The origins of racism are probably like the origins of religion; deriving from deep human needs and (in the case of racism) pathologies that arise from people's life situations. As I've said, I think Winthrop Jordan is good on this (while not neglecting the class angle) in White Over Black. Others like Joel Kovel, whose White Racism I find a little thin.
The difference bewteen racisms of different groups needs to be explored by people who know about such things, but it's probably a reasonable starting hypothesis that competition among groups fuels working class racism, along with the psychic "compensation" of whiteness. Different ruling groups have different sorts and kinds of racism. The white ruling class of the old South had a different investment in racism from that of the urban North.
Your points about the differences between the needs of individual capitalists and that of the capitalist class, etc., are good and remind us of the need for microexplanation. You are becoming an analytical Marxist, Yoshie! Those are characteristics obsessions of the AMs. In fact, dragging in the World Spirit in a derogatory way, you are starting to found like Elster. Next thing you know, you will be posting Roemerian models, and Carrol will flip.
-jks
>_Once racism arose_, it could & has sometimes been employed
>intentionally by the governing elite & their lackeys (e.g., Willie
>Horton ads). In such cases, intentional-functional explanations are
>obviously useful. They cover, however, only a small part of what is
>to be explained, I think. For instance, what of the very origin of
>racism? It doesn't make sense to argue that the ruling class
>intentionally created racism in order to enslave Africans for racism
>is functional to slavery under capitalism. What of the differences
>between ruling-class & working-class racisms? I doubt that
>intentional-functional explanations help to illuminate them. What of
>contradictory themes within racism (e.g., Mammy versus Jezebel, Uncle
>Tom versus Criminals)? And laws, customs, & institutions that
>produce racist outcomes but are not intended for such a purpose,
>which I believe accounts for much of post-Civil Rights racism?
>
>Most importantly, what's functional for capitalism as a mode of
>production isn't necessarily good for individual capitalists or
>capitalist factions, & vice versa. Imperialism is functional for
>capitalism, but it isn't necessarily good for individual capitalists.
>I think intentional-functional explanations have difficulties
>accounting for these important phenomena (unless you attribute
>intention to the World Capitalist Spirit or something like that in a
>Hegelian fashion). For instance, intentional-functional explanations
>of ruling-class racism are subject to criticism from those who think
>like Gary Becker.
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com