COMMENTARY: (Anti?)-racists perplexed by diversity of Black, Brown thought

Not every white cowboy from Texas is a pro-gun conservative; not every undocumented immigrant in California is a pro-choice liberal. Yet there seems to be a growing assumption that people will think, act and vote based on their race and ethnicity, a sort of intellectual racism.

Antiracism, the practice of identifying and opposing racism, may need a mirror to identify and oppose racism.

There has been no shortage of self-proclaimed antiracists vilifying racial and ethnic minorities who didn’t “vote the way that minorities should,” as though minority status is contingent upon demographic diversity (the color of skin) but ideological uniformity (the content of character).

If antiracists inadvertently conflate the color of black and brown skin with the content of black and brown character, they risk propagating the very racism they seek to address, giving way to neo-racism.

There is a tendency within antiracist frameworks to homogenize the experiences and perspectives of Black and Brown people. This can lead to the expectation that Black and Brown people hold similar views on social, economic and political issues, which is not the case.

Such assumptions neglect the complex interplay of socioeconomic status, education, personal experiences and individual beliefs that influence one’s worldview.

Antiracism often reinforces the very concept of race as a primary aspect of individual identity. By constantly focusing on race — even positively, protectively or paternalistically — antiracism can inadvertently propagate racial divisions and encourage society to continue thinking in racial terms.

Many antiracist approaches generalize the experiences and attitudes of Black and Brown people based on their race, which can lead to stereotyping. This essentialism reduces the rich diversity within Black and Brown people to a singular, often simplified narrative, undermining the complex realities of individual lives and perpetuating a monolithic view of what it means to be Black or Brown.

Some forms of antiracism encourage reverse systemic oppression to address historical grievances, which can foster a sense of victimhood and resentment among racial groups. This focus can hinder individuals from different racial backgrounds from seeing each other as potential allies, instead reinforcing a combative stance that views racial relations through a lens of perpetual conflict and competition.

Black and Brown people may feel pressured to conform to the dominant narratives and ideologies endorsed by mainstream antiracist movements. This pressure can stifle free thinking and discourage Black and Brown people from expressing dissenting or alternative viewpoints for fear of being labeled as traitors or deniers of their racial identity.

When antiracism does not acknowledge the diversity of thought within Black and Brown communities, it can lead to the silencing of internal critique and debate. This silencing can occur socially and institutionally, where voices that diverge from the accepted narrative are excluded from discussions and representation.

Intersectional demographics do not predetermine voting patterns; someone’s race, gender and sexuality do not predetermine their values, ideas and actions. Identity politics may no longer be an effective tool as previously unexpected proportions of Black and Brown men and women, Hispanic men and women, Muslims, and Jewish people show increasing support toward a white man despite a racial and ethnic minority woman being on the presidential ballot. People are starting to care less about the demographic boxes a candidate or party checks and more about how a candidate or party aligns with their values, ideas and actions.

This shift seems to have self-proclaimed antiracists perplexed by the diversity of Black and Brown thought. However, rather than embracing this diversity, the response has been to devise intellectually racist strategies to bring Black and Brown minds back to the intellectual plantation of predictable uniformity, suggesting there is little room within antiracism for Black and Brown thought to deviate from antiracist prescriptions.

Antiracist policies often adopt an uncompromising stance on what constitutes acceptable speech and behavior. This can lead to the silencing of open discussion about race, where any deviation from the accepted antiracist perspective is quickly labeled as racist or supportive of racism.

Such an environment can stifle the nuanced dialogue necessary for genuine understanding and reconciliation, further polarizing society.

If we genuinely intend to be antiracists, we must first acknowledge the viewpoint diversity that exists within races. We cannot assume that one’s race predetermines one’s viewpoint. Otherwise, we would be racists, not antiracists. Antiracism risks devolving into neo-racism if it isn’t a tool to recognize the content of Black and Brown characters, not just the color of black and brown skin.

Nafees Alam is a professor in social work at Boise (Idaho) State University. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.