48 pages • 1 hour read
Ibram X. KendiA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
In Kendi’s third grade class, he had a White teacher who favored three White students and ignored most Black students. One day, Kendi saw a Black girl classmate raise her hand but the teacher ignored her in favor of a White student. Angry at seeing this racially informed favoritism, Kendi protested and went to the principal’s office for a formal reprimand. Kendi explained he felt that what transpired in the classroom was “unfair” (55), though he did not have the vocabulary of race to explain the dynamic between the White teacher and the non-White students.
When the principal called Kendi’s parents, they were not mad at him but informed him there would be consequences for future protests. Kendi understood. From that day onward, the teacher was less harsh toward the non-White students. However, due to this incident, Kendi’s parents decided to transfer him to a primarily Black, private Christian school after he finished third grade.
Using this story, Kendi reflects on his early understanding of biological racism, which rests on the belief that “the races are meaningfully different in their biology and that these differences create a hierarchy of value” (49). Modern society has always tried to use biological racism to assign value to different races. For instance, people have used the Biblical curse of Ham’s descendants to argue that Black people descended from a different line than White people. Additionally, the theory of polygenesis argues that races are different species of people, which inspired biologist Charles Darwin’s ideas of natural selection. Natural selection holds that some races are biologically superior to others, and that the White race is the most successful. Darwin’s ideas influenced the transatlantic eugenics movement facilitated by his half cousin, Francis Galton, which encouraged reproduction policies to bolster the superior White race and exterminate the inferior races.
With the scientific advancement that led to the first complete survey of the human genome and the conclusion that all humans share 99.9 percent of the same genetic coding, racists continued to apply biological racism to this data. Some science writers like Nicholas Wade believed that the 0.1 percent difference in human genes proves that “there is a genetic component to human social behavior” (53). Wade believed this tiny percentage accounted for racial difference in human genes.
While Wade represents modern segregationist thinkers’ perspective on race, assimilationist thinkers would argue that everyone is part of a singular race. Kendi contends this belief is just as detrimental as it removes the sense of individuality that comes from distinct experiences with racialization. He concludes, “Race is a genetic mirage” (53).
Kendi reflects on his adolescent teasing of an African classmate Akeem. Along with other African American classmates, Kendi would make fun of Akeem’s similarity to the character Prince Akeem in the film Coming to America, which follows the journey of a fictional African prince whose fumbling with American culture is the main source of the film’s humor. Looking back, Kendi is shameful of his participation in ethnic racism.
Kendi defines ethnic racism as a “powerful collection of racist policies that lead to inequity between racialized ethnic groups and are substantiated by racist ideas about racialized ethnic groups” (56). Historically, slave traders used ethnic racism to determine the inherent worth of different African groups, characterizing enslaved Black people from certain African countries as better slaves than others. Ethnic racism also produces current friction between African immigrants and African Americans. Whereas West Africans considered African Americans to be “lazy, unambitious, uneducated, unfriendly, welfare-dependent, and lacking in family values” (60), African Americans considered West Africans to be as “selfish, lacking in race awareness, being lackeys of whites” (60). These stereotypes are based in ethnic racist assumptions steered by standards dictated by White, American models of success.
Kendi once found himself challenged by his own ethnic racism when, as a professor, he invited a student from Ghana to speak to his class. The Ghanaian student recited stereotypes about African Americans, inciting the ire of Kendi’s African American students. Kendi tried to challenge the student by naming stereotypes of African immigrants, which only worsened tensions. After class, Kendi asked the student for British stereotypes of Africans and if he believed them to be true. When the student adamantly denied the stereotypes, Kendi asked him to consider from where his ideas about African Americans might have come. Another student responded, “American whites” (65). After witnessing this response, the student finally understood his error.
Throughout its history, the US has used ethnic racism to defend exclusionary immigration policies. The ideas perpetuated by these policies become internalized through different racial ethnic communities who then see themselves as better than others that share their racial identities. Ethnic racism leads to “angrily trashing the racist ideas about one’s own group but happily consuming the racist ideas about other ethnic groups” (65). However, this factionalism only obscures the power of ethnic racism at work.
Kendi considers how Black people are often considered violent and criminal. From his days at John Bowne High School, he recalls a Black boy named Smurf who had these violent tendencies. Smurf once pulled a gun on him. He also initiated a crew of boys to beat up an Indian boy on the bus. In the past, Kendi had also engaged in similarly violent actions, having joined a crew of Black boys who would get into regular fights with others.
Kendi cites a report by the Washington Post stating that Black people are twice as likely to be killed by law enforcement than white people. This is due to the racist policymaking that codes Black bodies as dangerous and criminal. Although White policymakers perpetuate these ideas, the concepts also become internalized by many Black citizens. In 1993, White legislators tried to pass the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act at the same time the Congressional Black Caucus was asking for $2 billion for drug treatments and $3 billion for drug prevention programs. Each of these groups had the notion of violent Black people in mind, what Kendi calls “their fear for my Black body—and of it” (74).
Kendi learned early that as a Black boy, those around him considered him dangerous. This notion played out in U.S. politics; for instance, former President Bill Clinton signed into law the measure permitting 13-year-old youth to be tried as adults in court. These beliefs about dangerous Black youth were further perpetuated by political scientist John J. Dilulio, Jr. who warned that “[a] new generation of street criminals is upon us,” referring to Black youth whom he deemed “super-predators” (75).
Kendi challenges this assumption that Black people are inherently more prone to violence, arguing that economic status has a lot to do with rates of violence more than race. The Urban Institute stated in a recent report on long-term unemployment that “[c]ommunities with a higher share of long-term unemployed workers also tend to have higher rates of crime and violence” (79). Thus, poor Black communities with high unemployment rates experience more violence than middle-class communities because of their economic struggles—not because of their being Black.
By distinguishing racism from biological interpretations of race, Kendi continues defining it as a socially informed set of practices and ideas administered by policy. He refers to race as a “genetic mirage” (53) to highlight the ways science has always been used throughout history to racially categorize society, attributing certain sets of inherent values to certain races—often at the expense of Black people who are considered biologically inferior. By illustrating the logical flaws of such forms of biological and scientific racism—from Darwin’s idea of natural selection to recent discoveries with the human genome—Kendi advocates for a definition of race away from science. Even recent advancements in genetic technology involving race rely on past ideas arguing for the “genetic component to human social behavior” (53). These ideas are dangerous as they assign variations of value to different racial groups, associating deviant behavior with Black people and qualities of success with White people. It supposes the natural potential for certain racial groups to succeed over others without recognizing the socially informed ways in which different individuals might move through the world, regardless of race.
The Scientific racism described by Kendi reflects the ugly side of one of the most vaunted and influential eras of Western history: the Enlightenment. Although many modern public intellectuals like Steven Pinker, Jordan Peterson, and Jonah Goldberg continue to place the era on a pedestal as a model for 21st century economic, political, and scientific progress, writer Jamelle Bouie cautions against this. Writing at Slate, Bouie argues that any calls to “return to Enlightenment values” must reckon with the fact that “[r]ace as we understand it—a biological taxonomy that turns physical difference into relations of domination—is a product of the Enlightenment.” (Bouie, Jamelle. “The Enlightenment’s Dark Side.” Slate, 5 Jun. 2018, slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/taking-the-enlightenment-seriously-requires-talking-about-race.html.) In keeping with the consistent thread in Kendi’s book that race is a justification for racist policies, Enlightenment philosophers like Immanuel Kant promoted scientific, moral, and philosophical justifications for White supremacy in order to resolve the contradictions inherent in a political theory that prized “freedom” and “liberty” yet upheld slavery.
Just as biological and scientific racism fashions naturalized notions about race, racist policy has the power to further harmful ideas about Black communities. In Chapter 6, Kendi’s examination of the relationship with criminal law and the criminalization of Black bodies reveals how racist policies operate on the idea that Black people are inherently more prone to violence. To further contest these naturalized ideas about Black people as “super-predators” (80), Kendi offers a social and economic analysis suggesting there is a greater correlation between violence and economic status than there is between violence and race. However, racist policies that continue to target Black people for crimes merely reinforce this false correlation between violence and race. This is also true of the false correlation between drug use and race. According to The New Jim Crow author Michelle Alexander, the fact that people of color are disproportionately targeted by police and prosecutors for drug offenses gives the false impression that drug use is more common in Black communities than White communities, despite there being no evidence to suggest significant differences in drug use between the two. (Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow. The New Press, 2010.) For Kendi, the undoing of racist policies criminalizing Black people will target this persisting correlation between Black people and a tendency towards crime and violence.
By Ibram X. Kendi