Color Blindness but Not Myopia: A New Look at State Action, Equal Protection, and "Private" Racial Discrimination

1961 ◽  
Vol 59 (7) ◽  
pp. 993
Author(s):  
Theodore J. St. Antoine
2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 857-884
Author(s):  
Christine Grandy

AbstractIn 1967, when the BBC was faced with a petition by the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination requesting an end to the televised variety program the Black and White Minstrel Show (1958–1978), producers at the BBC, the press, and audience members collectively argued that the historic presence of minstrelsy in Britain rendered the practice of blacking up harmless. This article uses critical race theory as a useful framework for unpacking defenses that hinged on both the color blindness of white British audiences and the simultaneous existence of wider customs of blacking up within British television and film. I examine a range of “screen culture” from the 1920s to the 1970s, including feature films, home movies, newsreels, and television, that provide evidence of the existence of blackface as a type of racialized custom in British entertainment throughout this period. Efforts by organizations such as the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination, black press publications like Flamingo, and audiences of color to name blacking up and minstrelsy as racist in the late 1960s were met by fierce resistance from majority white audiences and producers, who denied their authority to do so. Concepts of color blindness or “racial innocence” thus become a useful means of examining, first, the wide-ranging existence of blacking-up practices within British screen culture; second, a broad reluctance by producers and the majority of audiences to identify this as racist; and third, the exceptional role that race played in characterizations of white audiences that were otherwise seen as historically fragile and impressionable in the face of screen content.


2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 499-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn R. Offermann ◽  
Tessa E. Basford ◽  
Raluca Graebner ◽  
Salman Jaffer ◽  
Sumona Basu De Graaf ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
pp. 501-567
Author(s):  
Ralph A. Rossum ◽  
G. Alan Tarr ◽  
Vincent Phillip Muñoz

Author(s):  
Mark Golub

Equal protection law operates within a narrative structure of fall and redemption. Framed as a repudiation of race, color-blind constitutionalism appears to enact this redemption by aspiring to transcend racial consciousness. And yet prohibitions against racial classification in fact serve to heighten and preserve racial awareness, in direct contradiction of their stated goals and justification. This chapter examines the narrative structure and constraints of equal protection law, within which efforts to achieve racial equality appear as equivalent to state-sponsored racial segregation. Theorizing color-blindness as a kind of performative contradiction, it demonstrates the race-conscious logic of color-blind constitutionalism.


Author(s):  
Mark Golub

This introductory chapter analyzes how color-blindness discourse functions simultaneously as legal doctrine and as political ideology. As doctrine, “getting beyond race” is the ostensible goal of both conservative and liberal theories of equal protection, expressed as principles of anticlassification or antidiscrimination respectively. Both views are criticized by antisubordination theory, which rejects color-blindness even in its aspirational form. As ideology, color-blindness establishes a racial common sense meant to reconcile the nation’s moral condemnation of racism with entrenched and pervasive material inequality by race. The chapter seeks to move beyond color-blindness and color-consciousness by analyzing both terms as elements of racial formation and by exposing color-blind constitutionalism’s underlying racial commitments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document