“Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum: Summary and Critique

1. Overuse and Conceptual Inflation of the Term “Racism”

• Blum argues that the term “racism” is frequently overused, leading to a loss of its distinct moral force.
• He states, “Instead of the current practice of referring to virtually anything that goes wrong or amiss with respect to race as ‘racism,’ we should recognize a much broader moral vocabulary” (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
• He advocates for alternative terms such as racial insensitivity, racial ignorance, racial injustice, racial discomfort, and racial exclusion to more accurately describe different racial ills.

2. Defining Racism: Antipathy and Inferiorizing Racism

• Blum defines racism as consisting of two distinct forms:
  • Antipathy Racism: Hostility or hatred toward a racial group.
  • Inferiorizing Racism: Treating a racial group as inferior or less valuable.
• He clarifies, “All forms of racism can be related to either of two general ‘themes’ – inferiorization, and antipathy” (Blum, 2002, p. 210).

3. Distinction Between Racist Actions and Racially Objectionable Actions

• Not all racial issues stem from racism, and not all racially insensitive acts are motivated by racist intent.
• Blum warns against the oversimplification of racial incidents: “If our only choices are to label an act ‘racist’ or ‘nothing to get too upset about,’ those who seek to garner moral attention to some racial malfeasance will be tempted to call it ‘racist’” (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
• He gives the example of a white police officer placing a noose as a prank, which may not be racist in intent but still has racial significance.

4. Racial Stereotypes: Not All Are Racist

• Blum distinguishes between racist and non-racist racial stereotypes.
  • Example: The stereotype that “blacks are intellectually deficient” is racist because it inferiorizes them.
  • However, the stereotype that “blacks are good dancers” is not necessarily racist, although it is still problematic (Blum, 2002, p. 212).
• He argues for a historical approach to understanding racial stereotypes, emphasizing that some have deeper, more harmful implications than others.

5. Racist Jokes vs. Racist Individuals

• A person who tells a racist joke is not necessarily a racist.
• He writes, “A remark can be unquestionably racist without the person making the remark being a racist, or making the remark for a racist reason” (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
• He highlights that some individuals may tell racist jokes out of ignorance or a desire to fit in rather than due to racist beliefs.

6. Racial Discomfort and Anxiety Are Not Racism

• Many white individuals experience racial discomfort when interacting with people of color, but this is not inherently racist.
• Example: A white teacher who is uneasy talking to Black parents is not racist but has racial anxiety, which still affects her effectiveness as an educator (Blum, 2002, p. 213).
• Blum asserts that racial anxiety stems from a lack of exposure, not necessarily racist ideology.

7. The Dangers of Racial Profiling and Stereotyping

• Blum examines the case of Officer Cornel Young Jr., a Black police officer shot by white colleagues who mistook him for a threat.
• He argues that the shooting was not motivated by racial hatred but by implicit racial biases: “Treating blackness as if it were an indicator of suspiciousness or criminality is referred to as ‘racial profiling’” (Blum, 2002, p. 216).
• This highlights how racist stereotypes can be dangerous even when there is no explicit racial hatred.

8. The Importance of Clarifying the Meaning of Racism

• Blum stresses that defining racism more precisely will improve interracial discussions and reduce unnecessary accusations of racism.
• He states, “Fixing on such a definition should encourage us to make use of the considerable other resources our language affords us for describing and evaluating race-related ills” (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
• He calls for a distinction between racism and other racial issues, so that society can address all race-related problems without diminishing the seriousness of racism.

Conclusion

• Blum emphasizes that while racism is a significant moral failing, not all racial problems should be categorized as racism.
• He calls for a broader and more precise moral vocabulary to discuss race-related issues without diluting the meaning of racism.
• Ultimately, he argues that “Moral concern is appropriately directed toward this wider domain, and should not be confined to racism appropriately so called” (Blum, 2002, p. 218).

1. Critical Race Theory (CRT)

• Blum’s work aligns with Critical Race Theory (CRT) by exploring how racism is deeply embedded in social structures and language.
• His argument that racism is often misapplied and overused mirrors CRT’s concern with how race is socially constructed and manipulated for power dynamics.
• He critiques the tendency to label all racial issues as “racism,” emphasizing, “Not all racial incidents are racist incidents. Not every instance of racial conflict, insensitivity, discomfort, miscommunication, exclusion, injustice, or ignorance should be called ‘racist’” (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
• This perspective refines CRT’s analytical tools, urging scholars to distinguish between different racial phenomena rather than using a single, broad framework.

2. Postcolonial Theory

• Blum’s emphasis on inferiorizing racism contributes to Postcolonial Theory, particularly regarding how colonized subjects are historically perceived as inferior.
• His distinction between antipathy racism (racial hatred) and inferiorizing racism (racial hierarchy) mirrors postcolonial critiques of Eurocentrism and its legacy.
• “All forms of racism can be related to either of two general ‘themes’ – inferiorization, and antipathy” (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
• This distinction helps in postcolonial literary analysis by differentiating between racial domination through hate (as seen in colonial violence) and racial paternalism (as seen in so-called ‘benevolent’ colonial rule).

3. Structuralism and Semiotics

• Blum’s work contributes to Structuralist and Semiotic Literary Theory by analyzing how language and terminology shape racial discourse.
• He argues that the word “racism” has become overloaded with moral and political meaning, diluting its analytical clarity, which aligns with structuralist concerns about language instability.
• “The words ‘racism’ and ‘racist’ have become deeply entrenched in the moral vocabulary of the United States and Western Europe” (Blum, 2002, p. 205).
• This insight is relevant for semiotic studies, as it suggests that racial discourse is shaped by shifting linguistic meanings rather than fixed realities.

4. Reader-Response Theory

• Blum’s discussion of racial discomfort and anxiety contributes to Reader-Response Theory, particularly regarding how audiences interpret racialized texts.
• He argues that not all racial unease is due to racism, stating, “Racial discomfort is quite common… but it is not, in itself, racist” (Blum, 2002, p. 213).
• This aligns with Stanley Fish’s notion of interpretive communities, where racial interpretation varies depending on cultural context and personal experience.
• It highlights that literature containing racial themes may be interpreted differently depending on the racial awareness and biases of the reader.

5. New Historicism

• Blum’s emphasis on historical context in defining racism supports New Historicism, which argues that texts must be understood within their historical and cultural conditions.
• He stresses that racial stereotypes must be evaluated in both their historical and contemporary significance, writing, “Stereotypes must be viewed historically as well as contemporarily, and a given stereotype’s resonance with a much more distinctly racist stereotype renders it objectionable” (Blum, 2002, p. 212).
• This reinforces New Historicist approaches that contextualize literary depictions of race within broader historical power structures.

6. Ethical Criticism

• Blum’s moral argument about the overuse of racism as a term contributes to Ethical Criticism, which evaluates literature based on its moral implications.
• He argues that if all racial issues are labeled as “racist,” moral accountability is lost, stating, “The burden placed on the term ‘racism’ when it is used to describe all racial problems leads to a dilution of its significance” (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
• This aligns with ethical critics like Martha Nussbaum, who emphasize precision in moral critique within literature.

7. Intersectionality in Feminist Theory

• Blum’s broadening of racial discourse beyond black/white binaries contributes to Intersectionality Theory, which examines race, gender, and class together.
• He highlights how Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian-Americans are often excluded from race discussions, stating, “Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian-Americans may not be certain how to insert themselves into a discourse which seems to them dominated by ‘black/white’ issues” (Blum, 2002, p. 204).
• This aligns with Kimberlé Crenshaw’s intersectional critique of race and gender as multifaceted rather than monolithic.

1. Oversimplification of Racism’s Structural Nature

• Some scholars argue that Blum’s focus on individual acts of racism (antipathy and inferiorizing racism) does not fully address structural and institutional racism.
• Critics from Critical Race Theory (CRT) contend that racism is deeply embedded in legal, economic, and political institutions, not just in individual attitudes (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
• Blum’s emphasis on distinguishing racial issues from racism might distract from systemic oppression and racial inequalities.

2. Risks of Downplaying Everyday Racism

• By advocating for a more nuanced moral vocabulary (racial insensitivity, racial ignorance, racial anxiety, etc.), some argue that Blum risks minimizing the harm of “less severe” racial issues (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
• Critics worry that distinguishing racism from other racial problems might allow individuals and institutions to dismiss discriminatory actions as merely “insensitive” or “ignorant” rather than truly harmful.
• This critique aligns with Toni Morrison’s idea that subtle, everyday racism can be just as damaging as overt racism.

3. Conceptual Inflation vs. Linguistic Evolution

• Blum critiques “conceptual inflation”, arguing that overusing “racism” weakens its moral force (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
• However, linguists and sociologists counter that language evolves to reflect new social realities, and broader applications of racism (such as microaggressions and systemic biases) are necessary to describe contemporary racial dynamics.
• Scholars like Ibram X. Kendi argue that racism should be recognized wherever racial disparities exist, rather than limited to historical definitions.

4. Limited Engagement with Intersectionality

• Blum’s work primarily focuses on race as an isolated category but does not deeply engage with intersectionality, the idea that race intersects with gender, class, sexuality, and disability.
• Kimberlé Crenshaw’s Intersectionality Theory criticizes frameworks that examine race without considering how multiple systems of oppression interact.
• For example, Black women experience racism and sexism simultaneously, but Blum does not fully address how these forms of discrimination overlap.

5. Eurocentric and U.S.-Centered Perspective

• Blum’s analysis of racism is largely based on U.S. racial history and Western moral philosophy (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
• Some critics argue that his framework does not sufficiently account for racial dynamics in non-Western contexts, such as caste-based discrimination in India or ethnic tensions in Africa.
• Postcolonial theorists argue that racism must be examined globally, beyond U.S. legal and social structures.

6. The Practicality of His Distinctions

• While Blum’s nuanced definitions are useful for academic discussions, critics question whether they are practical in real-world applications.
• Activists argue that insisting on differentiating “racial insensitivity” from “racism” could complicate anti-racist efforts and lead to unnecessary debates rather than action.
• Angela Davis and other anti-racist activists emphasize that naming and challenging racism directly is more important than philosophically debating definitions.