Another Halloween is past and you know what that means my POC friends. Yup, we just did another round of muttering “that’s racist” over and over again to ourselves.
… and while I fear I might be (ok, am) a minority on this one (see what I did there?): I don’t entirely get it.
Now ruling out the extremely obviously racist costumes like the buck toothed Asian (a la Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany’s), Jim Crow era Black caricatures, or Islamic “terrorists,” which clearly are unacceptable, I don’t particularly agree with the uproar and activism over “ethnic” costumes.
When I say I don’t ‘get it.’ I mean that I don’t accept the rationale behind why the outcry is focused on the costumes themselves. I don’t understand why the call is basically for White people NOT to do it. Full Stop.
I mean why is it that we see costumes based on traditional dress racist? The usual refrain is: “we are a culture, not a costume.” But if this is the case, would it not also be proper for Whites to decry costumes based on horned Vikings (which are historically inaccurate btw) or medieval knights?
Now the answer to my question is obvious: It’s not the same because of the disparity in power relations, and the vicious history of colonization that has imbued on to these images a different connotation.
I get that.
What I don’t get, is why this translates simply into: Don’t wear that Whitey!
A costume is not a culture. Not unless we choose to see it that way. And by then we are lost.
When we people of colour see these costumes we are reminded of our subordinate place in society. We are reminded that our countries of origin were ravaged by colonialism, and are still exploited through modern imperialism.
But again, if that is the case, and I think most POCs are on board with that line of thought, why do we stop at simply calling out the costume?
Now of course I’m not saying that we can’t both try to convince our White sisters and brothers that this offends us, and at the same time, fight the root causes. We can. But we should also prioritize.
If the costume is a symbol that offends because it reminds us that we still live in an unequal world why do we stop at the symbol and not continue on to what it symbolizes?
Instead of just activism to end ‘racist’ Halloween costumes, why not put first activism to end the conditions that make our cultural symbols racist to our own eyes?
If we truly care, shouldn’t our first target be imperialism?
Because in a world without imperialism the reasons for this offense evaporates. Our cultural dress are again ours—and no matter who wears them they remain ours. By focusing on costume activism we relinquish this to others, we alienate ourselves from what is our cultural commons. This is depressing twice over.
And that. Is racist.
* * *
So Why Don’t We?
The analysis about the costume racism is the easy part. The hard part comes in the question of why we focus on the symbolized over the symbol?
I’m sad to say, I think it’s because we middle-class Western people of colour more or less like it this way.
Fighting the big fight against the status quo, against the socio-political-economic system we live in, against imperialism, threatens our own way of life.
Try telling masses in the Philippines about these costumes being racist. Really. Try it. The majority of them will just stare blankly at you. They won’t get it.
*approx $1.00
For them their concerns are material: food, housing, employment, education, healthcare, etc. And for those who have analyzed the situation they will tell you that it’s due to both foreign exploitation of their country, and the local elites that assist them.
For them the ethnic costumes are either stupid in their unrealism, or make the wearer look like an idiot, or even cute—because they still own those costumes, they still own their culture.
This stress on the individual wearing a costume is made because the reasoning is part of the core ideology of our time: the idea that everything comes down to individual choice. But we don’t choose our culture. We live that culture. When one chooses, it no longer lives.
A costume may be based on a culture, but it is not the culture.
It’s only us in the West who see a White man in a sombrero and feel the rage.
But to do anything about it means risking a loss of our own cherished position in the middle. We are second class citizens, but we aren’t at the bottom and we hold out hope that we can be one of the few allowed to rise up and join the elites up top.
So we rage at the symbol. It’s another key part of the ideology of the day isn’t it? As I wrote in a previous article:
By focusing on telling any ol’ White person in ethnic dress that they are racist what are we doing? We don’t know the person, their intent, whether they themselves understand why we are offended. And in doing so we distance ourselves from them, and them from us.
Step this up to a societal level and what we are doing is further strengthening the divide alongst racial lines. We create an enmity amongst others that may not actually be racist in intent. And we stop the possibility for solidarity emerging.
The problems we collectively face as a society are too big for us to fight alone. The various forms of inequality that exist cut across racial, gender, and class lines (to name just three) and will require largescale political organization to overturn.
Too often today our actions relegate us to individual action, or actions against an individuals actions.
That’s the genius of ideology today. We can think we are being progressive, that we are addressing core societal issues. But in reality we reinforce differences, we help make a united front against the forces that oppress the majority of us (White people included) more difficult, and in the end the winner is the status quo.
It’s amazing ideological ju-jitsu.
I hope what I’m trying to write is clear. It’s not that I don’t understand why so many of us are offended. I just think we need to focus at the source.
Racism can be ended. Sexism can be ended. Classism can be ended. …and all the rest.
But for that we need solidarity and a united front against the cause of this inequality.
And we’re not going to do that if we continue to do the job of the oppressor for them.
- – -
If you’re interested in learning more about the political work I do, and especially if you are interested in taking part (no matter your racial background), please feel free to get in touch:
www.facebook.com/Anakbayan.Toronto
- – -
An older halloween themed post, this time about the Day of the Dead and magic: The Dead, River Spirits, & a Magic Hat
- – -
01/11/2012 at 4:24 pm
For the standard POV on why these costumes are racist and why Whitey shouldn’t wear them: http://racebending.tumblr.com/post/34730759762/casual-isms-since-this-recently-submitted
01/11/2012 at 4:54 pm
Here’s my analysis on this issue.
Premise: Priorities in activist circles, like in anti-racism work, are motivated by what generation of settler you are, and whether you have a decolonization/anti-oppressive framework.
1) There is a gap between generations of immigrants/settlers of colour.
a) 1st gens and some 1.5ers (example: folks who were born in their country of origin but migrated quite young) have an immediate attachment to their country of origin, comparing, contrasting, looking back. Most of them, however, migrate out of fear and desire for security, they are less likely to stand up for their rights, since I feel that if they could have stayed, they would have fought conditions in their country of origin. The few who do become activists after they migrate have a larger tendency to have an anti-imperialistic, decolonized viewpoint.
b) A few 1.5ers, 2nd gens, and beyond, have an immediate attachment to the Western, white politics of which they were raised in. They are less likely to have an anti-imperialistic, decolonized viewpoint because they can’t relate to it. This leads me to the second point.
2) There is a lack of a decolonization framework in Western white politics as most activism is based on what is immediately apparent, i.e. effecting the activist in question or their loved ones.
a) Examples: Did someone kill themselves of bullying? Let’s make anti-bullying programs as opposed to dealing with the root of the issue, which is that we socialize children to dominate others as part of a colonizing mentality– take what’s yours, the weak must fall.
b) Decolonization and anti-oppression are in danger of becoming buzz words because once the framework is learned, there is a confusion about how to prioritize the work because there’s so much work to do.
I’ll make a second post on what my priorities are that explain my position on what priorities make sense with a decolonization framework, as well as quickly review what “decolonization” even means (at least, to me).
01/11/2012 at 5:38 pm
Here’s my position on activism, which is based on a framework of decolonization. anti-oppression, and liberation.
1) What is the framework?
a) Colonization
At its most basic, the framework is about the fact that colonizers have and continue to displace indigenous peoples and their land through killing their bodies and culture (residential schools, putting them in reserves, disbanding their forms of government, telling them they can’t govern themselves, destroying their languages, etc).
b) Oppression/”The Order of Things”
This is because most colonizers come from their own framework that there’s “an order of things” based on skin pigmentation, the abilities of your body and mind, how much you can produce and generate income, the language you speak, your age, what genitals you have, what gender you present, what romantic and family relationships you create, etc.
c) Privilege, the Oppressed & Migration
When they come to a new place and dismantle the previous ways of being they set up their order of things in the very structures of their new world, their new society (education, government, healthcare, law enforcement, etc).
Those who are privileged by this order perpetuate it through fear/apathy, ignorance, or true belief in it. Others who are privileged attempt to resist it to various degrees.
Those who are hurt by this order become used to it, or fight, or die. Some migrate as an escape, thinking that the country of which this “order” comes from must be greater and will, paradoxically, have better opportunities. But mostly it’s a lie to get folks to migrate and do the things that the privileged and aware don’t want to do, the “dirty labour”, the “wage slave” work.
2) How does one prioritize their activism within this framework?
a) From a standpoint of decolonization, the priority is with indigenous folks. Help get the colonizers out of their land. Help get the colonizer’s “order of things” out of their minds and hearts.
b) From a standpoint of anti-oppression and liberation, folks who are oppressed engineer their own liberation from oppression– they cannot be told how to liberate themselves from folks who are privileged and have never gone through what they’ve done. This is because privileged folks may be invested in alleviating a sense of guilt instead of realizing that they should instead be angry at the system that privileged them instead of feeling guilty about having privilege. This means that it’s still important to work on what most affects an activist, whether it’s bullying, racism, transphobia, patriarchy, etc.
c) BUT! To merge the standpoints of liberation and decolonization, it’s important to be in “consensual solidarity”. This means:
- educating oneself on the framework and what colonization is
- building alliances and relationships with people who are on the frontlines of decolonization and anti-imperialistic work
- then taking the lead from those organizations and collectives as to what they need their allies to do, instead of telling them what they need to do for their people and movements.
3) Example: How do I prioritize my activism in this framework?
a) My Liberation
- I educate others and myself about how I am not less of a person, or anyone else is, because of the colour of my skin, what genitalia I have, what romantic and family relationships I make, what income I generate, how able my mind is, what size and shape my body is, and what gender I present. I do this through social media, workshops in schools/workplaces/community centres, speeches, and organizing events/conferences on these issues. I attend events that others have done and support them (if they desire) in their endeavours through input and hugs and encouragement.
- I then try to live this example in interacting with the system and with individuals on a daily basis, in a way too detailed to explain here (this is already quite a long explanation, lol).
b) Consensual Solidarity
- I build alliances with other folks who are working on their liberation and want everyone’s liberation. I do this by getting to know their issues, getting to know them as people, building trust by not acting oppressive towards them, and then asking them what they need from me or if they want support from me and any collectives/organizations I represent (that I have chosen because they are tied up with my own liberation).
- I make a point of specifically building alliances and relationships with groups focused on indigenous issues, indigenous solidarity, and/or decolonization. I encourage and am working on strategies to have settlers of colour and indigenous folks build relationships and alliances together, because the struggle of migration is very much tied up with the struggle of indigenous liberation and survival as they have all been spit out by the same imperialistic machine. For example, the mining companies in Philippines are wrecking the lives of indigenous folks there the same as the mining companies in Canada for indigenous folks here. To support one and not the other makes no sense to me, they must both be fought and resisted. All these indigenous communities must be supported in the way that they ask of their allies. That means, for the immigrant/settler like myself, that one day they may ask settlers to leave their lands for good. I may have to return to my birthplace, and I am okay with that. This is a trickier issue for white settlers or settlers of colour who have been here for as long as 13 generations, who still feel a claim to the land after 200 years, despite what colonizers have done to the people here who have been on the land for THOUSANDS of years.
01/11/2012 at 5:46 pm
Addendum: I forgot to mention that to me the work that I do must (resisting/transforming/dismantling oppression/colonization/imperialism) must be on 3 levels: 1) institutions, 2) cultures, 3) individuals. There isn’t so much a priority, as each level must occur based on what I myself am best at, and then I build relationships with folks who are better at, say, dismantling institutions, while I have a skill on speaking to individuals one-on-one. But to ignore any one level, for me, is problematic in my activism.
01/11/2012 at 5:57 pm
The biggest thing for me, nowadays, is that now that I have this framework and priorities, what are the most effective strategies on an institutional, cultural, and individual level? And then matching up my skills and temperament for what’s best suited to me so that I can advance the movements I’m a part of. It’s an ongoing process of learning from others past and present.
12/11/2012 at 6:39 pm
I agree with you, but I am white, so I don’t generally talk about how I feel about this issue. I understand why the stereotyped costumes give offense, but it also concerns me. The focus on confronting ignorant choices by individual white folks– does it encourage people to analyse the larger issues, or could it serve as a substitute, as you mention? Is there a larger focus on these types of things because they are more manageable to think about, to change, to process? I am reminded of the 90s environmental focus on recycling, and the ongoing efforts to plant-a-tree or restore a piecemeal “wilderness.” It is a good, justifiable effort, but it is not good if it replaces energy which would otherwise be free to engage against the root causes of environmental destruction. How is that determination made?
I don’t have any significant non-European heritage, so I recognize that I may not see all aspects of this issue, I may not see it correctly. But I also know that in any movement to end oppressions, some voices will be stifled as ‘oppressive’ which are simply voices of dissent. I am trans, and I feel that some trans people go too far in dissecting language and end up dissecting the self-esteem of real people, real trans people too! I hope you will not face backlash because of your post. I have started treading really carefully within my own community lately.
Additionally, what happens if we follow our natural human tendency to go after achievable goals, easier ones perhaps, smaller ones? Will our fight against categorical oppressions like white privilege, cisgender privilege, etc., end up playing out in classist ways? Will people with professional or university privilege be the only ones who are “qualified” to write about oppression because they can avoid all the wrong words, the wrong ideas?
13/11/2012 at 3:44 pm
I think the problem precisely is the question whats more offensive, the costumes representing dominated non-European cultures or the domination of non-European cultures?
I am always tempted to push the bar of the fetishization of Halloween costumes with double ironic costumes representing an ignorant Canadian – immigrant wearing a racist stereotypical costume of someone else. Or even more meta, a racist stereotypical costume of themselves, but that would get too meta for most, and would probably lead to a psychological implosion a la Dave Chappelle.
I think you’re right on the class issue here. A lot of the people who raise this issue are often times trying to have their cake and eat it too. Most working class members immigrant communities don’t celebrate Halloween besides taking their young children trick or treating. First of all Halloween is a European event for children and costumes are meant to be a caricature of what they represent. This is okay when little kids are dressed as Native Americans, it’s different when adults try to celebrate Halloween. There is no way you can wear a costume without it being caricature and performance.
22/11/2012 at 4:32 pm
carolynefiore: Thank you for your comments.
I find it so sad and odd that in many left places, critique and discussion about how to confront root causes is so often a no-go area.
I’ve had some quiet backlash, as in I’ve heard from others of backlash, but no one has told me in person, and that’s sad too. I fear too often the need to feel better about oneself and to feel morally superior has overtaken the need to make actual changes. Do you live in Toronto? I’d love to hear more about your own experiences.
I also appreciate the questions you end your comment with: what happens if we follow our natural human tendency to go after achievable goals, easier ones perhaps, smaller ones? Will our fight against categorical oppressions like white privilege, cisgender privilege, etc., end up playing out in classist ways? Will people with professional or university privilege be the only ones who are “qualified” to write about oppression because they can avoid all the wrong words, the wrong ideas?
Unfortunately, I feel that we are heading that way…
22/11/2012 at 4:34 pm
Pio, thanks for your comments too.
“There is no way you can wear a costume without it being caricature and performance.”
True, but need a caricature be offensive in and of itself?