Racist knowledge

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Racist knowledge is an analytical category that examines racism not only as an individual prejudice , but as part of a social value system .

As racial knowledge has David Theo Goldberg is the process legitimized the one hand, racism by the established sciences and also certain scientific fields using the category of race be constructed.

Mark Terkessidis describes ideas about “strangers” that are valid and supported by a clear consensus of the majority of all members of society as racist knowledge , which are primarily “lived” through social practice and have a close connection with institutions - “material apparatus” - such as B. Labor market, citizenship and hegemonic culture ( institutional racism ).

Origin of the term

On the basis of descriptions by the writer Richard Wright , and against the background of research results by Teun A. van Dijk , Alphons Silbermann and Francis Hüser as well as, in particular, discourse analyzes by Siegfried Jäger on racist phenomena in individuals, groups and in the media, Terkessidis does not follow racism explain more than an “exceptional phenomenon in social functioning”, according to which racism is primarily examined as a state of individual errors such as prejudices and stereotypes. Above all, the belief of many racism theorists that there is a prejudice-free majority of society and that, by means of their individualistic racism analyzes, a correction or even a therapy of "distorted perceptions" can be attempted at the same time, according to Terkessidis, contradicts the studies, since they cannot explain why only very specific groups of society are affected by racism and why racism experiences different cycles. The studies show that essential elements of racism in society belong to the normal - “normative” - body of knowledge.

Social practice

Terkessidis illustrates the social practice of racism using an example from an essay by Earl Raab and Seymour Martin Lipset , "The Prejudiced Society". The authors describe how a white toddler in the southern United States "only comes into contact with blacks who are in subordinate positions". Clothing, education, apartments, work, schools deviate completely from the living conditions of the toddler, but are constantly perceived as normal. The toddler grows up with the experience of being in a superior situation to black people.

Differentiation between prejudice and racism

According to Terkessidis, racism is not a delusion, but is “lived” in a practical unit of knowledge and institutions in a permanent process. Since racism is not just a prejudice about people who are perceived as "foreign", but a continuous and collective phenomenon in modern societies, Mark Terkessidis criticizes the concept of prejudice as a psychological explanation for racism and proposes the following seven theses:

  • Racism is not a personal fallacy

Racism does not arise from the fact that a person is subject to an error, perceives reality in a distorted manner or because he reacts pathologically to appearances that are strange to him.

“Racism does not arise from aggregating personal problems - errors, distortions of perception or pathological reactions - of individuals. In this respect, it is misleading from the outset to designate the object of investigation as prejudice or ethnic prejudice, because this term implies the idea of ​​an individual error. "
  • “Judgments” are in turn constructed

A prejudice presupposes that a “correct” judgment about something - e.g. B. "the stranger" - can be formed. What is to be judged as “correct”, however, only emerged through a certain practice and a certain discourse. The judgment that “strangers” are “different” already presupposes, for example, the production of “racist knowledge” through “lived racism”.

“But there are other reasons that speak against the term prejudice. It assumes that a correct judgment is possible about some pre-existing 'object' (...). In fact, however, this 'object' is created in the first place through a certain practice and a certain discourse. "
  • Historical constitutional conditions and power relations

Racism is expressed in the relationships and relationships between groups. It is therefore necessary to examine how these groups were formed and what conditions were underlying this formation and their relationship to one another. For example " guest workers " / "German post-war society " etc.

“In order to understand racism, one must focus on the relationships between groups. However, as I said, the groups or categories are not preformed, natural conditions. Therefore, both the concrete historical constitutional conditions of the groups and the conditions of the relationship between them must be analyzed. "
  • Racist knowledge is considered plausible in the dominant group

Prejudices and stereotypes correspond to the actual perception of members of a group. They describe the existing relationship between a group and a group that is “foreign” or perceived as “different” and stabilizes its own position in society as a whole. They are recognized as normal and explanatory and are part of “social knowledge”. The users of prejudices receive positive confirmations from their group, since racist knowledge belongs to the socially unifying common property of the whole group.

“Prejudices or stereotypes are not a simple distortion of reality, but rather, for the members of the hegemonic group, they reflect the relationship between the groups in a very 'appropriate' way. These are forms of 'social knowledge' which explain reality plausibly to their users and which constantly receive positive feedback from the consensus of the group. In order to avoid the terms prejudice and stereotype, I would like to refer to the existence of such 'explanations' in society as racist knowledge. "
  • Racist knowledge is part of the hegemonic group's canon of cultural values

Socially dominant groups refer to common values ​​that are formed in contrast to other groups, e.g. B. in statements such as: "We whites are 'civilized'", " Negroes are 'wild'" etc. The racist knowledge of "the others" can be used to confirm which values ​​the own group defines as common.

“There is a connection between the hegemonic values ​​in a group and the judgmental group categorizations. The contents of racist knowledge are therefore not arbitrary, but result from the canon of cultural values ​​widespread in the hegemonic group. With the collective definition of the others in accordance with the hegemonic values, the group also constantly defines its 'self'. "
  • Racist knowledge serves to legitimize the dominance relationship and historically adapts to the requirements

The description of the relationship between the dominant group and the excluded group determines the content of racist knowledge. Above all, they serve to legitimize one's own dominant position. They are temporally adaptable and changeable to historical requirements.

“In the content of racist knowledge, the concrete relationship between one's own and the other is therefore defined with the help of the canon of values ​​of the dominant group. Both this ratio and the canon of values ​​are historically variable. This leads to constant collective redefinitions. "
  • Racist knowledge can be redefined as needed

Racist knowledge is constantly adapted to the circumstances and redefined if necessary. If this knowledge is recognized as incompatible with the 'ethos of equality' recognized in modern societies, new definitions emerge with the aim of defending one's own dominant position.

“Defending and redefining the relationship is a defense of the position of the dominant group. Racist knowledge continuously legitimizes the overriding position of a group. Such legitimation is necessary because the inequality between the groups is felt to be unjustified in view of the 'ethos of equality'. "

(Quotes: Terkessidis 1998, p. 59f)

Institutional and organizational basis of racist knowledge

David Theo Goldberg defines racial knowledge as the result of a dual development: On the one hand, racist knowledge is based on nowadays established sciences such as anthropology , natural history and biology . From these it receives the cloak of scientificity, the formal character and the apparent universality. In this way, racist knowledge gains legitimacy and authority. On the other hand, it is only able to do this because historically it has contributed to the emergence and rise of these fields of science. Because race, so Goldberg, was a fundamental categorical object of these sciences and in some cases even the substantive focus of scientific analysis. This phenomenon was facilitated by the importance of difference for the development of knowledge of the modern age, already established by Michel Foucault .

Discourse-analytical studies by Teun van Dijk (1987) from the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona and Jäger (1992) have found for the USA, the Netherlands and Germany that at certain times certain topics are in the foreground of racist knowledge. It is found that in Germany in the 1990s these issues were primarily a negatively interpreted otherness, the threat - e. B. of security and cultural identity - and economic competition. It examines the issues that first come to mind when locals think about foreigners . These topics are called topoi according to Heinrich Popitz . Racist knowledge is “organized” in these topoi. The amount of thematic, content and rhetorical statements is manageable. These topoi do not depend on the personal experience or the worldview of the individual, but on the experience and "practice" of the common group. The individual chooses the topoi that “make sense” to him the most.

According to Terkessidis, topoi are “ hybrid structures, i. H. they are both form and content. On the one hand, it is about those topics that are currently given when the field foreigners is mentioned, on the other hand, topoi also ensure the coherence and recognizability of the discourse that is organized around them. "Terkessidis refers to Gehlen , the topoi as" Institutions of the people of thought ”describes:“ They work (...) in many ways as centers of gravity, signposts, inhibitions, coordinators. ”According to Terkessidis, the group of autochthons can use these topoi“ as a valid matter of course again and again without the risk of disagreements and conflicts ”.

According to Terkessidis, topoi are not static, but very flexible and form a “discursive formation”: “50 years ago, one would not have subtly assessed the otherness of blacks, for example, negatively, but spoke openly about their inferiority. Although the topos has changed, the basis of the statement has not changed: 'It is still undisputed that two fundamentally different collectives, i.e. whites and blacks, exist with certain characteristics and face each other as alien.' ” Jonathan Potter (Loughborough University) and Margaret Wetherell (Open University (UK)) refer to the entirety of such a discursive formation as an “ interpretive repertoire ” (stock of possible interpretations). Thus, according to Terkessidis, topoi are "embedded in an almost inexhaustible universe of pre-constructions on the subject of" race ", culture and ethnic groups, in a variety of ways to legitimately articulate racist knowledge at the moment." Terkessidis refers to Alain de Benoist , who like the Interviewee from the investigation currently uses topoi of otherness and threat and compares it with Arthur de Gobineau . Terkessidis notes that Alain de Benoist uses different topoi than Gobineau, but uses a similar repertoire. By referring to Johann Gottfried von Herder , Robert Ardrey and Arthur Jensen , Alain de Benoist can "bring the topoi to language" in a different way.

The topoi are related to “specific” experiences of the group, while interpretive repertoires can be generalized. Terkessidis: “The topoi are specific insofar as it is possible for whites, for example, to claim that the black race is happy-go-lucky and sexually excessive, but it is not possible for blacks to claim the same about whites. The assignment of the characteristics 'lazy and dirty' to whites has no external support in reality. Blacks, however, can claim to be sun people, while whites are inferior ice people . Or they can claim, like the Nation of Islam , that they are the 'original people' of the earth and that whites are blue eyed devils, a genetic accident that emerged from the experiments of the evil scientist Yakub . The repertoire that asserts the existence of two different races and assumes them to have certain characteristics based on the social situation remains completely intact. "

Terkessidis concludes from this that repertoires have "extensive autonomy" in practice. The “objects” of racist knowledge have been made visible by institutionalized practice. For example, at the beginning of colonization, the Spaniards brought the blacks to the fore as a group through the practice of their racial caste society. There is no evidence that blacks “perceived themselves as a group because of their main color” before colonization. Only when a group is made visible as an “object” is it possible to form or “acquire” knowledge about it. The Spaniards then “sent their researchers to determine the“ inferiority ”of the“ objects ” with the help of the current discursive practice of science at the time ; a reality indeed, but one that the Spaniards had previously created themselves. (...) A flood of “race theories” developed. Today the repertoires of racist knowledge are used in general, often even by the opponents of racism, without it being clear what power relations have contributed to the development of the repertoires. "

Terkessidis emphasizes that the topoi are directly related to the respective social situation of the respective group, and refers to the situation diagram of the Bonn psychologist Hans Thomae . This can be used to characterize racist knowledge. So the racist knowledge has the effect of a "social knowledge" for the autochthonous group. In this way, racist knowledge offers simple insights even for complex contradictions. One such contradiction is the postulate in modern bourgeois society that “all people are equal”. Against this background, social inequalities such as privileges and dominance or the distinction between a “1. World "and a" 3rd world "need explanation. Terkessidis: “The explanations are of course wrong, but they are not an illusion. But the knowledge not only serves as a reason for the differences, it also functions as a legitimation for these differences. Because racist knowledge 'realizes' the overriding position of the autochthons permanently. "

One way of getting around these contradictions is the idea that racist attitudes are merely an exception or a “delusion”. In contrast, the function of racism can only be understood if it is examined as a unit of knowledge and institution. The American psychologist Joseph Renny Noel reversed the traditional perspective on racism as an individual exception in 1972: “Since racism is so ubiquitous, it is as good as inevitable. The real problem could therefore be not to explain why people acquire prejudice, but why some people reject these biased attitudes. "

An essential motivation to perceive racism as a pathological individual problem is also the fact that a “democratic society cannot admit” that “the stock of social knowledge naturally also includes racist knowledge. The racist knowledge has a 'dilemmatic character', i. H. it exists subject to its illegitimacy. We know from discourse analysis studies that racist remarks are often introduced with sentences such as I am not a racist, but ... or We are all human beings, but ... ” (Terkessidis). Van Dyk calls these strategies "apparent denial". Terkessidis concludes from this "obvious dilemma" that there "must be a practice that creates this conflict within knowledge".

Michel Foucault writes in The Order of Things : "Modern thinking advances even more fundamentally in that direction in which the other in man must become what he is."

Sabine Forschner explains this fact using the anti-racist do- gooder : “This is also the basis of the tyranny of well-meaning stranger friends , who usually try to recognize what is their own in what is foreign, instead of recognizing what is foreign in themselves through what is foreign. Unfortunately, the consequence of this is all too often that the other subject, based on general equality, has his or her own needs, ethical or moral ideas and goals, which in my opinion contradicts the original demand for equality for everyone. "

According to Terkessidis, these conflicts are generated by “the institutionalized equality postulates of liberal democracy . However, it must be said historically that the practice of liberal democracy has always proven to be weaker than the practice that implies racism. Usually the conflict is 'resolved' by 'building' the conflicting liberal principles into racist knowledge. "

Another cause of such conflicts is the resistance of people affected by racism to the institutions that racist them. In doing so, they would have the opportunity to make demands in two directions that would “solve” the conflict, but which would produce new forms of racist knowledge. Terkessidis: “Either they rely on the values ​​of abstract equality (which means assimilation ) or they demand recognition of one's own difference or identity. So these struggles are in turn [conditioned] by the institutions, whose practice continually brings them to the fore as a particular group. ”Because of the unequal balance of power, it is not the institutional practice that is changed, only the racist knowledge. Terkessidis: "Nevertheless: the practice of liberal democracy and the practice of anti-institutional struggles form the only basis for the fact that someone is not prejudiced or at least finds out that he is prejudiced ."

Since racism is a "practical unit of knowledge and institutions", a "complex overall ensemble" arises which "when it is in 'operation' can be influenced from all sides". Terkessidis: “Changes in knowledge can also result in changes in institutions. However, racism will only disappear with the institutions that create it. "

Historical origins

Knowledge production in the German colonial society

Kien Nghi Ha examines the production of knowledge in German colonial society . According to Kien Nghi Ha, the colonies were “used not only as suppliers of raw materials, settlement areas, sales and capital markets, but also as ' laboratories of modernity ' and ' school of the nation '”. During the colonial period, in “popular culture”, travel literature, photographs, national shows and other media were used to “serve exotic foreignness and racist stereotypes” and “make them tangible”. In this presentation of the “foreign”, the encounter with them was staged “hierarchically”: “These representational spaces connected the symbolic with the real world to form imaginary projection surfaces that were determined by the gaze of the white subject and charged with colonial pedagogy. Undoubtedly, the colonial experience, with the images that continue to circulate in this country, has significantly shaped the construction of whiteness and otherness . ”Thus, an“ open encounter ”between Germans and colonized people was not possible due to the foreign images, the racist processes and the inequalities of power:“ Under these conditions the images of oneself and others are racially formatted and brought into a rigid relationship of belonging and foreignness, of superiority and subordination. Such deformed worldviews have given rise to social Darwinist images of man and feelings of superiority, but also to missionary and colonial-pedagogical zeal. ”Kien Nghi Ha states that in this process the“ scientific knowledge production ”did not offer an enlightening or“ emancipatory role ”, and instead of“ as academic disciplines such as botany, tropical medicine, geography, anthropology and linguistics functioned almost without exception as willing colonial techniques. "

Racist Knowledge in the History of Science

ethnology

Katharina Schramm examines racist knowledge based on the history of science in ethnology. Schramm sees “The origins of ethnology (...) closely linked to the western expansion and colonial history and the scientific tradition of the Enlightenment. It was primarily anthropology , biology and philosophy as well as the popularization of the topics debated here in contemporary travel and adventure literature that played a key role in the production of "racial knowledge" and thus profoundly shaped the ideology of a white European society. "She recognizes Here racialization processes in the subject construction in the self- and external attribution of the European researchers: “Here the racialized difference was raised to the fundamental principle of a taxonomic world order, through which a white self was constructed, which was defined in contrast to a multitude of objectified 'others' . A “ natural” hierarchy of “races” was proclaimed in Manichaean fashion, at the head of which stood the white European: rational, enlightened, controlled; and at the bottom of which blacks were placed: irrational, superstitious, sexually promiscuous and cannibalized - endowed with all those negative attributes from which the white subject wanted to distance himself. "

Racist Knowledge in Visual Discourses

Racist knowledge is also expressed in the viewer's visual expectations. Racist knowledge forms the basis for statements that claim that it is visible whether someone belongs to the group of "us" or the "other". Just as in certain professions that are male-dominated, many expect that a professorship in medicine, for example, will be held by a man and not a woman, so it is part of racist knowledge that a German Chancellor is physically of a certain skin color is assigned. Even the fact whether someone is perceived as a German citizen depends on the visual discourse. In this discourse, for example, skin color or other physical characteristics are used to mark whether someone is German or not. Here, on the basis of racial markings, a difference (difference) in belonging to one's own society is constructed, which is based on the racist knowledge that skin color is a characteristic of whether someone belongs or not. What is constructed is what we are and what is our own and what is to be excluded from it because it is perceived as different or foreign due to the racialization of certain physical characteristics.

Passing

Stuart Hall sees a connection between the “visual discourse and the production of (racialized) knowledge (s)”, which Aischa Ahmed made clear through the passage . According to Aischa Ahmed, "Perception and non-perception of difference (...) are associated with certain expectations that are particularly pronounced on the visual level." Aischa Ahmed demonstrates the connection between visual discourses and racist knowledge in her study "Well, somehow one has seen that ”. Passing in Germany - Reflections on Representation and Difference. based on the passing. Passing shows how the visual expectations of “white people” are deceived, how representative spaces are formed by a social norm of being white , that being white, in contrast to being black, is not marked and is therefore not perceived in its privileges. Here, the relationship between is racist knowledge and visual discourse visible in the write-up of the skin color of siblings who have the same ancestors, but because of the perception of their physical characteristics - here the skin color - sometimes as a German to go through or not. In interviews, Aischa Ahmed presents various experiences of “Black Germans” that “ could happen as white ”. M. - one of the interviewees - is "often addressed because of her name". In the interview she replied " when asked how she is seen by white people":

Personally, I find that very different. As long as you do not say anything, they are puzzled by the name and there are frequent inquiries. And then it depends. There are people who say, 'Hach, the name' and then the question arises, how long have I been there or whether I was born here or how it came about that I have such a name. It also depends on whether I then say 'Yes, my grandfather is from Africa', or whether I say anything at all or not. I think I used to be less specific about that. But now I often don't say so much about it. Because the typical reaction that came up quite often was: 'Well, somehow you saw it.' And then I just think, 'yes mmh'. That's just a very acidic and stupid reaction. I don't know what people want to see then ... the full mouth or - I don't know. Is very strange.

In a review of the anthology re / visionen - which focuses on people of color's postcolonial perspectives on racism, cultural politics and resistance in Germany - three years after her study, Aischa Ahmed takes up the importance of visual discourses for racial power relations and the possibility of Counter-discourses on:

Black people - the German synonym for People of Color - are seen from the dominant perspective, regardless of whether they immigrated recently or hundreds of years ago, as “others” of society, as “others” of Europe. So it is about power relations, and one form of hegemonic formation is to make people immobile, to silence them, by means of culturalistic and racial attributions.

Definitions of terms

In Wikipedia, according to the current state of knowledge production, certain central concepts of this topic are not treated as independent lemmas. In the following, the key concepts for this lemma are explained.

Racialization

Racization, derived from race , means the categorization of supposed characteristics of a group of people as essential or identitarian for them . Racialization thus describes social processes (process of racialization) that construct “race” and “ethnicity”.

Mark Terkessidis describes racialization as a process of race construction "in which on the one hand a group of people is defined as a natural group by means of certain characteristics and at the same time the nature of this group is formulated in relation to one's own group" - Maureen Maisha Eggers describes racialization as the "imprinting of Identity through constructions of race and ethnicity ”. According to Eggers, racialization differs from racism in that it initially does not hierarchize groups of people. Depending on the perspective, however, power differences can also be described.

Processes of racialization are comparable or are synonymous with the processes of essentialization , culturalization and ethnicization .

criticism

The conception of racist knowledge related to Foucault is criticized from the perspective of Critical Realism (see Critical Realism ). Because through the view that knowledge is completely determined by the social conditions under which it is produced, not only racist, but also non-racist and anti-racist knowledge would be relativized, whereby the possibilities of critical social science threatened to disappear.

In her review of Mark Terkessidis' Die Banality des Racism, Claudia Perlitius criticizes that the author does not name the "common structures of discrimination based on other characteristics (gender, disability, social class / class ...) and does not address the relevant research."

literature

  • Roland Barthes : Myths of Everyday Life (= edition suhrkamp. 2425). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2003, ISBN 3-518-12425-0 .
  • Maureen Maisha Eggers: Racized Power Difference as an Interpretative Perspective in Critical Whiteness Research in Germany. In: Maureen Maisha Eggers, Grada Kilomba , Peggy Piesche, Susan Arndt (eds.): Myths, masks and subjects. Critical whiteness research in Germany. Unrast-Verlag, Münster 2005, ISBN 3-89771-440-X , p. 56–72, here p. 64 ff .: The ticket into the mainstream - racist knowledge as a white consensus.
  • Maureen Maisha Eggers: Black identity, transculturality and the task of political education. In: AntiDiskriminierungsBüro (ADB) Cologne by the public against violence eV and CyberNomads (cbN) (ed.): The blackbook. Germany's moults. IKO - Verlag für Interkulturelle Kommunikation, Frankfurt am Main et al. 2004, ISBN 3-88939-745-X , pp. 155–159, ( online) .
  • Maureen Maisha Eggers, Grada Kilomba , Peggy Piesche, Susan Arndt (eds.): Myths, masks and subjects. Critical whiteness research in Germany. Unrast-Verlag, Münster 2005, ISBN 3-89771-440-X (see also Weißsein , literature there).
  • Michel Foucault : Archeology of Knowledge (= Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft. 356). Translated by Ulrich Köppen. 3. Edition. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-27956-4 .
  • David Theo Goldberg : Racist Culture. Philosophy and the Politics of Meaning. Blackwell, Oxford et al. 1993, ISBN 0-631-18078-8 .
  • Siegfried Jäger : Critical Discourse Analysis. An introduction (= Edition DISS. Edition of the Duisburg Institute for Linguistic and Social Research. 3). 4th, unchanged edition. Unrast-Verlag, Münster 2004, ISBN 3-89771-732-8 .
  • Beth Ann Merenstein: Racial reproduction. The development and expression of racial knowledge among immigrants. 2003, (University of Connecticut, Phil. Dissertation, 2003; Online ).
  • Claudia Perlitius: “You speak German well!” On the trail of “banal” racism. In: Forum Law . Vol. 23, No. 3, 2005, pp. 93–95, (review of Mark Terkessidis' “The Banality of Racism”; digitized version (PDF; 79.05 KB) ).
  • Harvey Sacks : On Formal Characteristics of Practical Action. In: Elmar Weingarten , Fritz Sack , Jim Schenkein (eds.): Ethnomethodology. Contributions to a sociology of everyday action (= Suhrkamp-Taschenbücher Wissenschaft. 71). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1976, ISBN 3-518-07671-X , pp. 130-176.
  • Mark Terkessidis : The Banality of Racism. Second generation migrants develop a new perspective. Transcript, Bielefeld 2004, ISBN 3-89942-263-5 .
  • Mark Terkessidis: Psychology of Racism. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen et al. 1998, ISBN 3-531-13040-4 .
  • Mark Terkessidis: Woven into the texture of things. Racism as a practical unit of knowledge and institution. In: Andreas Disselnkötter, Siegfried Jäger, Helmut Kellershohn , Susanne Slobodzian (eds.): Evidenzen im Fluß. Loss of democracy in Germany. Model D - Gender - Racism - PC. DISS, Duisburg 1997, ISBN 3-927388-60-2 , pp. 172-187.

Literature to which Terkessidis refers above all

  • Louis Althusser : Ideology and ideological state apparatus . Essays on Marxist theory (= series of positions. 3). VSA, Hamburg et al. 1977, ISBN 3-87975-109-9 .
  • Peter L. Berger , Thomas Luckmann : The social construction of reality. A theory of the sociology of knowledge (= Fischer. 6623). 34-35 Thousand. Fischer-Taschenbuch-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1994, ISBN 3-596-26623-8 .
  • Rogers Brubaker: State Citizen. Germany and France in historical comparison. Junius, Hamburg 1994, ISBN 3-88506-234-8 .
  • Philomena Essed : Understanding Everyday Racism. An Interdisciplinary Theory (= Sage Series on Race and Ethnic Relations. 2). Sage Publications, Newbury Park CA et al. 1991, ISBN 0-8039-4255-9 .
  • Arnold Gehlen : primitive people and late culture. Philosophical results and statements. Athenäum-Verlag, Bonn 1956.
  • Friedrich Heckmann: Ethnic minorities, people and nation. Sociology of Inter-Ethnic Relations. Enke, Stuttgart 1992, ISBN 3-432-99971-2 .
  • Frantz Fanon : Black skin, white masks (= Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch. 1186). License issue. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1985, ISBN 3-518-37686-1 .
  • Siegfried Jäger: BrandSätze. Racism in everyday life. DISS, Duisburg 1992, ISBN 3-927388-29-7 .
  • Marget Jäger: Fatal effects. The criticism of patriarchy in the immigration discourse. DISS, Duisburg 1996, ISBN 3-927388-52-1 (At the same time: Oldenburg, University, dissertation: Ethnicisation of sexism in the everyday discourse of immigration. ).
  • Robert Miles : Racism. Introduction to the history and theory of a term. Argument-Verlag, Hamburg et al. 1991, ISBN 3-88619-389-6 .
  • Joseph R. Noel: The Norm of White. Antiblack Prejudice in the United States. In: International Journal of Group Tensions. Vol. 2, 1972, ISSN  0047-0732 , pp. 51-62.
  • Michel Pécheux: On the role of memory as an interdiscursive material. A research project in the context of discourse analysis and archive reading. In: Manfred Geier , Harold Woetzel (ed.): The subject of discourse. Contributions to the linguistic formation of subjectivity and intersubjectivity (= argument special volume. 98). Argument-Verlag, Berlin 1983, ISBN 3-88619-098-6 , pp. 50-58.
  • Alphons Silbermann , Francis Hüsers: The "normal" hatred of strangers. A social science study on the extent and background of xenophobia in Germany. Quintessenz, Berlin et al. 1995, ISBN 3-86128-327-1 .
  • Hans Thomae: location and location scheme. (1958). In: Hans Thomae: Dynamics of human action. Selected writings on psychology 1944–1984. Edited by Ursula M. Lehr and Franz E. Weinert. Bouvier, Bonn 1985, ISBN 3-416-01854-0 , pp. 125-136.
  • Teun A. van Dijk : Communicating Racism. Ethnic Prejudice in Thought and Talk. Sage Publications, Newbury Park CA et al. 1987, ISBN 0-8039-2674-X .
  • Margaret Wetherell, Jonathan Potter : Mapping the Language of Racism. Discourse and the Legitimation of Exploitation. Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York NY et al. 1992, ISBN 0-7450-0621-3 .

Web links

Footnotes

  1. ^ Goldberg: Racist Culture. 1993, p. 148 ff.
  2. ↑ Heribert Faßbender, the Argentinos and national comfort. Footnote 20 ( Memento of March 22, 2007 in the Internet Archive ).
  3. ↑ There seems to be a citation error here, as a word is apparently missing.
  4. ^ Kien Nghi Ha : Macht (t) raum (a) Berlin - Germany as a colonial society. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 105–117, here p. 107.
  5. ^ Kien Nghi Ha: Macht (t) raum (a) Berlin - Germany as a colonial society. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 105–117, here and the following citations p. 107.
  6. ^ Kien Nghi Ha: Macht (t) raum (a) Berlin - Germany as a colonial society. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 105–117, here p. 109.
  7. ↑ Schramm refers to the term racial knowledge in: Goldberg: Racist Culture. 1993, p. 149. See Nicholas Thomas: Colonialism's Culture. Anthropology, Travel and Government. Polity Press, Cambridge 1994, ISBN 0-7456-0871-X , p. 82; Johannes Fabian: Time and the Other. How Anthropology makes its Object. Columbia University Press, New York NY et al. 1983, ISBN 0-231-05590-0 , p. 8.
  8. ^ A b Katharina Schramm: Whiteness as a subject of research. Methodological reflection and 'new fields' in ethnology. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 460-475, here p. 461.
  9. ↑ See Aischa Ahmed: “Well, somehow you saw it”. Passing in Germany - Reflections on Representation and Difference. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 270–282, here pp. 270 ff. As well as Stuart Hall : Selected writings. Volume 4: Ideology, Identity, Representation. Argument-Verlag, Hamburg 2004, ISBN 3-88619-326-8 .
  10. ↑ Stuart Hall: The Spectacle of the 'Other'. In: Stuart Hall: Selected Writings. Volume 4: Ideology, Identity, Representation. Argument-Verlag, Hamburg 2004, ISBN 3-88619-326-8 , pp. 108–166, here p. 128. Quoted from Aischa Ahmed: “Well, somehow you saw it”. Passing in Germany - Reflections on Representation and Difference. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 270-282.
  11. ↑ Aischa Ahmed: "Well, somehow you saw it". Passing in Germany - Reflections on Representation and Difference. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 270–282, here p. 270.
  12. ↑ Aischa Ahmed: "Well, somehow you saw it". Passing in Germany - Reflections on Representation and Difference. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 270–282, here pp. 270 ff.
  13. ↑ a b Aischa Ahmed: "Well, somehow you saw that". Passing in Germany - Reflections on Representation and Difference. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 270-282, here p. 275.
  14. ↑ Kien Nghi Ha, Nicola Lauré al-Samarai, Sheila Mysorekar (eds.): Re / visionen. Postcolonial Perspectives of People of Color on Racism, Cultural Politics and Resistance in Germany. Unrast, Münster 2007, ISBN 978-3-89771-458-8 .
  15. ↑ Registered mail - continue writing. ( Memento from October 22, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Aischa Ahmed: Review of “re / visionen. Postcolonial Perspectives of People of Color on Racism, Cultural Politics and Resistance in Germany ”. Heinrich Böll Foundation. June 2008.
  16. ↑ a b Maureen Maisha Eggers: Black identity, transculturality and the task of political education. In: AntiDiskriminierungsBüro (ADB) Cologne by the public against violence eV and CyberNomads (cbN) (ed.): The blackbook. Germany's moults. 2004, pp. 155-159.
  17. ↑ Mark Terkessidis, The Banality of Racism - Second Generation Migrants Develop a New Perspective, Bielefeld 2004. Quoted from: Claudia Perlitius: “But you speak German well!” On the trail of “banal” racism. In: Forum Law. Vol. 23, No. 3, 2005, pp. 93-95.
  18. ↑ Maureen Maisha Eggers: Racized Power Difference as an Interpretative Perspective in Critical Whiteness Research in Germany. In: Eggers ua (Hrsg.): Myths, Masken und Subjecte. 2005, pp. 56-72.
  19. ↑ Compare Bob Carter: Realism and Racism. Concepts of Race in Sociological Research. Routledge, London et al. 2000, ISBN 0-415-23372-0 , p. 31 ff.
  20. ↑ Claudia Perlitius: “You speak German well!” On the trail of “banal” racism. In: Forum Law. Vol. 23, No. 3, 2005, pp. 93-95.