City of Notracists
Feb 19, 2008
You could make several criticisms of Afrocentric schooling. You could argue that creating an alternative school system merely re-entrenches the Eurocentricism of the dominant one. You could point out that creating these schools only addresses the symptoms and not the root causes of the systemic issues of race and class that make these schools appear necessary in the first place. You could bring up the tricky logistical problems, like: would admitting a white student be tantamount to denying a black student a spot?
You could make those criticisms and sound intelligent. Reducing the issue to one of ’segregation,’ however, and dismissing it as such is not intelligent.1 It’s this latter kind of superficial politics though, with its lazy and disingenuous over-simplifications, that rules supreme in mainstream discussions of the issue. Critical debate is not what corporate media appears to be interested in having.
The Globe and Mail, for instance, in its editorial cartoon (drawn by Tony Jenkins) on February 18, made a mockery of pedagogy, black masculinities, and popular culture all in one fell swoop.
I honestly cannot believe someone thought that cartoon constituted useful contribution to the debate. 2
The Toronto Star has also indulged in more than its fair share of cheap shots. I don’t have dates for the following cartoons, but you’ll find them if you scroll through the Star’s online cartoon archives.
The Globe and Mail one definitely takes the cake though.
What I find most useful about these discussions around Afrocentric schools is the way they bring to the forefront all the latent anxieties Canadian society as a whole continues to have about constructions of blackness and the way whiteness and perceptions of ourselves as a ‘tolerant’ nation-state are dependent on marginalised communities refraining from making a ruckus and drawing attention to their status as peoples who are marginalised (as opposed to merely people ‘of colour’ 3) in ways that make everyone ‘else’ uncomfortable.
Ultimately, this co-opting of figures like Martin Luther King and discourses of multiculturalism has less to do with a genuine interest in helping the students of Toronto, black or otherwise, than it does with ensuring that everyone feels like they’re getting their tax’s worth of self-righteousness.
Because, listen, I like my neighbours. I’m so colour blind, I didn’t even notice they were black. I certainly don’t treat them like they’re different. I am a good person and I am not a racist. I think it’s just horrible that kids are killing themselves to death in places like Jane&Finch and I wish the fathers in those neighbourhoods would stand up and be men. I insist, therefore, that my neighbour’s kids go to school with my mine. No, really, as a sign of my goodwill, I absolutely must insist.
Update:
Tony Jenkins, the cartoonist responsible for ‘Afrocentric Algebra’, has a history of passing off blatantly racist cartoons as art. A full fourteen years ago he published a cartoon, again in the Globe and Mail, entitled “Wisdom of the Elders”:
This is his justification for that cartoon:
Natives are into smoking, drinking and now gambling, Jenkins said. At one time, Elders would pass on information about hunting and trapping. Now the knowledge that will be passed down will be about gambling, the cartoonist said. »
Wow. A decade and a half later and the Globe and Mail continues to publish this shit. Unbelievable.
Footnotes
- I dare you to talk about Afrocentric schools and not once use the word ’segregation’ or some variation thereof. [⇑]
- I’m practising restraint here. My first response on seeing that cartoon was, “You’re fucking kidding me.” [⇑]
- As labels go, ‘of colour’ isn’t so bad. But it has this fetishistic aura to it that I don’t like. It gives off this vibe of sexiness that detracts from the thorniness of the actual process of racialisation. It conjures to mind, for me anyway, images of slender brown women in silk saris that don’t quite outshine their long and impeccably straight hair. This is the practice of ‘of colour.’ It has no space for Walmart sneakers and depilatory creams. [⇑]
- « whiteprint
- Shadow »
19 Responses to “City of Notracists”
1 nomes » Race card Feb 19, 2008
[...] has a brilliant post about the virulently racist editorial cartoon featured in the Globe & Mail on Monday, [...]
2 Anjum Feb 19, 2008
What are the reason(s) FOR these schools?
3 basit Feb 19, 2008
ah, ha, wow. i’ve been trying to keep up with the star while here but somehow missed those.
on the other hand, i did find:
“this is ridiculous. our country was raised on christian morals and to take out the lord’s prayer is to admit defeat to other ethnicities.” (letter to the editor, feb15.08)
i’ve always disliked ‘of colour.’
4 yaser Feb 20, 2008
“What are the reason(s) FOR these schools?”
it’s easier to deal with the problem once it’s isolated. HAH.
also, my television is of colour.
5 fathima Feb 20, 2008
Anjum,
basically, it’s been argued that the Toronto District School Board is failing its students. in particular, the TDSB’s history of discipline is held up as proof of its unfairly targeting black students.
“The connection of schools as sites of knowledge production seems to elude students who are disproportionately impacted by harsh discipline, suspensions and expulsions.” »
for me, however, the issue is that the curriculum (referring specifically now to the social sciences and humanities, in courses like History, for instance) fails to reflect a critical or even honest view of the world. so i look to alternative schools to address those gaping holes in mainstream curriculum. i don’t expect Afrocentric schools to be about teaching kids to love Mother Africa. nor do any of its proponents. i do expect those schools to counter some of the complacency of what currently passes for education.
“For years, parents, grandparents, caregivers have advocated for schools where our children will learn about themselves and what their ancestors have contributed to the world and the society in which they live.” »
basit,
oh wow. admitting defeat. how’d i miss that.
yaser,
there’s a real problem with that, though, right. it’s the flipside of my problem with the possibility that this encourage further eurocentricism in mainstream curriculum.
also, my television is simply not. how’s that for self-righteousness.
6 fathima Feb 20, 2008
these comments copy-pasted from facebook -
Puneet:
Well there’s two things. While I was at Angela Davis’ talk, one of the activists who was involved with the afro-centric school from the beginning informed us that, in fact, they had been fighting hard to get an afro-centric curriculum into “mainstream” schools. The TDSB etc. resisted, resisted resisted and instead “offered” them the option to have their own school. The activist’s powerful last words were that this was the worst and last possible option - nobody on either side of the equation desired a separate school. The star had an article with a quote from a white girl who was part of the experiment (testing the curriculum in mainstream schools) and she argued that the school is for everybody not just black kids. So it’s really an experiment of a diversified curriculum, which is so stupid and sad when we already have schools which they could just enrich.
Second, you write that “I’m so colour blind, I didn’t even notice they were black. I certainly don’t treat them like they’re different.” I used to subscribe to this but I don’t like it anymore because it has dangerous implications. One inevitably white girl said this to me and then she followed it up with, “Puneet, don’t write as Puneet the brown girl, write as Puneet the intellectual” becuase of course, that’s how she sees me and that’s where we are similar. But this is dangerous. I am brown. It signifies my heritage. See it. See my difference. Some dude wrote that intelligence is holding two different things in your mind. So see my difference but don’t see it as a limitation, don’t read it as a blackboard of assumptions. Just see my difference. And see Puneet the individual. It’s possible.
Fathima:
i. i didn’t know that about the TDSB offering alternative schools as a wide of avoiding mainstream curriculum changes. that’s key, because my support for afrocentric schools is contingent on the recognition that these schools are short-term fixes, not the final solution to the problem of mainstream schools failing its students.
ii. that last paragraph should be read ironically. i tried to compress into it every tautology i’ve ever encountered - all the circular arguments of ‘tolerance’ that wind in on themselves to no one’s satisfaction except the already established. so, ‘killing themselves dead’ for instance is a reference to gang violence, which is constantly presented as the defining feature of young black masculinity in places like Jane and Finch or Regent Park.
and the bit about ‘colour-blind’ is one that i think most of us have had to struggle with - this supposed conflict between the universality of our human/e existences and the particularities of our daily lives. except i no longer believe it’s a conflict, unless it’s blown up as such by the people with whom we interact. i think we resolve those issues of ‘conflict’ in ways that we don’t have the cultural language to articulate. or that we inhabit systems that make it difficult to do that, anyway.
in any case, we are more than merely ‘like and equal to’ prevailing notions of selfhood.
7 Anjum Feb 20, 2008
Fathima, I know in your post you aren’t arguing for the Afrocentric schools; you are just criticizing the poor public discourse regarding their existence/utility. But your comment quoted here indicates you are in favor of the schools, albeit as a last resort.
the curriculum [of current schools]…fails to reflect a critical or even honest view of the world. so i look to alternative schools to address those gaping holes in mainstream curriculum. … i do expect [Afrocentric/alternative] schools to counter some of the complacency of what currently passes for education.
and
my support for afrocentric schools is contigent on the recognition that these schools are short-term fixes, not the final solution to the problem of mainstream schools failing it students.
But I disagree. It’s a horrible last resort, and the effects of it outweigh any “short-term fix” benefits it might provide. This “solution” leaves open to a precedent that would soon find us dealing with all kinds of specialized and regionalized schools designed to attend to the vast gaps not covered in current curricula. For example, current History classes typically have a strong focus on American and Western European history. If the African history gets their own school - EVEN as a last resort - why wouldn’t ever region get their own school? East and South Asian, Middle Eastern, South American?
No, if something wrong or incomplete is being taught, the solution is not to leave it there while supplementing it with correct/full information elsewhere, even for a short term period. The population who does not get the supplemental information (in this case, the majority of kids, the ones who won’t go to Afrocentric schools) will still get only the wrong/incomplete information. The *solution* is to FIX the current curricula so everyone gets the right/complete/full/appropriate information.
The reason this kind of fix hasn’t been done is obviously because there’s disagreement on what should be covered and to what extent. Everyone wants their region to be covered heavily, but there’s only so much time in a school year. I agree that the school boards should not have approved an Afrocentric curriculum in regular public schools, because of equity reasons - you know, “if they get their history in, why can’t we get our history in?” kind of reasons.
But you know, I do this fr my job - Every team/group/dept wants their stuff being the focal point, but you can’t have in-depth focus on every single point - not only will it take too much time, but ALL ppl don’t need to know ALL that information. Difficult conversations must be had, that go beyond “I want MY stuff [insert ethnocentric curriculum here] covered!”
8 City of Notracists (://URLFAN) Feb 21, 2008
9 puneet Feb 21, 2008
“If the African history gets their own school - EVEN as a last resort - why wouldn’t ever region get their own school? East and South Asian, Middle Eastern, South American?”
I think it’s worth making a distinction here…South Asian/Middle Eastern/South American peoples in Canada are immigrants. I think when we talk about Afro-centric history we have to keep in mind the North American history of slavery of Africans. Of course Canada is not the US but the whole history of slavery (Africans go as far back in US history as the 1700s - they were well-established part of the history before the US even became its own country) is bound up with Canadian history of the Underground Railroad. I think we have to factor this in to a discussion …. and its worth considering the Canadian reality of Aboriginal Reserves and Reserve schools…what are our aboriginal kids learning??
10 sk Feb 22, 2008
This is quite possibly the most ridiculous option to take given the problem of black students not having sufficient passing rates.
Euro-centrism in the curriculum should have very little effect on the intellectual capabilities of the student. Psychologically, as well socially, a system of defacto segregation has just been created in a 21st century. Its like the 50’s called. and they want their segregation back.
Wrapping this under a blanket of a short-term solution is merely setting a precedence which will now be used as leverage to further segregate schools based on socio-economic stratas. This can be further proved by the existence and usage of “magent schools” in the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet_school). Initially they were designed to provide much -more- valuable specialized education in focused areas (more [financially] than this so called afro-centric education proposed). However, if you goto a magnet school today, all you are going to see are black people.
Also, why do you disagree with the last editorial cartoon?
The US in 1988 passed the IGRA (based on Cabazon vs California, and another case i can’t quite recall) and led to much noise about indians and gambling as their largest source of financial support system. It is not entirely unknown, and if anything, the person boldly stated what everyone else knows already. It addresses a social perception (and quite possibly, fact) that exists in a humourous way.
11 noaman Feb 23, 2008
Because there is something to be said about history. In this case, a history of exploitation, oppression and genocide that leads to the particular socioeconomic situation prevalent in reserves and among Natives. This history — ongoing history — is ignored, and instead, we are presented with an abstracted version of reality. Here, we are told that, for some unknown mysterious reason, Natives are incapable of being responsible, conscientious, functioning members of a normal society. No, indeed, they are just drunken, smoking, gambling messes — they have no morals and no character — and are passing on this mess to their children. By taking this particular vision and exploding it, the cartoon also ignores the complexity and reality of the lives of Natives as they exist now. You may say, of course, simplification is what cartoons are supposed to do; and I’d agree. I don’t mind simplification on the side of the oppressed, against the oppressor. The other way around is simply the replication and reinforcement of unequal power balances, without any kind of attempt at subversion or critical reflection.
12 sk Feb 23, 2008
Hmm, between episodes of LOST:
First, the psychological aspect of ignoring history is due to the heuristics that we use in decision making. Human beings are naturally irrational and need to be, in order to rapidly make decisions in a dynamic environment. If we were to sit around and find out the 300 year history of every person, culture, society, or group of people we met in order to figure out how to deal with them, we would be paralyzed. This interesting enough, was actually found in some AI experiments. Blew my mind.
Second, the environmental reasons are probably enormous and couldn’t possibly be enumerated succesfully. However, one obvious aspect that we are throwing here is the bias in the newspaper against the “oppressed”. Where oppressed is ill-defined. As has been shown time and time again by the Palestinian movement, noone really cares (unfortunately) about the history. To bring up the history of oppression, is, in my opinion, detrimental to helping a group of people rise out of it. It wastes valuable energy, and resources, which would be better utilized in being forward thinking and coming with solutions to the problem at hand.
Since everyone here seems well read, Mein Kampf documents some well known socio-psychological tactics utilized to isolate and demean a group of people in order to justify an attack on them. I believe that these tactics are not militaristic in nature, but rather inherent in human society. A derivation from our psychology, ifyou will. What you claim, and what this cartoon does, are precisely that. It may be ethically wrong, but to expect journalists to not be biased is like asking the sky to be green.
Critical reflection cannot be expected from any one specific source. Journalists are not exactly known for their incredible IQ. If anything, reflection is a burden put upon -me-. it is I who needs to go out, seek multiple view points to establish a semblance of a non-biased perspective upon which to act.
Man, I seem to be full of hate against journalists. But can you blame me?
13 noaman Feb 24, 2008
Your responses have annoyed me because of their smug inanity.
1. Those with privilege can choose to ignore history, precisely because it suits them to forget the history of their privilege. Of course you’re not going to sit down and think about 300 year old histories when you are trying to decide whether or not you’re supposed to run away from the police officer. Duh. That wasn’t my point.
History does not stop. It continues and its ramifications continue. I pointed out quite specifically that exploitation, oppression and genocide is ongoing when it comes to Natives in the United States and Canada. History is important to situate the present, and for that reason, yes, it’s important to take into account even 300 years of history into account. But if you’re not going to do that then at least open your eyes to the legacy of that history and its continuities with the present.
Additionally, to suggest that humans are “naturally” irrational, and therefore, all decisions that we make collectively — whether as a society, or in groups — will and ought to “naturally” gravitate toward irrationality is inane. Humans naturally piss in forests and on rocks, what have you been doing for the past several years of your existence?
2. Oppressed = Natives. If you don’t know how a problem was created, how do you expect to solve it? There are millions of people around the world who care about the history of the Palestinians. You might not care, Israeli governments might not care, and Americans might not care, but who are you to speak on behalf of the Palestinians and their allies? Unless you recognize the nature of the oppression — and to do that you have to examine its history — you’re not going to rise out of it. What do you want Palestinians to do, build an airport in Gaza? — this will lead the way to the future? Let’s sit down and negotiate for the future? Yeah, that’s worked out great over the past 18 years!
3. I believe having insane amounts of sex is inherent in human society. A derivation from our psychology, if you will. In any case, if Hitler was drawing racist cartoons about Jews, I doubt anyone today — other than neo-Nazis and David Duke — would mind if he was fired from his job.
4. I don’t expect journalists to be biased. I am precisely pointing out that bias. I am saying that journalist — or cartoonist in this case — is a racist pig. He should be fired, and an apology should be made for it.
5. Yes, I do expect you to do some critical reflection. Clearly you haven’t done enough of it, re: history. Having said that, if you’re writing racist, inane shit for a newspaper, I will call you out on it. Because racism is bad. I just did some AI shit, and proved it.
14 Anjum Feb 25, 2008
Critical reflection cannot be expected from any one specific source. Journalists are not exactly known for their incredible IQ. If anything, reflection is a burden put upon -me-. it is I who needs to go out, seek multiple view points to establish a semblance of a non-biased perspective upon which to act.
To some extent yes people have a social responsibility to be aware of whats going on outside of their little lives, but you’re excusing the cartoonists’ message because we are so used to seeing one-sided journalism today that we should expect it and excuse it? and because of expected low IQ across the profession? that’s ridiculous! Please excuse MY rather graphic response, but just because everyone knows that (for instance) FOX news takes it up the butt from the Bush Administration does not mean that its OKAY for that to happen and for the public to get completely biased editorialisms and news. If anything, in current US society, people’s social responsibility has increased from “know about stuff” to “know *and spread* (true) knowledge about stuff.”
15 sk Feb 25, 2008
Hmm, yes, my post was fairly conceited.
Thanks for calling it out.
16 zb Feb 26, 2008
“Your responses have annoyed me because of their smug inanity.”
17 zb Feb 26, 2008
.. is classic.
18 noaman Feb 26, 2008
(That should read, “I don’t expect journalists to be unbiased.”)
19 Asmaa Feb 27, 2008
I agree that it’s an over-simplification of the matter. When I saw those cartoons in the paper I was really annoyed. You’re right, they are cheap shots and not thought through very well.
At the end of the day, we each have our own theories on education - whether people choose to send their kids to public schools, private schools, religious schools, montessori schools, all-girls schools, whatever. The point is, parents should have the right to decide what’s best for their kids. That is not the prerogative of the government.
Frankly, the public system is really created for one race and mindset. In high school, we studied authors who were all European and/or North american. Not a single book from an African author for example. All the history, including art history, came from Europe, as though no other continent existed. Whether it was civics, art, or english, every subject had that Eurocentric path of thinking entrenched in the curriculum. It was only when I got to university (a luxury that many young individuals don’t have) that I was able to expand my thought to properly include the entire world and come to terms with the idea of colonialism and oppression of nations by the European world.
So one of two things need to happen:
a) make the public system inclusive and representative of ALL races and cultures - this needs to happen from within the curriculum (and “black history month” does not and will not ever suffice - it’s simply a token phrase).
b) let concerned educators and parents do what is necessary (obviously, within reason) to instill a decent education in these kids that they are absolutely not getting in the public system.
In reality, the public system does promote only a single mode of thinking. And due to the fact that we’re not all identical moulds of one another, that’s not going to work for everyone. So I think the public needs to relax and let this black-centred school play out, and see where we get.