W ostatecznym
rozrachunku musimy się odseparować od czarnych i innych nie-białych, i trzymać
się na osobności, niezależnie od tego, czego to będzie od nas wymagać. Musimy
to zrobić nie dlatego, że nienawidzimy czarnych, lecz dlatego, że nie będziemy
mogli przeżyć, jeśli pozostaniemy z nimi zmieszani. I nie będziemy mogli
przeżyć, jeśli pozwolimy Żydom i innym zdrajcom pozostać wśród nas i powtarzać
akty zdrady. W końcu
musimy ich dopaść i pozbyć się ich. (William Pierce)
White Supremacy
Als White Supremacy [waɪt səˈprɛməsi] (englisch für „weiße Vorherrschaft“, „Überlegenheit der Weißen“) werden im englischsprachigen Raum diejenigen rassistischen Ideologien bezeichnet, die auf der Annahme beruhen, dass Weiße anderen menschlichen „Rassen“ prinzipiell überlegen seien und dass diese Überlegenheit faktisch verteidigt werden müsse. Der Ausdruck dient als Sammelbezeichnung für eine Vielzahl rassistischer ideologischer Systeme, darunter auch die Nationalsozialistische Rassenlehre und die Rassenideologie im südafrikanischen Apartheids-Regime. Darüber hinaus schließt der Begriff „White Supremacy“ auch solche Ideologien ein, die in englischsprachigen Ländern wie den Vereinigten Staaten verbreitet waren bzw. noch heute verbreitet sind, z. B. die Alt-Right-Bewegung. Viele amerikanische Historiker und Politologen bevorzugen den Ausdruck „White Supremacy“ gegenüber dem weniger präzisen Ausdruck „Rassismus“, weil er erstens explizit benennt, von welcher Personengruppe diese Ideologien ausgehen, und weil er zweitens klar herausstellt, dass es dabei um Macht und Herrschaft geht und nicht nur um etwas so Vages wie etwa Einstellungen oder Vorurteile.[1] Das Pendant hierzu ist die Black Supremacy.
Als White Supremacy [waɪt səˈprɛməsi] (englisch für „weiße Vorherrschaft“, „Überlegenheit der Weißen“) werden im englischsprachigen Raum diejenigen rassistischen Ideologien bezeichnet, die auf der Annahme beruhen, dass Weiße anderen menschlichen „Rassen“ prinzipiell überlegen seien und dass diese Überlegenheit faktisch verteidigt werden müsse. Der Ausdruck dient als Sammelbezeichnung für eine Vielzahl rassistischer ideologischer Systeme, darunter auch die Nationalsozialistische Rassenlehre und die Rassenideologie im südafrikanischen Apartheids-Regime. Darüber hinaus schließt der Begriff „White Supremacy“ auch solche Ideologien ein, die in englischsprachigen Ländern wie den Vereinigten Staaten verbreitet waren bzw. noch heute verbreitet sind, z. B. die Alt-Right-Bewegung. Viele amerikanische Historiker und Politologen bevorzugen den Ausdruck „White Supremacy“ gegenüber dem weniger präzisen Ausdruck „Rassismus“, weil er erstens explizit benennt, von welcher Personengruppe diese Ideologien ausgehen, und weil er zweitens klar herausstellt, dass es dabei um Macht und Herrschaft geht und nicht nur um etwas so Vages wie etwa Einstellungen oder Vorurteile.[1] Das Pendant hierzu ist die Black Supremacy.
Postkoloniale Theorie[Bearbeiten | Quelltext bearbeiten]
Die in dem Rahmen der postkolonialen Theorien entstandenen Critical Whiteness Studies (kritische Weißseinsforschung) bezeichnen nicht nur explizite Normsetzungen von Weiß-Sein ... im Kontext von Kolonialismus, Rechtsextremismus und Apartheid als Form der Machtausübung und Herrschaft, sondern richten die Aufmerksamkeit mit dem Begriff White Supremacy (bell hooks[2]) auch auf das Phänomen, dass die in von Weißen dominierten Gesellschaften gebildete Normen nicht nur als überlegen angesehen werden, sondern auch als „neutral“ und „normal“ verallgemeinert und objektiviert werden.[3] Gleichzeitig entziehen sie sich damit der kritischen Reflexion. White Supremacy maskiere[4] demnach auch die „eigenen“ weißen Privilegien und machten diese für weiße Positionen unsichtbar.[5] Während einerseits „White Supremacy“ einen mythischen Charakter bekomme und die Machtverhältnisse verschleiert würden, bleiben die Auswirkungen der Normierung Weißsein in den Erfahrungen und Vorstellungen derjenigen, die nicht in der Kategorie weiß wahrgenommen werden, eine Gewaltstruktur, die bis hin zum „Terror“ reiche.[6] So zeige sich die White Supremacy auch an den Universitäten, an denen die weiße Norm bestimmt, wer etwas zu sagen hat, also „Wissen“ definiert und im Zentrum des Diskurses steht, und wessen „Wissen“ nicht als „objektiv“ wahrgenommen wird, sondern als „Erfahrung“.[7]
Die in dem Rahmen der postkolonialen Theorien entstandenen Critical Whiteness Studies (kritische Weißseinsforschung) bezeichnen nicht nur explizite Normsetzungen von Weiß-Sein ... im Kontext von Kolonialismus, Rechtsextremismus und Apartheid als Form der Machtausübung und Herrschaft, sondern richten die Aufmerksamkeit mit dem Begriff White Supremacy (bell hooks[2]) auch auf das Phänomen, dass die in von Weißen dominierten Gesellschaften gebildete Normen nicht nur als überlegen angesehen werden, sondern auch als „neutral“ und „normal“ verallgemeinert und objektiviert werden.[3] Gleichzeitig entziehen sie sich damit der kritischen Reflexion. White Supremacy maskiere[4] demnach auch die „eigenen“ weißen Privilegien und machten diese für weiße Positionen unsichtbar.[5] Während einerseits „White Supremacy“ einen mythischen Charakter bekomme und die Machtverhältnisse verschleiert würden, bleiben die Auswirkungen der Normierung Weißsein in den Erfahrungen und Vorstellungen derjenigen, die nicht in der Kategorie weiß wahrgenommen werden, eine Gewaltstruktur, die bis hin zum „Terror“ reiche.[6] So zeige sich die White Supremacy auch an den Universitäten, an denen die weiße Norm bestimmt, wer etwas zu sagen hat, also „Wissen“ definiert und im Zentrum des Diskurses steht, und wessen „Wissen“ nicht als „objektiv“ wahrgenommen wird, sondern als „Erfahrung“.[7]
White Supremacy in den Vereinigten Staaten[Bearbeiten | Quelltext bearbeiten]
Während der Sklaverei[Bearbeiten | Quelltext bearbeiten]
Die Ursprünge der White-Supremacy-Ideologie in den Vereinigten Staaten liegen in der Sklaverei der Kolonialzeit. Während die Pflanzer eine auf der Arbeitskraft afroamerikanischer Sklaven basierende Plantagenökonomie errichteten, durch die sie wohlhabend und politisch mächtig wurden, förderten sie ein rassistisches Gedankensystem, das ihre Macht auch ideologisch rechtfertigte. Wie der amerikanische Historiker Ira Berlin beschrieben hat, definierte dieses ideologische System in seiner Hochblüte nicht nur das Verhältnis zwischen Schwarzen und Weißen, sondern führte die menschlichen Beziehungen generell auf ein Herrschafts-Unterwerfungs-Verhältnis zurück, etwa auch die Beziehung zwischen Eltern und Kindern, Männern und Frauen, Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern.[8]
Die Pflanzer betrachteten sich nicht nur als Herren ihrer Sklaven und Bediensteten, sondern entwickelten die Ideologie einer paternalistischen Gesellschaft, in deren alle sozialen Beziehungen durch Differenz und Autorität definiert, und in der sie selbst die Beweger aller Dinge waren. Ihren Anspruch auf bedingungslosen Gehorsam leiteten sie daraus ab, dass sie sich als wohlwollende Patres familias verstanden, die an ihrer erweiterten „Familie“, zu der sie auch ihre Sklaven zählten, väterlichen Anteil nahmen, ihnen monatliche „Rationen“ zuwiesen und zu Weihnachten Geschenke machten. Die Plantage erschien in dieser Konstruktion als ein kollektives Unternehmen, in dem Herr und Sklaven zum beiderseitigen Vorteil miteinander verbunden waren.[9]
Dabei hielt die Begrifflichkeit der Familie erst allmählich Einzug in die Ideologie der Sklavenhalter. In der frühen Kolonialzeit empfanden die Pflanzer ihre Sklaven nämlich noch keineswegs als ihre „Kinder“, sondern als unverzichtbare, aber schwierige Arbeitskräfte, die sich ihnen jederzeit zu widersetzen drohten. Erst im Verlaufe der nächsten 200 Jahre entstand das Stereotyp des ewig unreifen, ewig heranwachsenden Sklaven, dessen Kindheit bis ins Alter hinein reichte. Ihre Vollform und ihre größte Bedeutung erreichte diese Ideologie Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts, als die Institution der Sklaverei von innen heraus brüchig zu werden begann und von außen durch den Abolitionismus bedroht war.[9]
Mit der Realität der Plantagen hatte diese Ideologie meist nichts zu tun. Dort wurde die Disziplin weiterhin mit der Peitsche durchgesetzt. Auch die Sklaven ließen niemals nach, sich dem Arbeitsregime zu widersetzen, sich krankzustellen, die Arbeit zu sabotieren, Werkzeug zu zerstören, Arbeitstiere zu verletzen oder zu fliehen. Oftmals diente diese Ideologie auch dazu, dass die Pflanzer sich in die Angelegenheiten ihrer Sklaven bis in die intimsten Bereiche hinein einmischten und mit dem Anspruch, deren Lebensbedingungen zu verbessern, versuchten, die Wohnverhältnisse, die Ernährung, die Lebensweise, die familiären Beziehungen und das religiöse Leben ihrer Sklaven zu kontrollieren.[10]
Die Ursprünge der White-Supremacy-Ideologie in den Vereinigten Staaten liegen in der Sklaverei der Kolonialzeit. Während die Pflanzer eine auf der Arbeitskraft afroamerikanischer Sklaven basierende Plantagenökonomie errichteten, durch die sie wohlhabend und politisch mächtig wurden, förderten sie ein rassistisches Gedankensystem, das ihre Macht auch ideologisch rechtfertigte. Wie der amerikanische Historiker Ira Berlin beschrieben hat, definierte dieses ideologische System in seiner Hochblüte nicht nur das Verhältnis zwischen Schwarzen und Weißen, sondern führte die menschlichen Beziehungen generell auf ein Herrschafts-Unterwerfungs-Verhältnis zurück, etwa auch die Beziehung zwischen Eltern und Kindern, Männern und Frauen, Arbeitgebern und Arbeitnehmern.[8]
Die Pflanzer betrachteten sich nicht nur als Herren ihrer Sklaven und Bediensteten, sondern entwickelten die Ideologie einer paternalistischen Gesellschaft, in deren alle sozialen Beziehungen durch Differenz und Autorität definiert, und in der sie selbst die Beweger aller Dinge waren. Ihren Anspruch auf bedingungslosen Gehorsam leiteten sie daraus ab, dass sie sich als wohlwollende Patres familias verstanden, die an ihrer erweiterten „Familie“, zu der sie auch ihre Sklaven zählten, väterlichen Anteil nahmen, ihnen monatliche „Rationen“ zuwiesen und zu Weihnachten Geschenke machten. Die Plantage erschien in dieser Konstruktion als ein kollektives Unternehmen, in dem Herr und Sklaven zum beiderseitigen Vorteil miteinander verbunden waren.[9]
Dabei hielt die Begrifflichkeit der Familie erst allmählich Einzug in die Ideologie der Sklavenhalter. In der frühen Kolonialzeit empfanden die Pflanzer ihre Sklaven nämlich noch keineswegs als ihre „Kinder“, sondern als unverzichtbare, aber schwierige Arbeitskräfte, die sich ihnen jederzeit zu widersetzen drohten. Erst im Verlaufe der nächsten 200 Jahre entstand das Stereotyp des ewig unreifen, ewig heranwachsenden Sklaven, dessen Kindheit bis ins Alter hinein reichte. Ihre Vollform und ihre größte Bedeutung erreichte diese Ideologie Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts, als die Institution der Sklaverei von innen heraus brüchig zu werden begann und von außen durch den Abolitionismus bedroht war.[9]
Mit der Realität der Plantagen hatte diese Ideologie meist nichts zu tun. Dort wurde die Disziplin weiterhin mit der Peitsche durchgesetzt. Auch die Sklaven ließen niemals nach, sich dem Arbeitsregime zu widersetzen, sich krankzustellen, die Arbeit zu sabotieren, Werkzeug zu zerstören, Arbeitstiere zu verletzen oder zu fliehen. Oftmals diente diese Ideologie auch dazu, dass die Pflanzer sich in die Angelegenheiten ihrer Sklaven bis in die intimsten Bereiche hinein einmischten und mit dem Anspruch, deren Lebensbedingungen zu verbessern, versuchten, die Wohnverhältnisse, die Ernährung, die Lebensweise, die familiären Beziehungen und das religiöse Leben ihrer Sklaven zu kontrollieren.[10]
Nach der Abschaffung der Sklaverei[Bearbeiten | Quelltext bearbeiten]
Noch im selben Jahr, in dem die Sklaverei endgültig abgeschafft wurde (1865), entstand auch der Ku-Klux-Klan, der eine Gleichstellung der nunmehr freien Afroamerikaner mit den Mitteln des Terrors zu verhindern suchte und sich für eine Rassentrennung einsetzte.[11]
Enge Beziehungen zur White-Supremacy-Ideologie bestehen auch in manchen kleinen amerikanischen Glaubensgemeinschaften, besonders in der Christian-Identity-Bewegung, die die angelsächsische bzw. nordische „Rasse“ als „Gottes auserwähltes Volk“ betrachtet und deren Mitglieder seit 1984 mehrfach durch rassistische und antisemitische Gewaltakte in Erscheinung getreten sind.[12] Das 1973 gegründete Creativity Movement fordert eine „weiße Religion“ und die Ausweisung aller Andersfarbigen aus den USA.[13] Obwohl die Ásatrúar („Odinisten“) die White-Supremacy-Ideologie mehrheitlich verwerfen, bekennt sich ein kleiner Teil der White Supremacists auch zu dieser neuheidnischen Religion.[14]
Eine der ältesten White-Supremacy-Organisationen in den Vereinigten Staaten ist der Pioneer Fund, der am 11. März 1937 von Wickcliffe Preston Draper gegründet wurde. Draper war der Auffassung, dass Schwarze anderen „Rassen“ genetisch unterlegen seien, und forderte, dass Afro-Amerikaner nach Afrika ausgesiedelt werden.[15] Der erste Präsident des Pioneer Fund war Harry Laughlin, Autor des Buches Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (dt. „Eugenische Sterilisation in den Vereinigten Staaten“). Laughlin sowie der zweite Präsident der Organisation, Frederick Osborn, waren in die Eugenikprogramme der Nationalsozialisten in den späten 1930er Jahren verstrickt.[15] Von 1958 bis 2002 war Drapers Anwalt, Harry F. Weyer, Präsident des Pioneer Fund, 2002 übernahm John Philippe Rushton diese Position. Eine wichtige Aufgabe des Pioneer Fund besteht in der Finanzierung von Forschung, die weiße Vorherrschaft stützen soll. Beispielsweise investierte der Pioneer Fund 3,5 Mio. $ in die Forschung von Charles Murray und Richard Herrnstein, die in ihrem Buch The Bell Curve die Behauptung aufstellten, dass Schwarze im Vergleich zu Weißen über eine minderwertige Intelligenz verfügten. William Bradford Shockley, der der Ansicht war, dass Schwarze genetisch bedingt weniger intelligent seien als Weiße, erhielt finanzielle Mittel in Höhe von mindestens 170.000 $ für seine Forschung. Darüber hinaus wurde auch Rushton selbst finanziell bei seiner Forschung über die intellektuellen Fähigkeiten verschiedener „Rassen“ unterstützt.[15]Der Pioneer Fund war nach Angaben des Southern Poverty Law Center 2013 noch aktiv.[16]
Der Gründer der American Nazi Party, George Lincoln Rockwell, schuf in den 1960er Jahren in Anlehnung an den schwarzen Kampfbegriff Black Power das Schlagwort „White Power“, das in der amerikanischen Neonazi- und Skinhead-Szene bis heute verbreitet ist.
Bereits vor seiner Wahl zum US-Präsidenten versuchten offenbar mehrere Rassisten, Barack Obama umzubringen.[17] Aus diesem Grund waren die Sicherheitsvorkehrungen für den damaligen Junior Senator aus Illinois so hoch wie bei keinem anderen Kandidaten bisher.
Noch im selben Jahr, in dem die Sklaverei endgültig abgeschafft wurde (1865), entstand auch der Ku-Klux-Klan, der eine Gleichstellung der nunmehr freien Afroamerikaner mit den Mitteln des Terrors zu verhindern suchte und sich für eine Rassentrennung einsetzte.[11]
Enge Beziehungen zur White-Supremacy-Ideologie bestehen auch in manchen kleinen amerikanischen Glaubensgemeinschaften, besonders in der Christian-Identity-Bewegung, die die angelsächsische bzw. nordische „Rasse“ als „Gottes auserwähltes Volk“ betrachtet und deren Mitglieder seit 1984 mehrfach durch rassistische und antisemitische Gewaltakte in Erscheinung getreten sind.[12] Das 1973 gegründete Creativity Movement fordert eine „weiße Religion“ und die Ausweisung aller Andersfarbigen aus den USA.[13] Obwohl die Ásatrúar („Odinisten“) die White-Supremacy-Ideologie mehrheitlich verwerfen, bekennt sich ein kleiner Teil der White Supremacists auch zu dieser neuheidnischen Religion.[14]
Eine der ältesten White-Supremacy-Organisationen in den Vereinigten Staaten ist der Pioneer Fund, der am 11. März 1937 von Wickcliffe Preston Draper gegründet wurde. Draper war der Auffassung, dass Schwarze anderen „Rassen“ genetisch unterlegen seien, und forderte, dass Afro-Amerikaner nach Afrika ausgesiedelt werden.[15] Der erste Präsident des Pioneer Fund war Harry Laughlin, Autor des Buches Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (dt. „Eugenische Sterilisation in den Vereinigten Staaten“). Laughlin sowie der zweite Präsident der Organisation, Frederick Osborn, waren in die Eugenikprogramme der Nationalsozialisten in den späten 1930er Jahren verstrickt.[15] Von 1958 bis 2002 war Drapers Anwalt, Harry F. Weyer, Präsident des Pioneer Fund, 2002 übernahm John Philippe Rushton diese Position. Eine wichtige Aufgabe des Pioneer Fund besteht in der Finanzierung von Forschung, die weiße Vorherrschaft stützen soll. Beispielsweise investierte der Pioneer Fund 3,5 Mio. $ in die Forschung von Charles Murray und Richard Herrnstein, die in ihrem Buch The Bell Curve die Behauptung aufstellten, dass Schwarze im Vergleich zu Weißen über eine minderwertige Intelligenz verfügten. William Bradford Shockley, der der Ansicht war, dass Schwarze genetisch bedingt weniger intelligent seien als Weiße, erhielt finanzielle Mittel in Höhe von mindestens 170.000 $ für seine Forschung. Darüber hinaus wurde auch Rushton selbst finanziell bei seiner Forschung über die intellektuellen Fähigkeiten verschiedener „Rassen“ unterstützt.[15]Der Pioneer Fund war nach Angaben des Southern Poverty Law Center 2013 noch aktiv.[16]
Der Gründer der American Nazi Party, George Lincoln Rockwell, schuf in den 1960er Jahren in Anlehnung an den schwarzen Kampfbegriff Black Power das Schlagwort „White Power“, das in der amerikanischen Neonazi- und Skinhead-Szene bis heute verbreitet ist.
Bereits vor seiner Wahl zum US-Präsidenten versuchten offenbar mehrere Rassisten, Barack Obama umzubringen.[17] Aus diesem Grund waren die Sicherheitsvorkehrungen für den damaligen Junior Senator aus Illinois so hoch wie bei keinem anderen Kandidaten bisher.
White supremacy
Part of a series on Discrimination
Specific forms
Discrimination portal
White supremacy or white supremacism is a racist ideology based upon the belief that white people are superior in many ways to people of other races and that therefore white people should be dominant over other races. White supremacy has roots in scientific racism and it often relies on pseudoscientific arguments. Like most similar movements such as neo-Nazism, white supremacists typically oppose people of color as well as people of most religions.
The term is also typically used to describe a political ideology that perpetuates and maintains the social, political, historicalor institutional domination by white people (as evidenced by historical and contemporary sociopolitical structures such as the Atlantic slave trade, Jim Crow laws in the United States, and apartheid in South Africa).[1] Different forms of white supremacism put forth different conceptions of who is considered white, and different white supremacists identify various racial and cultural groups as their primary enemy.[2]
In academic usage, particularly in usage drawing on critical race theory, the term "white supremacy" can also refer to a political or socio-economic system where white people enjoy a structural advantage (privilege) over other ethnic groups, both at a collective and an individual
| Part of a series on |
| Discrimination |
|---|
| Specific forms |
 Discrimination portal |
White supremacy or white supremacism is a racist ideology based upon the belief that white people are superior in many ways to people of other races and that therefore white people should be dominant over other races. White supremacy has roots in scientific racism and it often relies on pseudoscientific arguments. Like most similar movements such as neo-Nazism, white supremacists typically oppose people of color as well as people of most religions.
The term is also typically used to describe a political ideology that perpetuates and maintains the social, political, historicalor institutional domination by white people (as evidenced by historical and contemporary sociopolitical structures such as the Atlantic slave trade, Jim Crow laws in the United States, and apartheid in South Africa).[1] Different forms of white supremacism put forth different conceptions of who is considered white, and different white supremacists identify various racial and cultural groups as their primary enemy.[2]
In academic usage, particularly in usage drawing on critical race theory, the term "white supremacy" can also refer to a political or socio-economic system where white people enjoy a structural advantage (privilege) over other ethnic groups, both at a collective and an individual
History of white supremacy
White supremacy has ideological foundations that at least date back to 17th-century scientific racism, the predominant paradigm of human variation that helped shape international and intra-national relations from the latter part of the Age of Enlightenment (in European history) through the era of the White Man's Burden until the late 20th century (marked by decolonization and the abolition of apartheid in South Africa in 1991, followed by that country's first multiracial elections in 1994).
White supremacy has ideological foundations that at least date back to 17th-century scientific racism, the predominant paradigm of human variation that helped shape international and intra-national relations from the latter part of the Age of Enlightenment (in European history) through the era of the White Man's Burden until the late 20th century (marked by decolonization and the abolition of apartheid in South Africa in 1991, followed by that country's first multiracial elections in 1994).
United States
White supremacy was dominant in the United States even after the American Civil War and it also persisted for decades after the Reconstruction Era.[3] In large areas of the U.S. this included the holding of non-whites (specifically African Americans) in chattel slavery with four million of them denied freedom from bondage.[4] The outbreak of the Civil War saw the desire to uphold white supremacy being cited as a cause for state secession[5] and the formation of the Confederate States of America.[6] In an editorial about Native Americans in 1890, author L. Frank Baum wrote: "The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians."[7]
In some parts of the United States, many people who were considered non-white were disenfranchised, barred from government office, and prevented from holding most government jobs well into the second half of the 20th century. Since the founding of the United States, when the right to vote was restricted to white men of property, professor Leland T. Saito of USC writes: "Throughout the history of the United States race has been used by whites for legitimizing and creating difference and social, economic and political exclusion."[8] The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited U.S. citizenship to whites only.[9]
The denial of social and political freedom continued into the mid-20th century, resulting in the Civil Rights Movement.[10] On the U.S. immigration laws prior to 1965, sociologist Stephen Klineberg cited the laws as clearly declaring "that Northern Europeans are a superior subspecies of the white race."[11] The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 dramatically opened entry to the U.S. to immigrants other than traditional Northern European and Germanic groups, and as a result it would significantly alter the demographic mix in the U.S.[11] Many U.S. states banned interracial marriage through anti-miscegenation laws until 1967, when these laws were invalidated by the Supreme Court of the United States' decision in Loving v. Virginia. Additionally, white leaders often viewed Native Americans as obstacles to economic and political progress with respect to the natives' claims to land and rights.
White supremacy was dominant in the United States even after the American Civil War and it also persisted for decades after the Reconstruction Era.[3] In large areas of the U.S. this included the holding of non-whites (specifically African Americans) in chattel slavery with four million of them denied freedom from bondage.[4] The outbreak of the Civil War saw the desire to uphold white supremacy being cited as a cause for state secession[5] and the formation of the Confederate States of America.[6] In an editorial about Native Americans in 1890, author L. Frank Baum wrote: "The Whites, by law of conquest, by justice of civilization, are masters of the American continent, and the best safety of the frontier settlements will be secured by the total annihilation of the few remaining Indians."[7]
In some parts of the United States, many people who were considered non-white were disenfranchised, barred from government office, and prevented from holding most government jobs well into the second half of the 20th century. Since the founding of the United States, when the right to vote was restricted to white men of property, professor Leland T. Saito of USC writes: "Throughout the history of the United States race has been used by whites for legitimizing and creating difference and social, economic and political exclusion."[8] The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited U.S. citizenship to whites only.[9]
The denial of social and political freedom continued into the mid-20th century, resulting in the Civil Rights Movement.[10] On the U.S. immigration laws prior to 1965, sociologist Stephen Klineberg cited the laws as clearly declaring "that Northern Europeans are a superior subspecies of the white race."[11] The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 dramatically opened entry to the U.S. to immigrants other than traditional Northern European and Germanic groups, and as a result it would significantly alter the demographic mix in the U.S.[11] Many U.S. states banned interracial marriage through anti-miscegenation laws until 1967, when these laws were invalidated by the Supreme Court of the United States' decision in Loving v. Virginia. Additionally, white leaders often viewed Native Americans as obstacles to economic and political progress with respect to the natives' claims to land and rights.
Germany
Nazism promoted the idea of a superior Germanic people or Aryan race in Germany during the early 20th century. Notions of white supremacy and Aryan racial superiority were combined in the 19th century, with white supremacists maintaining the belief that white people were members of an Aryan "master race" which is superior to other races, particularly the Jews who were described as the "Semitic race", Slavs and Gypsies, which they associated with "cultural sterility". Arthur de Gobineau, a French racial theorist and aristocrat, blamed the fall of the ancient régime in France on racial degeneracy caused by racial intermixing, which he argued had destroyed the purity of the Nordic or Germanic race. Gobineau's theories, which attracted a strong following in Germany, emphasized the existence of an irreconcilable polarity between Aryan or Germanic peoples and Jewish culture.[12]
As the Nazi Party's chief racial theorist, Alfred Rosenberg oversaw the construction of a human racial "ladder" that justified Hitler's racial and ethnic policies. Rosenberg promoted the Nordic theory which regarded Nordics as the "master race", superior to all others, including other Aryans (Indo-Europeans).[13] Rosenberg got the racial term Untermensch from the title of Klansman Lothrop Stoddard's 1922 book The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Under-man.[14] It was later adopted by the Nazis from that book's German version Der Kulturumsturz: Die Drohung des Untermenschen (1925).[15] Rosenberg was the leading Nazi who attributed the concept of the East-European "under man" to Stoddard.[16] An advocate of the U.S. immigration laws that favored Northern Europeans, Stoddard wrote primarily on the alleged dangers posed by "colored" peoples to white civilization, and wrote The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy in 1920.
In order to preserve the Aryan or Nordic race, the Nazis introduced the Nuremberg racial laws in 1935, which forbade sexual relations and marriages between Germans and Jews, and later between Germans and Romani and Slavs. The Nazis used the Mendelian inheritance theory to argue that social traits were innate, claiming that there was a racial nature associated with certain general traits such as inventiveness or criminal behavior.[17]
Many modern-day white supremacist groups around the world reuse Nazi symbolism, including the swastika, to represent their beliefs.[citation needed]
According to the 2012 annual report of Germany's interior intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, at the time there were 26,000 right-wing extremists living in Germany, including 6000 Neo-Nazis.[18]
Nazism promoted the idea of a superior Germanic people or Aryan race in Germany during the early 20th century. Notions of white supremacy and Aryan racial superiority were combined in the 19th century, with white supremacists maintaining the belief that white people were members of an Aryan "master race" which is superior to other races, particularly the Jews who were described as the "Semitic race", Slavs and Gypsies, which they associated with "cultural sterility". Arthur de Gobineau, a French racial theorist and aristocrat, blamed the fall of the ancient régime in France on racial degeneracy caused by racial intermixing, which he argued had destroyed the purity of the Nordic or Germanic race. Gobineau's theories, which attracted a strong following in Germany, emphasized the existence of an irreconcilable polarity between Aryan or Germanic peoples and Jewish culture.[12]
As the Nazi Party's chief racial theorist, Alfred Rosenberg oversaw the construction of a human racial "ladder" that justified Hitler's racial and ethnic policies. Rosenberg promoted the Nordic theory which regarded Nordics as the "master race", superior to all others, including other Aryans (Indo-Europeans).[13] Rosenberg got the racial term Untermensch from the title of Klansman Lothrop Stoddard's 1922 book The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Under-man.[14] It was later adopted by the Nazis from that book's German version Der Kulturumsturz: Die Drohung des Untermenschen (1925).[15] Rosenberg was the leading Nazi who attributed the concept of the East-European "under man" to Stoddard.[16] An advocate of the U.S. immigration laws that favored Northern Europeans, Stoddard wrote primarily on the alleged dangers posed by "colored" peoples to white civilization, and wrote The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy in 1920.
In order to preserve the Aryan or Nordic race, the Nazis introduced the Nuremberg racial laws in 1935, which forbade sexual relations and marriages between Germans and Jews, and later between Germans and Romani and Slavs. The Nazis used the Mendelian inheritance theory to argue that social traits were innate, claiming that there was a racial nature associated with certain general traits such as inventiveness or criminal behavior.[17]
Many modern-day white supremacist groups around the world reuse Nazi symbolism, including the swastika, to represent their beliefs.[citation needed]
According to the 2012 annual report of Germany's interior intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, at the time there were 26,000 right-wing extremists living in Germany, including 6000 Neo-Nazis.[18]
South Africa and Rhodesia
A number of Southern African nations experienced severe racial tension and conflict during global decolonization, particularly as white Africans of European ancestryfought to protect their preferential social and political status. Racial segregation in South Africa began in colonial times under the Dutch Empire, and it continued when the British took over the Cape of Good Hope in 1795. Apartheid was introduced as an officially structured policy by the Afrikaner-dominated National Party after the general election of 1948. Apartheid's legislation divided inhabitants into four racial groups—"black", "white", "coloured", and "Indian", the last two of which were divided into several sub-classifications.[19] In 1970, the Afrikaner-run government abolished non-white political representation, and starting that year black people were deprived of South African citizenship.[20] South Africa abolished apartheid in 1991.[21][22] In Rhodesia, a predominantly white government issued its own unilateral declaration of independence from the United Kingdom during an unsuccessful attempt to avoid immediate majority rule.[23] Following the Rhodesian Bush War which was fought by African nationalists, Rhodesian prime minister Ian Smith acceded to biracial political representation in 1978 and the state achieved recognition from the United Kingdom as Zimbabwe in 1980.[24]
A number of Southern African nations experienced severe racial tension and conflict during global decolonization, particularly as white Africans of European ancestryfought to protect their preferential social and political status. Racial segregation in South Africa began in colonial times under the Dutch Empire, and it continued when the British took over the Cape of Good Hope in 1795. Apartheid was introduced as an officially structured policy by the Afrikaner-dominated National Party after the general election of 1948. Apartheid's legislation divided inhabitants into four racial groups—"black", "white", "coloured", and "Indian", the last two of which were divided into several sub-classifications.[19] In 1970, the Afrikaner-run government abolished non-white political representation, and starting that year black people were deprived of South African citizenship.[20] South Africa abolished apartheid in 1991.[21][22] In Rhodesia, a predominantly white government issued its own unilateral declaration of independence from the United Kingdom during an unsuccessful attempt to avoid immediate majority rule.[23] Following the Rhodesian Bush War which was fought by African nationalists, Rhodesian prime minister Ian Smith acceded to biracial political representation in 1978 and the state achieved recognition from the United Kingdom as Zimbabwe in 1980.[24]
Russia
Academic use of the term
The term white supremacy is used in academic studies of racial power to denote a system of structural or societal racism which privileges white people over others, regardless of the presence or the absence of racial hatred. White racial advantages occur at both a collective and an individual level (ceteris paribus, i. e., when individuals are compared that do not relevantly differ except in ethnicity). Legal scholar Frances Lee Ansley explains this definition as follows:
This and similar definitions have been adopted or proposed by Charles Mills,[28] bell hooks,[29] David Gillborn,[30] Jessie Daniels [31] and Neely Fuller Jr,[32] and they are widely used in critical race theory and intersectional feminism. Some anti-racist educators, such as Betita Martinez and the Challenging White Supremacy workshop, also use the term in this way. The term expresses historic continuities between a pre-Civil Rights Movement era of open white supremacism and the current racial power structure of the United States. It also expresses the visceral impact of structural racism through "provocative and brutal" language that characterizes racism as "nefarious, global, systemic, and constant."[33] Academic users of the term sometimes prefer it to racism because it allows for a disconnection between racist feelings and white racial advantage or privilege.[34][35]
The term's rise in popularity among leftist activists in 2016 has been characterized by some as counterproductive. Specialist in both language and race relations, John McWhorter has described its use as straying from commonly accepted meaning to encompass much less extreme issues which thereby cheapens the term and can shut-down productive discussion.[36][37] Political columnist Kevin Drum attributes the term's growing popularity in 2016 to frequent use by Ta-Nehisi Coates, and he describes it as a "terrible fad" which fails to convey nuance and should be reserved for those who are trying to promote the idea that whites are inherently superior to blacks and not used for any type of less severe racist belief or action.[38][39] The use of the academic definition of the term white supremacy has been criticized by Conor Friedersdorf for the confusion it creates for the general public in how it differs from the more common dictionary definition and he argues that it is likely to alienate those it hopes to convince.[39]
The term white supremacy is used in academic studies of racial power to denote a system of structural or societal racism which privileges white people over others, regardless of the presence or the absence of racial hatred. White racial advantages occur at both a collective and an individual level (ceteris paribus, i. e., when individuals are compared that do not relevantly differ except in ethnicity). Legal scholar Frances Lee Ansley explains this definition as follows:
This and similar definitions have been adopted or proposed by Charles Mills,[28] bell hooks,[29] David Gillborn,[30] Jessie Daniels [31] and Neely Fuller Jr,[32] and they are widely used in critical race theory and intersectional feminism. Some anti-racist educators, such as Betita Martinez and the Challenging White Supremacy workshop, also use the term in this way. The term expresses historic continuities between a pre-Civil Rights Movement era of open white supremacism and the current racial power structure of the United States. It also expresses the visceral impact of structural racism through "provocative and brutal" language that characterizes racism as "nefarious, global, systemic, and constant."[33] Academic users of the term sometimes prefer it to racism because it allows for a disconnection between racist feelings and white racial advantage or privilege.[34][35]
The term's rise in popularity among leftist activists in 2016 has been characterized by some as counterproductive. Specialist in both language and race relations, John McWhorter has described its use as straying from commonly accepted meaning to encompass much less extreme issues which thereby cheapens the term and can shut-down productive discussion.[36][37] Political columnist Kevin Drum attributes the term's growing popularity in 2016 to frequent use by Ta-Nehisi Coates, and he describes it as a "terrible fad" which fails to convey nuance and should be reserved for those who are trying to promote the idea that whites are inherently superior to blacks and not used for any type of less severe racist belief or action.[38][39] The use of the academic definition of the term white supremacy has been criticized by Conor Friedersdorf for the confusion it creates for the general public in how it differs from the more common dictionary definition and he argues that it is likely to alienate those it hopes to convince.[39]
Ideologies and movements
Supporters of Nordicism consider the "Nordic peoples" to be a superior race.[40] By the early 19th century, white supremacy was attached to emerging theories of racial hierarchy. The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer attributed civilisational primacy to the white race:
The eugenicist Madison Grant argued in his 1916 book, The Passing of the Great Race, that the Nordic race had been responsible for most of humanity's great achievements, and that admixture was "race suicide".[42] In this book, Europeans who are not of Germanic origin but have Nordic characteristics such as blonde/red hair and blue/green/gray eyes, were considered to be a Nordic admixture and suitable for Aryanization.[43]
In the United States, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is the group most associated with the white supremacist movement. Many white supremacist groups are based on the concept of preserving genetic purity, and they do not focus solely on discriminationbased on skin color.[44] The KKK's reasons for supporting racial segregation are not primarily based on religious ideals, but some Klan groups are openly Protestant. The KKK and other white supremacist groups like Aryan Nations, The Order and the White Patriot Party are considered antisemitic.[44]
Nazi Germany promulgated white supremacy based on the belief that the Aryan race, or the Germans, were the master race. It was combined with a eugenics programme that aimed for racial hygiene through compulsory sterilization of sick individuals and extermination of Untermenschen ("subhumans"): Slavs, Jews and Romani, which eventually culminated in the Holocaust.[45][46][47][48][49]
Christian Identity is another movement closely tied to white supremacy. Some white supremacists identify themselves as Odinists, although many Odinists reject white supremacy. Some white supremacist groups, such as the South AfricanBoeremag, conflate elements of Christianity and Odinism. Creativity (formerly known as "The World Church of the Creator") is atheistic and it denounces Christianity and other theistic religions.[50][51] Aside from this, its ideology is similar to that of many Christian Identity groups because it believes in the antisemitic conspiracy theory that there is a "Jewish conspiracy" in control of governments, the banking industry and the media. Matthew F. Hale, founder of the World Church of the Creator, has published articles stating that all races other than white are "mud races," which is what the group's religion teaches.[44]
The white supremacist ideology has become associated with a racist faction of the skinhead subculture, despite the fact that when the skinhead culture first developed in the United Kingdom in the late 1960s, it was heavily influenced by black fashions and music, especially Jamaican reggae and ska, and African American soul music.[52][53][54]
White supremacist recruitment activities are primarily conducted at a grassroots level as well as on the Internet. Widespread access to the Internet has led to a dramatic increase in white supremacist websites.[55] The Internet provides a venue to openly express white supremacist ideas at little social cost, because people who post the information are able to remain anonymous.
Supporters of Nordicism consider the "Nordic peoples" to be a superior race.[40] By the early 19th century, white supremacy was attached to emerging theories of racial hierarchy. The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer attributed civilisational primacy to the white race:
.svg)
The eugenicist Madison Grant argued in his 1916 book, The Passing of the Great Race, that the Nordic race had been responsible for most of humanity's great achievements, and that admixture was "race suicide".[42] In this book, Europeans who are not of Germanic origin but have Nordic characteristics such as blonde/red hair and blue/green/gray eyes, were considered to be a Nordic admixture and suitable for Aryanization.[43]
In the United States, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is the group most associated with the white supremacist movement. Many white supremacist groups are based on the concept of preserving genetic purity, and they do not focus solely on discriminationbased on skin color.[44] The KKK's reasons for supporting racial segregation are not primarily based on religious ideals, but some Klan groups are openly Protestant. The KKK and other white supremacist groups like Aryan Nations, The Order and the White Patriot Party are considered antisemitic.[44]
Nazi Germany promulgated white supremacy based on the belief that the Aryan race, or the Germans, were the master race. It was combined with a eugenics programme that aimed for racial hygiene through compulsory sterilization of sick individuals and extermination of Untermenschen ("subhumans"): Slavs, Jews and Romani, which eventually culminated in the Holocaust.[45][46][47][48][49]
Christian Identity is another movement closely tied to white supremacy. Some white supremacists identify themselves as Odinists, although many Odinists reject white supremacy. Some white supremacist groups, such as the South AfricanBoeremag, conflate elements of Christianity and Odinism. Creativity (formerly known as "The World Church of the Creator") is atheistic and it denounces Christianity and other theistic religions.[50][51] Aside from this, its ideology is similar to that of many Christian Identity groups because it believes in the antisemitic conspiracy theory that there is a "Jewish conspiracy" in control of governments, the banking industry and the media. Matthew F. Hale, founder of the World Church of the Creator, has published articles stating that all races other than white are "mud races," which is what the group's religion teaches.[44]
The white supremacist ideology has become associated with a racist faction of the skinhead subculture, despite the fact that when the skinhead culture first developed in the United Kingdom in the late 1960s, it was heavily influenced by black fashions and music, especially Jamaican reggae and ska, and African American soul music.[52][53][54]
White supremacist recruitment activities are primarily conducted at a grassroots level as well as on the Internet. Widespread access to the Internet has led to a dramatic increase in white supremacist websites.[55] The Internet provides a venue to openly express white supremacist ideas at little social cost, because people who post the information are able to remain anonymous.
Relationships with black separatist groups
In February 1962 George Lincoln Rockwell, the leader of the American Nazi Party, spoke at a Nation of Islam rally in Chicago, where he was applauded by Elijah Muhammad as he pronounced: "I am proud to stand here before black men. I believe Elijah Muhammed is the Adolf Hitler of the black man!"[56] Rockwell had attended, but did not speak at, an earlier NOI rally in Washington, D.C. in June 1961.[57] and once he even donated $20 to the NOI.[58] In 1965, after breaking with the Nation of Islam and denouncing its separatist doctrine, Malcolm X told his followers that the Nation of Islam under Elijah Muhammad had made secret agreements with the American Nazi Party and the Ku Klux Klan.[57]
Rockwell and other white supremacists (e.g. Willis Carto) also supported less well-known black separatist groups, such as Hassan Jeru-Ahmed's Blackman's Army of Liberation, in reference to which Rockwell told Los Angeles Times reporter Michael Drosnin in 1967 that if "Any Negro wants to go back to Africa, I'll carry him piggy-back."[59]
More recently, Tom Metzger, erstwhile Ku Klux Klan leader from California, spoke at a NOI rally in Los Angeles in September 1985 and donated $100 to the group.[60]In October of that same year, over 200 prominent white supremacists met at former Klan leader Robert E. Miles's farm to discuss an alliance with Louis Farrakhan, head of the NOI.[58] In attendance were Edward Reed Fields of the National States' Rights Party, Richard Girnt Butler of the Aryan Nations, Don Black, Roy Frankhouser, and Metzger, who said that "America is like a rotting carcass. The Jews are living off the carcass like the parasites they are. Farrakhan understands this."[58]
In February 1962 George Lincoln Rockwell, the leader of the American Nazi Party, spoke at a Nation of Islam rally in Chicago, where he was applauded by Elijah Muhammad as he pronounced: "I am proud to stand here before black men. I believe Elijah Muhammed is the Adolf Hitler of the black man!"[56] Rockwell had attended, but did not speak at, an earlier NOI rally in Washington, D.C. in June 1961.[57] and once he even donated $20 to the NOI.[58] In 1965, after breaking with the Nation of Islam and denouncing its separatist doctrine, Malcolm X told his followers that the Nation of Islam under Elijah Muhammad had made secret agreements with the American Nazi Party and the Ku Klux Klan.[57]
Rockwell and other white supremacists (e.g. Willis Carto) also supported less well-known black separatist groups, such as Hassan Jeru-Ahmed's Blackman's Army of Liberation, in reference to which Rockwell told Los Angeles Times reporter Michael Drosnin in 1967 that if "Any Negro wants to go back to Africa, I'll carry him piggy-back."[59]
More recently, Tom Metzger, erstwhile Ku Klux Klan leader from California, spoke at a NOI rally in Los Angeles in September 1985 and donated $100 to the group.[60]In October of that same year, over 200 prominent white supremacists met at former Klan leader Robert E. Miles's farm to discuss an alliance with Louis Farrakhan, head of the NOI.[58] In attendance were Edward Reed Fields of the National States' Rights Party, Richard Girnt Butler of the Aryan Nations, Don Black, Roy Frankhouser, and Metzger, who said that "America is like a rotting carcass. The Jews are living off the carcass like the parasites they are. Farrakhan understands this."[58]
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen