For A, who so often saved me from myself, and for G., that he may recognize and resist. | Racist Culture Philosophy and the Politics of Meaning David Theo Goldberg BLACKWELL DacaCopyright © David Theo Goldberg 1993 “The righ of David Theo! astrte in accordance with the Cop 8 author ofthis wore hasbeen Designs and Patents Act 1988, First published 1993 Reprinted 1994 (twice), 1995, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002 ‘ransomed o dial pat 2008 1 HTisziass 1993 9236107 3058 - 820 cr British Library Cataloguing im Publica ‘ACIP catalogue record for this bok is available fom the British Library 10 on 12pt Times Rom jon Assistance Cente, Collage of Public Programe, Arizona State University. rite and bound in Great Briain by Marston Book Services Limited, Oxford This book is printed on acid-free paper. Contents Preface 1. Introduction: Racial Subjects 1 2 14 15 21 3. Racialized Discourse 4 ‘The Discourse of Race and Racism 4 a3 ‘The Grammar of Racialized Discourse 46 ‘The Preconceptual Elements of Racialized Discourse 48 Discursive Power and the Body of Racist Expression 32 ‘The Racist Subject 3” 4. The Masks of Race a eo 6 65 or 69 20 Ethnorace 4 8 80 84 5 90 2 93 94 Biology and Hierarchy 4 Tdeology 95 Domination 95‘Modernity, Race, and Morality oo be, Te pose arity of racist exclusions they enable. The poss Once tin a unt form the focus ofthe following contours of sucha covering accoun form te Fe ckground of cept map Sn ture, wil furnish th pers and respectively), 8 dian ence sane apenas wepei) oe ee ren’ set rae i somalzing cial tisking and ris Sesion hate 6 3 Racialized Discourse ee Paul Gilroy has argued that because rac historically specific, no ‘can be sustai vary so widely and are by nature theory of ‘race relations and race and politics namely, the race otentilly applies to any attempted tion to explore in responding to Gilroy's. _the ways in which racisms become ‘and.sacism. The theory would have to account discontinuti ‘The Discourse of Race and Racism Thinted in the introduction at conceiving racial field of dsc Tam widening tha te the various expressions tse. These expressions include beliefs and verbal acts and theiRacialized Discourse a ‘Soa number of interrelated and general puzzles emerge here: How have the forms of racialized expression changed overtime, and why? How have these discursive chat pervading social formations and cultures. [will have something tosay accordingly about each ofthese discursive constituents. However, Iwill focus primarily upon the second, namely, the emergence and elaboration of the discourse’s formal structures in elation to economic, political, lege, and cultural demands in specific conjunctures. Casting the analysis in this way also enables differentiation of racialized discourse from other rationalism emerge ive object o class, Itum now to discuss the social arises, The Social Conjuncture of Racialized Discourse ‘The sociohistorical conjuncture th ‘generally consists in the confluence o discursive developments stress the macrosocial44 Racialized Discourse Racialized Discourse limension, so any account of class formation in moden ‘The voyages of discovery from the late fifteenth century on reported vast areas ‘of ‘uaconquered" land with inestimabl 1 wealth and natural resources but ade ‘modes of economic and other words, in terms pon common assumptions: knowledge as ri accompanyi developed and matured with the social and inte the whole and often not even the fundamental part. S the emergence of racialized discourse cannot properly be accounted for wi46 Racialized Discourse aa i ‘one side ofthe equatiod “People are more readily perceived as inferior by nature,” ‘she writes, ‘when they ae already seen as oppressed, and she explicitly contrasts is revealed in posing lized discourse can be Ita unifying grammar hharge. The implication behavior are thus in these conditions may render racialized unthinkable. Yet once the general boundary transformations in these background ‘a central part of pla differed from those di ‘wake of abolition. Those who hold that intradiscursive formations and ‘or to its expressive object are exclusively ‘a repr and metaphors as well asin the categories and expressions. The s wolves a more abstract concern, for in the relations between the expre iesa grammar, and underlying the categories representing the objects is a preconceptual plane or set of primitive terms, Analysis of the structures of racialized discourse must seek to uncover this grammar and the preconceptual primitives. tions or of the concentration of mode of rai expesion~its nae , is syle—may be interpreted maya eves ead wen gals, brant roe isc, egos, mii, or ieslogal Relzed despre48 have altered over time, ishistorical stylistic or hypotheses, choices, ‘This precludes the possi statements pick out obj sme ofan anti-Semitic: office)? differs restcting blacks to manual labor or sla described, analyzed, and judged—in » word, emerge—in the discourse; just as themes are chosen, delineated, and developed in speaking} Determined by the discurive Feld, and themes cannot be all that differentiates the discourse of rae from other discourses. ere ony in discourse, delineated by the set of norms, 1d choices, and articulated in figures of speech and styles. The prammar of raielized discourse assumes coherence and uniqueness only ‘when compared from the vantage those of nation or -ma of its preconceptual set and inthe implic arrangement and displacement’ ‘The Preconceptual Elements of Kacialized Discourse “The_preconceptual set for racialized discourse consists of reflective and constitutive of power, including dominant valves cnable the expression of racialized discourse. These conceptual abstract a priori essences; they do not constitute an ideal f Taclalized discursive formation, Nor are they to be confused with the actual, explicit i and terms by which racialized discourse is usually expressed. 38 of power relations vested in 2 and cat ‘Thus, these preconceptval factors define ina general way the expression of those Racialized Discourse ‘s ‘gent, and only hse, who speak and act in ems of railized discourse and lows tat ke uty of cin discourse given in any pp ‘durability of race or racism. The di im om a fic methodology.” With observation Butitalso claims toreflect the natural aero hings. Tis ordering of representations accordingly always presupposes value: ot ingly always pre : Nature ought to be as itis, be otherwise. So the seemingly naked body of pute facts i Veiled sytem ening oo bt. Extended human a tered forse ans the Hee spention of cg man goupngs othe bs of uel esc Une . . ring 9a assumption uadrynganbroplogieal asificaton nthe time tues out to be lation of sin cme ft diferent s deg to Jaws of behavior for their members. ee So casifcation central o scent methodology, and tong ee ken ste ea mel of aly. The ep for anny i tm considered he ma of um : tatopoogcal eres nos temscientists and social theorists in Europe and the inferences tothe same conclusi i bjectifyi 1 view to develop of subjectless bodies(Once lyzed, categorized, classified, and ordered jonym racial differentiation. furnishing whatever grot different. Since the seventeenth century32 Racialized Discourse identities has served as a leading mode of promoting exclusions and inclusions. It has recently allowed racists to applaud the debunking of social hierarchies, ing is sila baie coneptal unity for modem sptually grounds the entire superstructure racial exclusion establishes the pertinent ‘assertion, and representation—in short, re material, physical, corporea! than the exercise of power. x cannot be something ideal. The drive uthorial power—whetber out ofthe pure pleasure of the expression 3 to futher ends—clothes isl in the theoretical fashions of Thnaghou moder ‘and racist expression has largely fu et for the forceful exclusion of the different, The institutional ‘success’ of conccivaity of Euro eulnverent of colena aban am suggesting that racist exclusion finds whatever authority it discourse of the body and tha this “body talk’ (6 to speak forges an underlying,‘might (aim fo) gain from this way of expressing themselves, Ractalized Discourse ‘The Racist Subject ‘Adoption of racialized discourse and racist expression has been ‘They have been assumed across classes, nations, social and ethnic the formation of social groups is the ind (Kantian) categories are thought ls are defined and define themselves Courses are the intermediary between al subject ism are the products of the economy of power, , produced and refined in ination, sub social discourses are placed in the passed along, inherited, reproduced, ‘By converging with related discourses and interiorize discourse underlying ra also, It molds subj tacialized discourse—reproduce: Feconstitutes the relations of powerRacialized Discourse .* Because human subjects ‘dynamic internal tothe discourse. The became, as the hypothesis emergedcy Racialized Discourse 4 The Masks of Race le everything may seem to be negotiable, culture, education, and ion are not negotiable,” addressed, however, the culture of race and elaboration, The fsst requirement in this anatomy ofthe revaling metology opp ‘There are two basic ws 3e first is purely concept largely a priori on the basis of what the terms ought to to structure and define transforming configurations of these questions that we now tum,