>>> Jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk 08/03/01 03:29PM >>>
In message <sb6aa0eb.064 at Internet>, Charles Brown <CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detr
oit.mi.us> writes
>>Doug:
>>> >The negation would be to
>>> >reject racial categorization altogether.
>>
>
>((((((((
>
>CB: Do you think that the U.S. slave system could have been negated in fact, if
>the slaves and the abolitionists had just rejected the category of master/slave
>? No. What had to happen was the masters had to be forced to "reject" the
>categories, i.e. not operate as if they were true.
I'm not sure this example helps Charles' argument. The Union's rejection of slavery was precisely a rejection of the (legal) category of slave.
(((((((((
CB: Is Doug proposing that the _legal_category of race be rejected ? But why would he propose this to Black or other racially oppressed groups ? Black people do not have the power to obliterate or reject the _legal_category. Black people don't have the power to change the law, do they ?
((((((((
It did not introduce positive discrimination against plantation owners, but abolished them outright (abolished them as slave-owners that is).
(((((((((
CB: The main point is that the slaves and abolitionists could not reject the legal category of slave/master. They didn't have the power to do it.
(((((((