Shrewsbury 1

Chaunce M. Shrewsbury
Dr. Potter
Anthropology 1020
Aug 7 2015
Race: Past, Present, Future
Racism is an ugly thing. At its root it is the hate and/or feeling of superiority of and over
another person based on his or her characteristics such as skin color at least, this is the modern
definition. A sense of superiority, centrality or a belief in a universal supremacy has existed
between nations throughout history, however, racisms current definition, one based on an
individual's characteristics, is quite modern. Much of today's racism sprouted from the African
Slave trade in the 17th century. One Historian, C.L.R. James, a socialist historian of the Haitian
Revolution, explains this about the slave-labor driven economies of the classical-age empires,
"[H]istorically, it is pretty well proven now that the ancient Greeks and Romans knew nothing
about race. They had another standardcivilized and barbarianand you could have white skin
and be a barbarian and you could be black and civilized." (Selfa)
The slave trades during colonial times were primarily established to bring massive labor
to the fields of the colonies established by European nations during the 16th and 17th centuries.
Originally, slave labor was a mix of different races, the word slave originating from the white
Slavic slaves of the past. Throughout history it was commonplace to have slaves of your own
(what we define today) race. Slaves in past times were people in poverty or those whom had
committed crimes; indentured servitude was a more fitting word.
The English empire originally attempted to use the Irish as slaves and then the Native
American's in the New World colonies, but quickly found that they weren't easily controlled.

Shrewsbury 2
Africans on the other hand were far from home and had nowhere to go if they rebelled. What's
more, the chiefs there were willing sellers; however, Lance Selfa quotes Historian Basil
Davidson's argument about African chiefs complicity in the slave trade: In this, they were no
less immoral than the Europeans who had instigated the trade and bought the captives.(Selfa)
It wasn't until the 1700s that we see the first laws dictating only Africans/blacks as slaves
in the west. The dominant culture of racism (white vs. black/colored) and slavery based on skin
color began to flourish, particularly within the United States. In the latter part of the 18th century
with the ideas of freedom, equality, and revolution, a challenge to slavery was introduced. In
order to combat this with their slave businesses, slave owners began to make appeals to divine
law, arguing that blacks were inferior culturally and intellectually and that therefore, as a lesser
species than whites, were God ordained to be suitable for slavery and so Christians were required
to use them as such.
As the years went on scholarly research and academia would seek to defend this position.
Now famous early Natural History (later integrated into biology, anthropology and geography
etc) scientists such as Linneaus and Blumenbach backed this notion through their classification
of peoples based largely on skin color. Morton (later challenged directly by Franz Boaz), one of
the leading researchers contributing to the distinction of supposed intelligence gaps between
whites and blacks published findings of smaller brains within black populations. Audrey
Smedley, author for the Anthropology Newsletter in 1997 states that "When Dr. Samuel Morton
in the 1830s initiated the field of craniometry, the first school of American Anthropology,
proponents of race ideology received the most powerful scientific support yet."(Smedley) A
change in the culture and a true feeling of blacks being inferior was made evident in the
infamous Dred Scott Case of 1854. Smedley quotes part of Chief Justice Rodger B. Taney as

Shrewsbury 3
declaring, "the negro is a different order of being." Thus slave-owners' rights to their property
were upheld in law by appeal to the newly invented identity of peoples from Africa. (Smedley)
In the latter part of the 17th century, during the 18th century and after WWII, despite the
freeing of the African Slaves, scientific racism was rampant. Old publications such as George
Gliddon's Types of Mankind(1854) was in continuous publication, producing nine editions
before the beginning of the 20th century. Scientific racism during the early 20th century focused
on how to improve race through genetic manipulation; this gave rise to Eugenics, a practice
fathered by Sir Francis Galton. The practice of Eugenics led to much inhumane experimentation
and ultimately to Hitler's ideological extermination of the Jews. The world at first stood still
because the contemporary science legitimized his actions. Fortunately, man was able to come to
its senses in the end.
After World War II in 1950, UNESCO made a profound anti-racist statement in their
publication that, "The biological fact of race and the myth of 'race' should be distinguished. For
all practical social purposes 'race' is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social myth. The
myth of 'race' has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years, it
has taken a heavy toll in human lives, and caused untold suffering." (The Race Question 4)
In the beginning of the fields distinguishing moments, Anthropology suffered at the
hands of much racist influence. It seemingly sought to bring credence to this mainstream idea in
hopes of bringing credibility to the field in its infancy. It has survived the long strife by the
amazing contributions of Franz Boaz whom denounced the scientific racism of his age and
discovered the influences that the environment has on us from generation to generation. We can
also thank Ashley Montagu whom argued against the use of the term "race" in science back in
the 1940s and we can thank the leading conversations of philosophers and cultural anthropology

Shrewsbury 4
sympathizers such as Jim Flynn, author of the Flynn Effect and a large contributor in closing
science's last taboo, race based intelligence, by bringing to light the socio-economic and cultural
implications of IQ scores.
Biologically, race has been concluded consensually by scientists as non-existent and that
the differences we see characteristically are regionally influenced and nothing more. We are one
race. Thousands of years of isolated exposure and micro-evolution to different environments
have led to the physical differences that we see today. Anatomically, human beings have been
the same with little difference between populations for the last two hundred thousand years. One
of the main contributing factors of racism, skin color, can now be deduced, based on genetic
evidence that light skin in Europe may have developed as early as seven thousand years ago.
(Ghose) This sets the development of light skin thousands of years earlier than previously
thought and more related to agriculture than UV rays than we previously understood. The
193,000 years before that were dominated by a "black" people.
Human beings across the board are 99.9% genetically identical. And, it is probably worth
mentioning that most anthropologists agree today that our oldest ancestors come from Africa,
meaning that we all likely started out black. This isn't to say that we shouldn't recognize what
makes us unique; however, there is no genetic or biological basis for making one less than the
other, specifically based on physical characteristics.
Although in its infancy it argued for racism, arguments made by Anthropologists in the
40s, 50s and ongoing contributed heavily to the Civil Rights movements of the 60s and early 70s
and rightfully so. Since then, we have seen dramatic changes in the racial atmosphere towards a
more egalitarian ideal. Even so, much has been written about the continuous tensions and issues
between "races" in the United States.

Shrewsbury 5
The CRRA(Commission on Race and Racism in Anthropology) released a ten page
report in 2012 detailing some of the issues within racism still prevalent today. Their primary
discussion on racism centers on the cultural aspect, making assertions that racism isn't something
that needs to be taught, but is still taught subliminally through our culture. They point to methods
that cause this such as television and other forms of media; they associate implicit racism and
microagressions to racism that we gain indirectly. They assert that microaggressions include
simple things such as the exclusion of African involvement being mentioned in historical
publications or documentaries when they played a key role. (Racism in the Academy: a New
Millenium)
One area that the CCRA commented on without making a clear stance are people's
feelings towards federal affirmative actions. They make mention of a gentleman who was ruled
as being discriminated against by the California State Court due to losing a job opportunity
despite being the best man for the job, but because of the federal requirements under affirmative
actions, a minority was hired despite less experience and lower test scores. (Racism in the
Academy: a New Millenium.)
I understand the need for non-discrimination laws, but I do agree with those whom assert
that affirmative action can lead to reverse discrimination. One of the most powerful things that
we can do to combat the social aspect of racism is to stop talking about it. This isn't to say stop
recognizing it, but to stop encouraging it by segregating people in our actions no matter how
generous their intentions are.
Morgan Freeman in an interview with 60 minutes makes a wonderful comment about the
lack of need for a Black History Month. Why do we need one? It's a vehicle for segregation. This
idea goes back to the subliminal cultural message. Black History Month, Native American Based

Shrewsbury 6
Colleges, Black Colleges, Grants granted by the Federal Government on the basis of being a
minority alone need to stop. These types of dealings segregate us. Equal opportunities should be
available for all. Financial aid should be the same for everyone, based on the same qualifications.
Privileges shouldn't be awarded for the sake of being listed as a minority or ones cultural past.
This segregates us further and drives racism. Let's stop addressing people as colored, minoral,
mixed, or any number of segregated terms such as an "African American woman", etc. and start
to use terms like people/person, men, woman and/or American. This will go a long way to end
racism within the subliminally segregated mindset.