Hi Readers,
As someone who loves history, and someone who watches way more TV than is good for them, I thought I would kick off the historical topics section of the blog, with my reflection on a documentary called “Who We Are: A Chronicle of racism in America.” I accessed this documentary via Netflix, but I would recommend looking it up on YouTube, as it is no longer available on Netflix, as of the time of this posting.
The documentary uses historical sources, the presenter’s own experiences with racism, and news footage, to deliver a truly captivating and informative film to viewers. The presenter and writer of this film is Mr. Jeffrey Robinson, a lawyer who has worked for the ACLU out of Memphis Tennessee. He started this project in an attempt to learn more about the history of racism in America, in order to understand what his young adopted son was facing as a black male in America. In addition to historical sources, he also talks to the audience about the implicit Association test he took via the Harvard website. He makes the point that at first, he thought the test results were false, because they showed that he had implicit bias towards African-American males, even though he himself belonged to that ethnic minority.
He then has his studio audience go through an exercise where they are given words in different colors and asked to say the color that they see on the screen but not the word. He also has the audience complete an exercise where they are shown randomly arranged shapes and asked if they see any specific symbols, such as a triangle, circle, star of David, etc. All these exercises are designed to show audience members, along with viewers of the documentary, that our brains are designed to fill in gaps between random bits of information to, “make the world make sense, and that when these assumptions come from negative, or false information, they can be considered negative biases. Personally, I think that this was a great and captivating way to reel the audience in and explain concepts like implicit bias in a factual, but easy to understand way.
Robinson then makes a claim, whose sentiment I agree with, but that I have a little trouble with the language of. Robinson states, that because many police departments, particularly those in the South, were rooted in slave patrols, it is basically baked into the DNA of African-Americans to fear police officers. While I do agree that police brutality has a long-standing history, needs to be dealt with, and has caused multigenerational trauma, because he was making a scientific claim about genetics, I would have liked to have seen some evidence from a psychologist or geneticist on how trauma can impact the physical structure of a person’s DNA. Upon further research, I did find an article that talked about how trauma can implement what genes and behaviors are expressed at a genetic level in a person. The article made it clear that trauma does not alter the structure of people’s DNA, but rather influences the expression of predispositions already found in someone’s genetic code.
That being said, Robinson’s point about implicit biases, and how they can lead to ugly things, is a point that audiences would do well to take on board. Studying American history, myself, within the hallowed halls of academia, I can tell you that implicit bias is something we sit around big tables talking about for hours. To be clear, even if you are not a historian, it is a worthy topic to talk about. If you don’t understand where messaging is coming from, or that you are subject to that messaging, it is very difficult to choose what you absorb, or how to combat it.
From there, Robinson takes what seems like a brief detour, to discuss his own experience at a civil rights march where Dr. Martin Luther King was speaking, along with his own personal response to the tragedy of King’s assassination in his hometown of Memphis. Just trust me, when I say that this seeming tangent gets woven back into the story later, in a compelling way. Then Robinson makes his second large and shock provoking claim, “America was founded on white supremacy.” He acknowledges that to some people this statement may seem radical, but encourages them to stay with him. He lets his audience know, that they shouldn’t just trust what he is saying because it’s coming from his lips, but provides some very compelling historical evidence to support his point.
For me, the most interesting piece of evidence within this section of the documentary, was a little-known third verse of the national anthem, which condones the murder of enslaved people, and the fear they experienced while trying to run away to freedom in America. I personally, had not been educated on this verse, even within my academic career, and anecdotally I’d never heard it sung within the national anthem, when I’ve been required to sing it. It should be noted that I am from an East Coast state, which is often referred to as the cradle of liberty, so that may be why, I was never exposed to this verse. To further emphasize his point, Robinson cites the U.S. Constitution, specifically the 3/5 clause, and the section which said that international slave trade, going to get slaves from Africa, would not be officially banned until 1808. He argued that these measures were put in place to stabilize the US economy, and to ensure that slaveowning states and slave owners would continue to profit and contribute to the national economy through cash crops, such as cotton, tobacco, and rice. He also uses the names of colonial slave ships such as, “The Hope, The Desire, The Prosperity and The Fortune, to further demonstrate that colonial era Americans, and leaders viewed slavery as a fundamental institution, which would ultimately contribute to the country’s greatness. Interestingly, Robinson mentions that one of the first slave ships was built in Massachusetts, a state which I, myself, did not associate with slavery.
He then briefly fasts forwards to the antebellum era, giving startling statistics about the Industrial Revolution, cotton production, and the internal slave trade, and breeding programs in America. After the statistics, Robinson uses narrative evidence such as a runaway slave advertisement placed by Andrew Jackson, to further illustrate that leaders in American politics had no qualms about voicing their support for slavery. Robinson then provides further narrative evidence, including secession statements from southern states, emphasizing in their own words, that the Civil War, or at least secession was due to state legislatures feeling that their fundamental property rights were being violated, because they would no longer be able to own slaves, and reap the economic benefits from slave produced products such as cotton, tobacco, and rice.
Of interest to me, in this section, was testimony from a New York Mayor, who was pro slavery in the antebellum era, stating that New York had sympathy with many of the southern states, because of the economic benefits slavery provided them. I had never come across this testimony within my academic career, but it should be noted that I did not study slavery in particularly. Robinson uses his antebellum evidence to state that the Civil War was, “about slavery.” He also mentions deeply troubling legislation, that would have schools teach that slavery was a side issue in the American Civil War.
While I do agree with him, that such policies teach false history, and that this practice is, fundamentally detrimental to all of our society, I also believe that saying the war was about slavery, could lead some people to believe that all the soldiers who fought for the Union were also Pro abolition. This, in fact, is not historically accurate, and I believe that with all the historical research that went into the documentary, it would’ve been easy to emphasize the fact that Northern soldiers, also, had their fair share of racism. Additionally, I wondered why Robinson did not mention the fact that many Confederate soldiers did not own slaves themselves.
Because these questions kept gnawing at me, I decided to do further research. According to the Franklin Battlefield Trust, approximately 20 to 30% of Confederate soldiers did own slaves, leaving approximately 70% of soldiers within the Confederate Army who did not. The writers of the trust article shed light on why Robinson, and other presenters on racism, may not have chosen to include this statistic in their presentations. The writers of the trust article rightly point out that slave ownership did not necessarily describe the way Confederate soldiers felt about slavery as an institution. Fundamentally, just because somebody didn’t own slaves didn’t mean that they weren’t in favor of the racist ideology that perpetuated slavery. After reading this, it made further sense to me why Robinson, who was not focusing exclusively on the Civil War, would choose to exclude the statistic, which may have confused viewers, if they truly believed that slave ownership indicated whether or not someone believed in the practices and ideologies of slavery. Furthermore, the writers of the trust article, unlike Robinson, pointed out that emancipation was not on Lincoln’s original war agenda, until about halfway through the war. I believe it would’ve been helpful for Robinson to include the second statistic mentioned in the Franklin battlefield trust article, as it would have further emphasized the point that Lincoln himself should not be viewed as being antiracist. Robinson did mention the fact that after the emancipation proclamation was signed, Lincoln paid reparations to slaveowners who had “lost their property.” This piece of evidence does demonstrate the point I was trying to make earlier about Lincoln, but I believe Robinson could have used the approximate timeline abolition was incorporated into the war agenda to further prove this point. To wrap up the Civil War portion of the documentary, Robinson highlights the number of black voters registered before the Civil War, and lets audiences in on the interesting fact, that a Civil Rights Act had been proposed as early as 1855. According to Robinson this act would have ensured equity in voting, housing, schools and other public spaces. I personally enjoyed finding this piece of information out, because it wasn’t something that I had studied before.
After concluding the portion of the documentary dealing with the antebellum and Civil War eras, Robinson seamlessly transitions to the reconstruction era through the 1940s. His main argument during this time span, focuses on the fact that black prosperity was on the rise, and that progress in Civil Rights was continuing to be made, despite a contiguous rise in antiblack sentiment and racism throughout the United States. To illustrate this point, Robinson highlights two historical events. The bombing of Black Wall Street, in Tulsa Oklahoma, in the 1920s, as well as the murder of a prominent black businessman in the 1940s. Robinson states that the bombing and resulting massacre in Tulsa, illustrates just how intimidated whites were by successful African-Americans during that era. He rightly draws attention to the fact that this event in American history, is not widely talked about in American schools, or history textbooks. I, myself, was not aware of the extent of the casualties, around 4000 people, until I had watched the documentary. Furthermore, I had not learned about the massacre itself, until significantly later in my grad school career. I wholeheartedly agree with Robinson’s statement that historical events like these need to be taught within our schools and communities. He also draws audience’s attention to the fact that because the airplanes used to carry out the bombings were under the care and control of the Tulsa Police Department, it is important to realize that the Police Department itself, was complicit in the massacre.
In this way, Robinson uses a historical event to illustrate that police complicity in the murder of black and brown people is a long-standing historical issue, not just a media talking point. The second racially charged event, that Robinson discusses in this section of the documentary, is the murder of a prominent black businessman in the 1940s. This event was also interestingly presented to viewers. I was appalled to learn through Robinson’s interview with the murder victim’s surviving daughter, as well as newspaper sources from the era that Robinson cited, that the murderers actually confessed to the crime, and wholeheartedly admitted that it was racially motivated. The fact that this murder was committed was bad enough, but the fact that the perpetrators were ready to confess in a court of law the extent of their motivations, combined with the fact that law enforcement did nothing to see the criminals brought to justice, is a startling example of how acceptable racially motivated hate is within our judicial system.
The last section of the documentary deals with what I would consider the modern Civil Rights movement, from approximately 1950 to the present day. Robinson covers the impact and influence of racism in modern day America. Robinson cites events and policies like Bill Clinton’s anti-crime bill, the rise of crack cocaine within black communities, redlining policies in real estate, which for those of you who don’t know were legal segregation maps, which showed neighborhoods which contained the most African-Americans, and were therefore considered undesirable, and which neighborhoods were homogeneously white, and therefore, considered desirable. Robinson also speaks about his family’s personal difficulties with acquiring a nice house in an all-white neighborhood, and how his family had to call on white friends to purchase the house for them, and then sell it back to them. This personal experience with racism, is yet another example of how Robinson reinforces his point that racism itself is not a static issue, but a fundamental problem within our society that needs to be dealt with.
From a historian’s perspective, it’s also interesting to note, that Robinson takes time to point out, that even within resistance movements, like the Montgomery County bus boycott, black people were encouraged to not draw attention to themselves, or cause active confrontation. Robinson is able to use his direct experiences with racism, as well as the historical pressure put on black and brown people to minimize their existence, even within civil rights movements, as powerful illustrations, and reframing tools for the concept of white privilege. He argues that white privilege is not a concept designed to undermine the hard work of individual white people. Rather, it should be viewed as a phrase to describe how black and brown people are forced to move differently through the world because of systemic racism.
I personally thought that this reframing of the phrase was very useful, as I have heard many white people get defensive around the concept of white privilege, thinking that it is a personal attack on them, and the hard work they put forward, rather than a way to speak about unjust differences, put upon people by society. Robinson finishes the documentary, by explaining that right now we are at a tipping point for the civil rights movement. Groups like Black Lives Matter have multiple chapters and leaders working together towards a common goal, of increasing the social, legal, and networking power of people of color. Robinson points out that this is something different from past movements, which were often centered around a central leader, such as Dr. Martin Luther King, for example. He also emphasizes that people outside of black and brown communities, are raising their voices against racism, in unprecedented numbers. He closes out his presentation, by reminding his audience that we get to decide whether this tipping point goes forward or not.
So, now that I’ve given you a summary of the documentary, you may be wondering, what I actually thought of it. What I liked most about the documentary, is how Robinson incorporated historical, and political evidence, along with his personal experiences with racism as well as those of others, to demonstrate that racism is a systemic issue, which has affected the country’s past, and will continue to affect its future. Throughout the documentary, I felt like Robinson was constantly humanizing the issue of racism for his viewers. Technically though, flipping between historical and modern-day evidence could be a bit jarring at times, and I felt that he could’ve included more evidence to back up his claims about fear of the police being part of someone’s genetic code. In addition, I thought the Civil War portion of the documentary could have been researched more in-depth, to paint a clearer picture of Union-based racism, and dismantle the strongly held belief that slave ownership, equated to how Southerners felt about the institution of slavery. In general, I would say, if you’re looking for an overview of how racism is incorporated into many facets of American life, this documentary will definitely make you think. That being said, I would advise those of you watching to do further research, on the topics being brought up, if you have continuing questions. Overall, “Who We Are: A Chronicle of racism in America,” is definitely worth the time it takes to watch it. Hoping this post gives you something to think on.
Sorloquator
Sources:
https://boft.org/myths#:~:text=While%20it%20is%20true%20that,the%20number%20was%20over%2030%25. Accessed December 31, 2023 Where I got my percentages for the Confederate soldiers to own slaves as well as the complexities of Lincoln’s view on slavery.
https://arkansasadvocate.com/2023/07/05/understanding-epigenetics-how-trauma-is-passed-on-through-our-family-members/#:~:text=These%20studies%20found%20that%20traumatic,marginal%20note%20in%20a%20book. Accessed December 31, 2023. This is a useful article explaining epi-genetics and trauma which I found easy to understand.
https://naucenter.as.virginia.edu/proslavery-unionism
Accessed December 31, 2023 useful article on proslavery unionism with suggestions for further reading.
https://www.thewhoweareproject.org/the-film
Accessed December 31, 2023 here is a link to the film’s official website that also lists where you can buy or rent the film and for how much. Unfortunately, it’s not available for free as of the time of this posting.
Add comment
Comments