A War on White Supremacy: The Plight of Black People and the Misconceptions of Activism
From the Civil Rights Era to present-day, black Americans have had to live with the knowledge that they are collectively viewed as inferior by their white counterparts, a view often reinforced by violence to and even death of black bodies. In their effort to assert themselves and disprove such discriminatory interpretation, black Americans have typically been met with fierce resistance and are made out to be a lazy group of people who are quick to blame whites for self-caused issues. In the Civil Rights Era, this resistance came in the form of anti-black slurs, mass jailing of black activists, and even murder. Today, not only do the same trends continue, but they have been coupled with covert forms of racism. While they receive some support, black Americans of today are just as much victims of white supremacy as blacks who fought for racial equality during the Civil Rights Era, as they are not only faced with overt forms of racism, but also more subtle forms, as microaggressions, lack of adequate media representation, and forced assimilation.
The plight of the black American is not a new issue, but is one that can be dated from the beginning of this nation’s creation, all the way back to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. In the article “The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade,” it is revealed that the “trade” was actually the largest forced removal of people recorded in history, as over 12 million African women, men, and children were stolen from their native lands and sold, primarily to white Europeans and Americans (par.1). The moment they were forced away from home marked the end of any cultural ties they had, as well as the end of their humanity. From the early 1400's when these people were first snatched from their land, to the mid-1600's and beyond, when they were brought to the United States, African people and cultures were viewed as savage and lowly by white men and women (“The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade” par. 1–3). Thus, they were not even considered to be human by slave owners, but objects and property — no different than an animal or a house.
It was not until January 1, 1863 that former President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, an executive order that declared all African slaves be set free. However this freedom was only technical, as slavery in the south would soon be replaced with black codes and eventually Jim Crow laws. According to Andrew Costly in his article “ The Southern “Black Codes” of 1865–66,” black codes restricted, and essentially overturned, African-Americans’ new freedom after the Emancipation Proclamation, forcing them back into a system of arduous labor based upon low wages and intense debt to former slave-owners (par. 7). Jim Crow laws, explained by Michelle Alexander in her novel, “The New Jim Crow,” were an amended version of these codes that upheld the idea that black people are inferior to whites, and they were kept in place from the late 1800's to the mid-1960’s (23).
Under both of these systems, black Americans were denied their human rights to “vote, serve on juries, travel freely, or work in occupations of their choice” (Costly par. 7). Marriage between two black people was outlawed, let alone inter-racial marriage between a black and a white person (Costly par. 7–8). As Dr. Pilgrim of Ferris State University mentions in his article “What Was Jim Crow,” white law-makers felt that to mix the black and white races via sex or marriage would bring about a “mongrel race which would destroy America” (par. 2). In order to combat such a future, violence was used to keep black Americans “at the bottom of the racial hierarchy” (Pilgrim par. 2).
For instance, “under Jim Crow any and all sexual interactions between black men and white women was illegal, illicit, socially repugnant, and within the Jim Crow definition of rape,” an offense worthy of lynching, which white legislature claimed was a necessary punishment meant to “protect white women from black men” (Pilgrim par. 34).
In addition to this, black people were denied the right to vote, on account of grandfather clauses, poll taxes, all-white primaries, and literacy tests. These were, respectively, laws that limited voting rights to those whose ancestors had voted before the Civil War, fees charged to poor black people, delegates who ruled that only Democrats could vote and only whites could be Democrat, and trick tests that forced aspirant black voters to “name all the Vice Presidents and Supreme Court Justices throughout America’s history,” for instance (Pilgrim par. 15).
These are only a couple examples, of many.
The desire, the need, of whites to keep black Americans oppressed meant that the latter had to exist in a fashion relegated by the former.
This meant that black men could not offer to shake hands with white men, because the gesture implied that the two races were equal; black men could not have any physical interactions with white women, lest they be accused of rape or assault, and murdered as a result (Pilgrim par. 3). Black people were not permitted to exhibit any signs of affection towards one another in the white-dominated public, particularly kissing, because it offended whites (Pilgrim par. 6). Whites were to be presented as superior in even minor ways: they were to always be introduced to black people, but never the other way around, and they were to be referred to as “sir” or “ma’am” by black people, who were in turn referred to as “boy” and “girl” (Pilgrim par. 7–8).
When it came to eating in public settings, whites were to be separated from black people with a physical barrier and they were to be served first, regardless of when they came into the restaurant (Pilgrim par. 4). When using public transport, white people were to sit in the front of the vehicle, while black people were forced to sit in the back, unless of course an oncoming white passenger could not find a seat, then one of the black passengers had to give up their seats and stand instead (Pilgrim par. 9).
In any public leisurely setting, such as a movie theater, zoo, or fair white people were always granted preferential treatment by the law. For example, in Downtown Memphis, Tennessee, when the Orpheum was just a Malco movie theater, only whites could use the front entrance of the building, while black people had to take the back-door entrances, or if there were not any present, they had to travel all the way up the emergency staircase, just to get inside (Bland Matthews, personal interview). In addition, when it came to a zoo or fair, black people only had one day out of the week to go, while whites were entitled to the six other days; if for some reason black peoples’ day to visit the zoo or enjoy fair rides fell on a major holiday, as the Fourth of July, they were not allowed to go, so that room could be made for whites (Bland Matthews, personal interview).
Furthermore, Jim Crow laws ensured that black people never insinuate that a white person was lying, never suggest that a white person was from a lower class than themselves, never claim to be more knowledgeable than a white person about anything, never swear at white people, never laugh at white people, and never comment on a white person’s appearance (Pilgrim par. 12). All of these methods of keeping black people separate and oppressed were forms of racism.
Together, black codes and Jim Crow laws birthed the Civil Rights Era, as they caused black Americans, particularly southerners, to become wearied by the anti-black status quo, and thus begin their fight for racial equality. No more would black Americans be silent about such restrictive and humiliating laws. No more would they stand for the “Separate-but-Equal” clause that othered them from whites, deeming them inferior and unworthy of the right to peaceably exist in the country, without being demonized or assaulted for their skin color (Pilgrim par. 14).
From 1954–1968 Civil Rights activists as Dorothy Height, president of the National Council for Negro Women, Bayard Rustin, organizer of the March on Washington, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the Civil Rights Era’s most celebrated figure, combined the tactics of non-violent resistance and mild civil disobedience — symbolic violation of the law — in order to invoke change. This came in the form of boycotts, sit-ins, peaceful public assemblies, and freedom rides. Black people around the south boycotted city buses, whose policies gave white people privilege to sit near the front, or to take black people’s seats. They occupied white-only restaurant counters and sipped from white-only water fountains, so that they could dismantle the system of separation ordained in so many public spaces. They gathered in the streets in great numbers, demanding basic human rights, and were consistent in their vows of non-violent action, even when their lives were endangered. In addition to this, black northerners traveled to southern states in freedom rides, in efforts to aid the desegregation process. During this era, the entirety of black America’s mission to desegregate the States was one founded on peace and respect. However, the same could not be said of white America’s response to this mission.
Though non-violent in action, sit-ins, public assemblies, and freedom rides were incredibly dangerous for all participants, and were viewed as a threat to the sanctity of whiteness perpetuated by white Americans. “Between autumn of 1961 and the spring of 1963, twenty thousand men, women, and children were arrested” and “in 1963 alone, another fifteen thousand were imprisoned” for partaking in desegregation efforts (Alexander 47). Those who were not jailed could be physically beat by whites, who had impunity against the law, and, as Pilgrim noted, these black victims “had little legal recourse against these assaults because the Jim Crow criminal justice system was all-white: police, prosecutors, judges, juries, and prison officials” (par. 32). Being jailed and receiving beatings were still more favorable punishments than death, as the methods that law officials used to kill were inhumane and often done for entertainment. Pilgrim stated that most victims of Jim Crow killings “were hanged or shot, but some were burned at the stake, castrated, beaten with clubs, or dismembered,” and he noted that lynchings in particular “were public, often sadistic, murders carried out by mobs” of people looking to control blacks and keep them “in their place,” so to speak (par. 33).
Both Alexander’s and Pilgrim’s descriptions of the Jim Crow “justice” system sound eerily similar to the justice system today, in which black Americans are often demonized, assaulted, or even killed by law officials, for protesting against white supremacy, or for just existing. As stated by Steven Best in his article “Dispatches From a Police State: Animal Rights in the Crosshairs of Repression,” the “terms and players have changed, but the situation is much the same as the 50's” (271). This means that, though the times are different and though the diction surrounding social and political crises have changed, the overall issues are the same. In the context of white supremacy and black rights, the situation is very much the same as it was in the 50’s and 60’s, though some people refuse to recognize this truth.
Just as Civil Rights leaders held peaceful protests and tried to reason with their oppressors in a civil manner, black activists of today are flooding the streets, exercising their right to peaceably assemble as well. In “A HerStory of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement,” author Alicia Garza describes the formation of the #Black Lives Matter hashtag, and of the overall movement, which was created by herself, along with Opal Tometi and Patrisse Cullors (Garza par. 1–2). After watching a 2012 trial in which 17 year-old Trayvon Martin was fatally shot by George Zimmerman — who faced no accountability, no jail time for murdering the unarmed teen-aged boy — the three women became distressed about the anti-black racism that permeates modern-day society, and formed the Black Lives Matter hashtag, which grew into a movement of its own (Garza par. 2). The point of the movement is to highlight all of the young black men, women, and children being murdered by law enforcement, who typically face no repercussions (Garza par. 2).
Black Lives Matter may have started off with just three people, but now has several thousand, primarily black, people championing the slogan during public protests. The Black Lives Matter movement is giving black Americans of today a louder voice, one that is now comparable to that of the Civil Rights Movement of the 50’s and 60’s. By saying the phrase, not only are black activists bringing attention to the flaws in America’s justice system, they are also highlighting the disdain that this country has for black people as a whole.
Don’t believe me?
Take a look at some of the names on this list:
- Dontre Hamilton of Milwaukee
- Eric Garner of New York
- John Crawford III of Dayton, Ohio
- Michael Brown Jr. of Ferguson, Missouri
- Ezell Ford of Florence, California
- Tanisha Anderson of Cleveland, Ohio
- Tamir Rice of Cleveland, Ohio
- Tony Robinson of Madison, Wiconsin
- Walter Scott of Charleston, South Carolina
- Freddie Gray of Baltimore, Maryland
- Sandra Bland of Waller County, Texas
- Korryn Gaines of Randallstown, Maryland
These are a few of several black people murdered by law enforcement from 2014 to 2016. The disheartening and shocking part about all of the people on this list is that they were all unarmed, yet all of their deaths were justified by white trigger-happy police officers, who claimed that their lives were endangered.The youngest victim in the above list was 12 year-old Tamir Rice, who was shot and killed by a police officer who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an actual weapon.
It is scary to know that these police officers are supposed to be the peace-keepers, yet they cannot effectively deescalate stressful situations without resorting to their guns first. To add insult to injury, it is frustrating that so many people will try to shift the blame on people like Rice, or the others on this list, while still giving their white murderers the benefit of the doubt. Too often are phrases like “We don’t know the full story,” and “He had a criminal background,” and “Maybe if he hadn’t resisted arrest, the cops would not have had a reason to shoot him” thrown around. On the contrary, there are too few people directing their skepticism towards the murders — the police. This is why the Black Lives Matter movement is so important. It shifts the blame back onto the responsible parties and does not victim blame. It speaks on behalf of the deceased, who cannot defend themselves. Yet, the movement is still criticized.
In the words of Steven Best, “the bad guy today is not a commie, but [a] … peace activist” (272). This sentence is true of black activists. Just as black Americans of the Civil Rights Era were jailed, assaulted, and killed for standing for equality, black activists of today are “surveilled, hassled, threatened, jailed, and stripped of their rights” (Best 272).
Online, for instance, Facebook users annoyed by Black Lives Matter protests have been known to threaten black protesters and claim that Black Lives Matter is a terrorist group.
Rather than actually do research as to why there even needs to be a Black Lives Matter movement, these people simply write off black activists, and black people as a whole, making them out to be lazy and a group of people wanting to shift the blame on white people and law enforcement for self-caused issues. These sort of comments are microaggressions.
The staff at Fusion Comedy compares microaggressions to mosquito bites, something that everyone experiences at some point in time, but that some people experience more than others and on a deeper level (“How Microaggressions are like Mosquito Bites”). Simply put, microaggressions are stereotypes that come in either declarations or questions. They reduce the cause of an individual’s feelings and their motives for speaking or behaving in a certain manner to that person’s race. This type of thinking is detrimental to black people, whose valid concerns about race-relations in the States are overlooked. By resorting to microaggressions, people ignore the root of the issue — racism — and only focus on its consequences — protesting.
This is not a new trend and it is not unique to black activists of today, but is an issue that Civil Rights activists dealt with as well. For instance, opposers of Black Lives Matter love to label the movement as divisive and love to tell its supporters to be more like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, who advocated for black people and white people to coexist in America. However, these same people fail to realize that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is exactly the type of person that they would have hated today, as he too called out white supremacy and white civilians for being complacent with the anti-black state of affairs. In his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” the reverend said “You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes” (King par. 5.) He goes on to say that “it is… unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative” to protesting and that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (King par. 4–5).
People’s attempts to misconstrue Dr. King’s messages, by omitting these very important details, paired with their thoughts of the Black Lives Matter movement has led to an inadequate representation of the black activist in this country.
Any white who praise Civil Rights activists of the 60’s, but simultaneously feel that today’s black activists are uneducated, lazy, divisive or unruly based on their limited perspective of what Black Lives Matter is exhibiting white privilege. How so? That they are able to be the deciders on what constitutes acceptable forms of activism signifies that they a position of power. What makes their words in these situations more than just opinions is that, white people possess a power that no other race of people does. If they decide that black activists are violent and wild, they will automatically sway outsiders’ opinions of the Black Lives Matter movement, and potentially of black people as a whole.
Furthermore, when whites try to dictate to black people what types of activism are acceptable, and try to demonize them for demonstrating in ways not widely accepted by white America, they have a negative effect on black people, who are then forced to assimilate. This means altering their typical behaviors, demeanor, and words simply to make whites comfortable, even if that means sacrificing their own personal comfort and overall well-being, a trend mentioned earlier with those living with Jim Crow laws. Yes, there is a proper way to handle certain situations based on the scenario, but black people should not always have to be subservient to the desires of whites. Moreover, black people are worthy of humanity and should be respected regardless of what forms of activism they choose to engage in. Their dignity should never be contingent upon white’s opinions of them.
Protesting against white supremacy and white privilege and advocating for equal rights are not acts committed out of hatred for white people, but out of a desire to secure a better future for black people of the present and the future, and even people of color as a whole. In the past activism was necessary, and it is just as relevant and necessary today. Whites should understand that it is not up to them to inject their personal opinions into the struggles of black people, or any other people of color. This is not to say that they are evil or cannot be helpful to people of color, but there is a time when they should learn to be silent and simply observe. When in the presence of any person of color, it is time for whites to listen and absorb information, rather than trying to speak over or speak on behalf of people of color. When in the presence of other whites, however, it is acceptable, and actually encouraged for them to take the information that they have learned from people of color and convey it to their white audiences, who are much more likely to accept information from people that look like them, rather than the people that they are accustomed to oppressing. Other things that white people can do to black people in dismantling white supremacy is call out their friends and family whenever they perpetuate stereotypes of any kind, or whenever they say something racist, but claim to be joking. Also, it is important that white people reflect on their own personal feelings, so as to make sure that they are not holding on to any personal prejudices before trying to correct others’ behaviors and words. Although whites have been blacks’ oppressors for so long, that does not mean that they cannot change. After all the war on white supremacy will not be won without them.
