[lbo-talk] Retreat into Racism

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Tue May 9 07:51:31 PDT 2006


On 5/9/06, Charles Brown <cbrown at michiganlegal.org> wrote:
> Yoshie :
> They probably will, but I suspect that they will mainly retreat into
> racism: "Iraqis were incapable of -- or were not ready for --
> democracy." And that racism will probably be shared by a sizable
> number of Americans beyond the hard Right. They won't admit that if
> America were a democracy, it would never have invaded Iraq, nor would they
> concede that what Washington wanted to export to Iraq was not democracy
> (which it doesn't practice at home either) but
> American-style capitalism and a pro-Washington and pro-Tel Aviv
> government.
>
> ^^^^^
> CB; Racism ? Didn't racism end with genocide ?

I'm not speaking for Michael, because this is not a point he explicitly makes in the essay (though I think he will agree with me if I ask him), but I let me put down what I think:

Genocide at the origin of its term was a term to name a racist crime, but since then it has become largely a racist term (in much of political discourse and people's consciousness) to name only crimes committed by peoples or governments outside the rich countries (where relative prosperity allows relative peace), never crimes committed by peoples or governments of rich countries. "We" (of the United States, the European Union, and Japan), the civilized, try to save lives, no matter how much direct and indirect deaths and injuries our actions cause in the process; "they" (in Sudan, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Russia, etc., etc.), the uncivilized, just kill, kill, kill because they are hateful brutes. That's the prevailing understanding of the world that the power elite create through their usage of the term genocide.

The term genocide is useful to the power elite because it, like their anti-Semitism-baiting, helps silence dissenters: "There are certain things in the world that the only appropriate response is to shut up and remain silent" in the words of Wojtek (at <http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20060501/036905.html>).

What are "certain things" about which one is asked to shut up and remain silent? Politics, economy, history . . . or anything else that may help us understand what's going on. So, labeling other peoples' crimes "genocides" helps the power elite of the rich countries: when one hears the term, one is supposed to condemn designated enemies without understanding what's going on, without thinking at all, in fact.

To be sure, there are leftists who apply the term genocide to past and present crimes committed by the power elite of the rich countries (e.g., the Holocaust of American Indians), but since leftists don't have power or own major media, the leftist usage doesn't stick and fails to change the dominant understanding of what racism is: "other peoples' crimes," compared to which "we" look good!

-- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list