"I wouldn't say [person] is racist - unless by that you mean that they care about white identity."
The short answer is, that yes, "caring about white identity" is racist, by definition. The concept of a person being "white" only exists in the context of race, and identifying as "white" - in other words, classifying yourself using race - is a literal expression of racism. Sorry, but that's how words work.
But what does that mean for those of us who "care about" our lineage, our heritage, and our genetic background? Can you care about those things and not be racist?
First, we have to agree that there is no biological or scientific meaning behind the term "race." Since the middle of the 20th century, anthropologists have started using the growing body of information available from studying DNA to study different human populations, and they've stopped using the outdated (not to mention loaded) terms concocted by their predecessors. As the Human Genome Project put it, "two random individuals from any one group are almost as different [genetically] as any two random individuals from the entire world." (see also Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations) This means that, at best, "race" is a post hoc cultural notion that usually tries to tie superficial physical characteristics to personality traits that makes as much sense, scientifically, as trying to define them by their horoscope.
So, just to restate the tautology here: Classifying people by "races" as if a race were a distinct, definable thing is a racist practice. All of us are guilty of buying into racism to some extent, even if it's just because we filled in the "white/caucasian" bubble on our Census forms. Racism is built into our society in ways that we can't ignore, and as historians, we are obligated to understand that and to address it in our research.
Defining what a "race" is has always been elusive. I've written before about how even the wise Benjamin Franklin viewed his "Pennsylvania Dutch" neighbors as being a different race from the English, and how the notion of who is and who isn't "white" has shifted over the centuries. Complicating this further, people frequently confuse national identity or religion with race. Many people aren't aware that the Cherokee nation, for example, does not base its citizenship on race. Being Jewish can mean either that one is descended from ethnically Jewish people, or that one belongs to the Jewish faith - or both. Being Muslim has nothing at all to do with race, but people frequently call out bigotry aimed at Muslim people as "racism." In reality, each of these classifications has more to do with heritage than anything biological.
When you talk about "heritage," you're talking about things that are passed down to you from your ancestors. These can be physical things, of course, but can also be stories and ideas that you learn from and about previous generations. Growing up hearing my grandfathers talk about their experiences in World War II, or reading my aunt's scrapbook about my great-great-grandparents taking a covered wagon from Kansas to the Arizona Territory - that's all part of my heritage.
The stories I've related in this blog about ancestors fighting in the American Revolution (whether they were fighting with Lafayette or being captured by Gen. George Washington), helping escaped slaves flee north, or rescuing children captured in the conflicts between settlers and indigenous tribes - those stories are all part of our heritage.
Each of those stories helps us understand the people who came before us, and what their place was in the world as they knew it. I try to tell their stories without judgment and with as much accuracy as is possible, but I also have to acknowledge that they were human and that even though they're my family, they weren't automatically the "good guys" of their stories.
Had the Irish immigrant and American Revolutionary James Callin and the Hessian mercenary Leopold Zindle met on the battlefield, which one would have been the "good guy"? When the Callin girl (or girls) were carried off by Indian warriors, was it because our settler ancestors had moved farther west than they were supposed to...or were they innocent pawns caught up in a dispute between British and French powers? And was Uncle George using his farm as a stop on the Underground Railroad because he believed in the humanity and freedom of these escaped slaves, or was he doing it because he didn't want those people settling in his county? I really don't know the answer, though I am always on the lookout for evidence that could tell me.
Race and racism are factors in all of those stories. How my ancestors saw people stolen from Africa, or how they treated native Americans or even how they treated each other as people of a different race is part of my heritage. Part of my task as a historian is to understand how they saw their world, and that means making their definitions part of their story. That is what I mean when I talk about preserving their stories. But that is a far different thing from accepting their views as right or keeping their views as my own.
For me, even though (so far) all of my proven ancestors came from populations that originated in northern Europe, I see them all as being too diverse to pigeon-hole into something as bland as simply "being white." They belonged to different faith traditions, spoke different languages, wore different clothes, knew different crafts and trades, and probably slept with a lot more people than the records would prove. I don't betray them by not being exactly like them - it would be impossible for me to "honor my heritage" that way, anyway. If I still practiced the religion of one set of 5th-great grandparents, I would be abandoning the very different practices of the other sets, after all - and remember, these were people who burned each other at the stake for practicing different religions.
Even though I don't practice a religion, I speak different languages than they did, I wear very different clothes, know few crafts, and practice a trade that didn't exist for them, and wouldn't presume to kiss and tell - I still care about my heritage. I still preserve their memories and their points of view as best as I can, while acknowledging their mistakes and their failures.
So, can I be interested in preserving my heritage and not be a racist? Absolutely. In my view, racism has no place in family history, other than as something that should be studied and understood as an outdated and dangerous part of our past - like cholera, Great Fires, or the Gold standard.
Interestingly, Virginia is currently facing a lawsuit related to this very topic.
ReplyDelete