Why the critical race theory concept of ‘White supremacy’ should not be dismissed by neo-Marxists: Lessons from contemporary Black radicalism

Abstract

Since entering the field of education studies, critical race theory has had an uneasy relationship with Marxism. One particular point of disagreement between Marxists and critical race theory scholars centres on the critical race theory concept of ‘White supremacy’. Some Marxist scholars suggest that, because of its reliance on ‘White supremacy’, critical race theory is unable to explain the prevalence of racism in Western, capitalist societies. These Marxists also argue that ‘White supremacy’ as understood within CRT is actively damaging to radical, emancipatory movements because the concept misrepresents the position of the White working class as the beneficiaries of racism, and in doing so, it alienates White workers from their Black counterparts. Some neo-Marxist thinkers have sought to replace the concept of ‘White supremacy’ with ‘racialisation’, a concept which is grounded in capitalist modes of production and has a historical, political and economic basis. Drawing on arguments from critical race theory, Marxism and Black radicalism, this paper argues that the critical race theory concept of ‘White supremacy’ is itself grounded in historical, political and economic reality and should not be dismissed by neo-Marxists. Incorporating ‘White supremacy’ into a neo-Marxist account of racism makes it more appealing to a broader (Black) radical audience.

A prolegomenon to a critical race theoretical Marxism

“…The first time that CRT made its presence felt within the field of education studies was probably with the publication of Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995). Some 10 years later, CRT had established itself in educational scholarship within the UK (See Cole, 2009aCole, , 2017aWalton, 2020 for a fuller discussion of the development of CRT and its adoption by educational scholars). Shortly after entering education studies in the UK, CRT encountered a host of criticisms.…”

“…Yet while the concept of White supremacy is indispensable in our theorising about racism, it cannot, in and of itself, account for the multifaceted nature of racism. (Walton, 2020: 91) As well as recognising that 'White supremacy' is necessary but not sufficient for explaining all forms of racism, the conclusion of Walton (2020) points out that even once the theoretical veracity of 'White supremacy' is established, further theorising need to be employed to link it to forms of racism that are not so obviously based on a White/non-White binary distinction. Also, several strategies for such theorising are available, but a proper discussion of them is beyond the scope of the arguments presented in the paper:…”

“…(Walton, 2020: 91) In summary, the three broad strategies outlined in Walton (2020) are: Employing 'Whiteness' as a 'shifting signifier' that may or may not apply only to people with white skin; limiting the concept of racism somewhat severely to one which involved a distinction between White identified and Black identified people and incorporating the concept into a broader, neo-Marxist account for explaining racism. In Walton (2020), the preferred strategy for explaining racism is identified as the final one, which uses both 'White Supremacy' combined with a neo-Marxist analysis to provide a comprehensive account of racism. Despite these arguments and caveats presented in Walton (2020) that clearly do not suggest that 'White supremacy' in and of itself, without supplementary theory, functions as a universal explanation for every form of racism, the first half of Cole (2020) misrepresents the arguments found in Walton (2020) in a subtle, but important, way and offers a critique based on an oversimplified understanding of 'White supremacy' as a one-size fits all explanation of every form of racism.…”

“…In Walton (2020), the preferred strategy for explaining racism is identified as the final one, which uses both 'White Supremacy' combined with a neo-Marxist analysis to provide a comprehensive account of racism. Despite these arguments and caveats presented in Walton (2020) that clearly do not suggest that 'White supremacy' in and of itself, without supplementary theory, functions as a universal explanation for every form of racism, the first half of Cole (2020) misrepresents the arguments found in Walton (2020) in a subtle, but important, way and offers a critique based on an oversimplified understanding of 'White supremacy' as a one-size fits all explanation of every form of racism. Cole (2020) bases most of his critique of the paper on the three strategies in Walton (2020) outlined above for theorising racisms that are (at least prima facie) beyond the White/non-white binary, even though these are only introduced briefly in the conclusion where it is stated that a proper discussion of them is, 'beyond the scope of this paper.…”

Organizational behavior management through group counseling discussions as a radicalism preventive effort

“…At that time there is also the disclosure and understanding of client problems, delineation of causes of problems, problem solving efforts (if necessary apply specific methods), evaluation of activities and follow-up (Berg, R. C., Landreth, G. L., & Fall, 2013;Winkel, W. S., & Hastuti, 2005). From this it can be understood that group counseling discussion is appropriate to be used to manage organizational behavior in order to avoid the behaviors of radicalism (Muazza et al, 2018;Walton, 2020).…”