How a turn to critical race theory can contribute to our understanding of 'race', racism and anti-racism in sport

As long as racism has been associated with sport there have been consistent, if not coordinated or coherent, struggles to confront its various forms. Critical race theory (CRT) is a framework established to challenge these racialized inequalities and racism in society and has some utility for anti-racism in sport. CRT's focus on social justice and transformation are two areas of convergence between critical race theorists and anti-racists. Of the many nuanced and pernicious forms of racism, one of the most obvious and commonly reported forms of racism in sport, racial abuse, has been described as a kind of dehumanizing process by Gardiner (2003), as those who are its target are simultaneously (re)constructed and objectified according to everyday myth and fantasy. However, this is one of the many forms of everyday racist experiences. Various forms of racism can be experienced in boardrooms, on television, in print, in the stands, on the sidelines and on the pitch. Many times racism is trivialized and put down as part of the game (Long et al., 2000), yet its impact is rarely the source of further exploration. This article will explore the conceptualization of 'race' and racism for a more effective anti-racism. Critical race theory will also be used to explore the ideas that underpin considerations of the severity of racist behaviour and the implications for anti-racism. © The Author(s) 2010

The Abandoned Promise of Civil Rights

Fifty years after the civil rights movement, ethnic and racial disparities persist and have even widened across a number of socioeconomic indicators. When compared against whites, nonwhites today fare about the same or worse than their counterparts of the past in educational and occupational attainment, income and earnings, wealth, unemployment and underemployment. How can we understand the failure of racial and ethnic minority groups to attain socioeconomic parity with non-Hispanic whites following one of the most progressive eras of American race relations? Contemporary economic and political approaches are often considered separately and offer different explanations. What they share in common, however, is a tendency to downplay the salience of race as a significant factor that conditions the life chances of nonwhites in the post-civil rights era. This article introduces a critical race perspective to redirect this conversation. This approach starts from the premise that the social structure of the United States is highly stratified by race, which conditions racially unequal outcomes. In the post-civil rights era, color-blind racism is the hegemonic ideology, discourse, and practice, which justifies persistent racial inequality. The development of a color-blind ideology reflects this historical moment and the larger political and economic context; thus, its development is consistent with the political shift toward neoconservatism and the economic transition to neoliberalism. Taken together, these social forces foster the reproduction of a racialized social system characterized by persistent racial inequality that is observed in the post-civil rights era

Challenging a culture of racial equivalence

We live at a time when our understandings and conceptualizations of ‘racism’ are often highly imprecise, broad, and used to describe a wide range of racialized phenomena. In this article, I raise some important questions about how the term racism is used and understood in contemporary British society by drawing on some recent cases of alleged racism in football and politics, many of which have been played out via new media technologies. A broader understanding of racism, through the use of the term ‘racialization’, has been helpful in articulating a more nuanced and complex understanding of racial incidents, especially of people’s (often ambivalent) beliefs and behaviours. However, the growing emphasis upon ‘racialization’ has led to a conceptualization of racism which increasingly involves multiple perpetrators, victims, and practices without enough consideration of how and why particular interactions and practices constitute racism as such.The trend toward a growing culture of racial equivalence is worrying, as it denudes the idea of racism of its historical basis, severity and power.These frequent and commonplace assertions of racism in the public sphere paradoxically end up trivializing and homogenizing quite different forms of racialized interactions. I conclude that we need to retain the term ‘racism’, but we need to differentiate more clearly between ‘racism’ (as an historical and structured system of domination) from the broader notion of ‘racialization’

Broker Fixed: The Racialized Social Structure and the Subjugation of Indigenous Populations in the Andes

Responding to calls to return racial analysis to indigenous Latin America, this article moves beyond the prejudicial attitudes of dominant groups to specify how native subordination gets perpetuated as a normal outcome of the organization of society. I argue that a naturalized system of indirect rule racially subordinates native populations through creating the position of mestizo “authoritarian intermediary.” Natives must depend on these cultural brokers for their personhood, while maintaining this privileged position requires facilitating indigenous exploitation. Institutional structures combine with cultural practices to generate a vicious cycle in which increased village intermediary success increases native marginalization. This racialized social structure explains my ethnographic findings that indigenous villagers continued to support the same coterie of mestizos despite their regular and sometimes extreme acts of peculation. My findings about the primacy of race suggest new directions for research into indigenous studies, ethnic mobilizations, and the global dimensions of racial domination

Racialized Architectural Space: A Critical Understanding of its Production, Perception and Evaluation

Academic inquiry into the concept of space as racialized can be traced back to at least as far as the turn of the twentieth century with sociologist W. E. B. Dubois’ promulgation of the “color-line” theory. More recently, numerous postmodern scholars from a variety of fields have elucidated the various ways in which physical space (i.e., the built environment), as a social product, embodies racialized ideologies exhibited and reproduced by segregation, economics and other social practices. The dialogue on race and space has primarily been limited to the urban scales of city, neighborhood, community and street. Socio-spatial research that centers around race rarely addresses this phenomenon at the scale of architecture – the individual building or a particular development. Such a failure to critically examine the role of the architectural product in the creation and reproduction of socio-spatial and socio-racial inequality yields the field of architectural practice exempt and blameless in its tangible contribution to the psychosocial and geospatial marginalization of communities of color, as in, for example, the case of gentrification. This paper attempts to illustrate the fact that architecture, like all of the built physical environment, is not ahistorical, apolitical – and certainly not race neutral – but, as a social product, is also understood clearly within these contexts, and its psychological and social impacts and outcomes must be examined with a racially critical lens, particularly in heterogeneous urban communities

Technological elites, the meritocracy, and postracial myths in Silicon Valley

Entre as modernas elites tecnológicas digitais, os mitos da meritocracia e da façanha intelectual são usados como marcadores de raça e gênero por uma supremacia branca masculina que consolida recursos de forma desproporcional em relação a pessoas não brancas, principalmente negros, latinos e indígenas. Os investimentos em mitos meritocráticos suprimem os questionamentos de racismo e discriminação, mesmo quando os produtos das elites digitais são infundidos com marcadores de raça, classe e gênero. As lutas históricas por inclusão social, política e econômica de negros, mulheres e outras classes desprotegidas têm implicado no reconhecimento da exclusão sistêmica, do trabalho forçado e da privação de direitos estruturais, além de compromissos com políticas públicas dos EUA, como as ações afirmativas, que foram igualmente fundamentais para reformas políticas voltadas para participação e oportunidades econômicas. A ascensão da tecnocracia digital tem sido, em muitos aspectos, antitética a esses esforços no sentido de reconhecer raça e gênero como fatores cruciais para inclusão e oportunidades tecnocráticas. Este artigo explora algumas das formas pelas quais os discursos das elites tecnocráticas do Vale do Silício reforçam os investimentos no pós racialismo como um pretexto para a re-consolidação do capital em oposição às políticas públicas que prometem acabar com práticas discriminatórias no mundo do trabalho. Por meio de uma análise cuidadosa do surgimento de empresas de tecnologias digitais e de uma discussão sobre como as elites tecnológicas trabalham para mascarar tudo, como inscrições algorítmicas e genéticas de raça incorporadas em seus produtos, mostramos como as elites digitais omitem a sua responsabilidade por suas reinscrições pós raciais de (in)visibilidades raciais. A partir do uso de análise histórica e crítica do discurso, o artigo revela como os mitos de uma meritocracia digital baseados em um “daltonismo racial” tecnocrático emergem como chave para a manutenção de exclusões de gênero e raça.Palavras-chave: Tecnologia. Raça. Gênero.Among modern digital technology elites, myths of meritocracy and intellectual prowess are used as racial and gender markers of white male supremacy that disproportionately consolidate resources away from people of color, particularly African Americans, Latino/as and Native Americans. Investments in meritocratic myths suppress interrogations of racism and discrimination even as the products of digital elites are infused with racial, class, and gender markers. Longstanding struggles for social, political, and economic inclusion for African Americans, women, and other legally protected classes have been predicated upon the recognition of systemic exclusion, forced labor, and structural disenfranchisement, and commitments to US public policies like affirmative action have, likewise, been fundamental to political reforms geared to economic opportunity and participation. The rise of the digital technocracy has, in many ways, been antithetical to these sustained efforts to recognize race and gender as salient factors structuring technocratic opportunity and inclusion. This paper explores some of the ways in which discourses of Silicon Valley technocratic elites bolster investments in post-racialism as a pretext for re-consolidations of capital, in opposition to public policy commitments to end discriminatory labor practices. Through a careful analysis of the rise of digital technology companies, and a discussion of how technology elites work to mask everything from algorithmic to genetic inscriptions of race embedded in their products, we show how digital elites elide responsibility for their post-racial re-inscriptions of racial visibilities (and invisibilities). Using historical and critical discourse analysis, the paper reveals how myths of a digital meritocracy premised on a technocratic colorblindness emerge key to perpetuating gender and racial exclusions.Keywords: Technology. Race. Gender

Blinded by Sight: The Racial Body and the Origins of the Social Construction of Race

Osagie K. Obasogie's Blinded by Sight: Seeing Race through the Eyes of the Blind (2014) makes important contributions to both to the sociology of law and to critical race studies. The book challenges “colorblind” racial ideology by showing empirically that people who are blind from birth nevertheless “see” race, grasping it as a nearly omnipresent feature of social interaction and social organization. These insights, however, do not diminish the importance of the racial body. Beyond refuting colorblindness, Obasogie's book points to a neverending tension, embedded in what we call racial formation, between the social construction of race and the corporeality of race. This tension has been present since the dawn of empire and African slavery. Obasogie's achievement of falsifying colorblindness should not lead us to neglect the importance of the racial body

Blinded by Sight: The Racial Body and the Origins of the Social Construction of Race

Osagie K. Obasogie's Blinded by Sight: Seeing Race through the Eyes of the Blind (2014) makes important contributions to both to the sociology of law and to critical race studies. The book challenges “colorblind” racial ideology by showing empirically that people who are blind from birth nevertheless “see” race, grasping it as a nearly omnipresent feature of social interaction and social organization. These insights, however, do not diminish the importance of the racial body. Beyond refuting colorblindness, Obasogie's book points to a neverending tension, embedded in what we call racial formation, between the social construction of race and the corporeality of race. This tension has been present since the dawn of empire and African slavery. Obasogie's achievement of falsifying colorblindness should not lead us to neglect the importance of the racial body