francisco's drug court witnessing a deep racial divide separating the room: the white judge, sheriff, stenographer and prosecutor on one side, and the deep sea of black and brown seated at the other. It occurs to me now that I had processed the entire scene as an experience with race itself, touching off a fervent desire to do something to change it. Whether the event was actually a product of institutional racial hegemony or some other theoretical abstraction, however, meant no difference to how I felt in the courtroom. The desire to mobilize was driven simply by the witnessing of a powerful racial moment with my own two eyes.
This desire to act was strong but once again, act on what exactly? And how? Where exactly was I to begin? Race theorists may not wield a sword and shield, but they can provide the foot soldier with a survey of the battlefield. Perhaps instead of viewing the theoretical and actual as two distinct entities, we can recognize that both must work together. The theory is an interesting read but without action, it amounts to little. Action is what we need but without an understanding of what to act upon, one's efforts may prove ineffective.
Conclusion
If a thing is what it does, it seems obvious to me that racism cannot be explained away. Racism lives and breathes in this nation and is as American as apple pie. It continues to be ever present thus discourse on the subject abounds. Intellectual inquiry about race synthesizes individual experiences to highlight themes and phenomena that are difficult to view from just the ground level. The scholarship is an act within itself but that alone will not solve the societal ills. Others must use the work of scholars and theorists to inform their plans of action and chart their course. The work does not end with race scholarship but rather, it is just the beginning.
* Kristine, I have to concede that within a few days after completing my original paper, I found myself disagreeing with its conclusion that race scholarship is utterly pointless. Wihle I still believe that race scholarship sometimes impedes social action more than it augments it, it would be unfair to say that the study of race as a whole carries no value. On the contrary, as an ethnic studies major myself, it helped me form my own ideas about how race operates, why it continues to be relevant today and the gains to be realized from taking action to promote racial equality. Your points are well taken. Where I do believe race scholarship often obstructs social action (I didn't get to address this in my original) is when ideologies about race pigeon-hole people's views and force them to adopt positions that are in conflict (and derisive) of those seeking the same ends. As a junior in college, for example, a young student approached me with a petition for creating a multicultural center at Berkeley. Flushed with ideas about how multiculturalism 'obscures the topography of power' and perpetuates the colonial condition, I resolutely denied her my signature. In hindsight, the decision was foolishly naive. So I guess my conclusion is that if people can engage the study of race open-mindedly as opposed to engaging in unnecessary scholarly competition, it can still be very beneficial to those seeking to promote racial equality. I appreciate your thoughts.
*