Violence. Brad Evans

THREE

      THE PERILS OF BEING A BLACK PHILOSOPHER

      America needs a movement that transcends the civil rights movement.

      Violence takes many different forms, from physical attacks upon bodies to the assault upon one’s dignity and sense of self. In this emotionally charged conversation, philosopher George Yancy discusses his painful experiences of racism in response to his previous forms of public engagement. What it means to be a black public intellectual is not only to bring power into question; it is to be further exposed to the violence that has long been used to mark black thinkers as incapable of thinking philosophically, as Yancy explains. In this regard, what Yancy deals with in this discussion are questions far more searching than philosophical mediation. His response is testimony on, and indictment of, today’s state of racial politics and violence in the United States and beyond.

      Brad Evans interviews George Yancy

      April 18, 2016

      George Yancy is a professor of philosophy at Emory University and author, editor, and co-editor of many books, including Backlash and Black Bodies, White Gazes.

       Brad Evans: In response to a series of troubling verbal attacks you received after your essay “Dear White America” appeared in “The Stone” in December 2015, the American Philosophical Association put out a strongly worded statement criticizing the bullying and harassment of academics in the public realm. But beyond this, shouldn’t we address the broader human realities of such hateful speech and in particular how this sort of discursive violence directly impacts the body of the person attacked?

      George Yancy: Your point about discursive violence is an important one. Immediately after the publication of “Dear White America,” I began to receive vile and vitriolic white racist comments sent to my university email address and verbal messages sent to my answering machine. I even received snail mail that was filled with hatred. Imagine the time put into actually sitting down and writing a letter filled with so much hate and then sending it snail mail, especially in our world of the Internet.

      The alarming reality is that the response to “Dear White America” revealed just how much racism continues to exist in our so-called postracial America. The comments were not about pointing out fallacies in my position but were designed to violate, to leave me psychologically broken and physically distraught.

      Words do things, especially words like “nigger” or being called an animal that should go back to Africa or being told that I should be “beheaded ISIS style.” One white supremacist message sent to me ended with “Be Prepared.” Another began with “Dear Nigger Professor.”

      The brutality and repetitiveness of this discursive violence has a way of inflicting injury. Given the history of the term “nigger,” it strikes with the long, hate-filled context of violence out of which that term grew. This points to the non-spectacular expression of violence. The lynching of black people was designed to be a spectacle, to draw white mobs. In this case, the black body was publicly violated. It was a public and communal form of bloodlust. There are many other forms of violence that are far more subtle, non-spectacular, yet painful and dehumanizing. So when I was called a “nigger,” I was subject to that. I felt violated, injured; a part of me felt broken.

      Only now have I really begun to recognize how discourse designed to hurt can actually leave its mark. I recall after reading so many of these messages I began to feel sick, literally. So words can debilitate, violate, injure; they can hit with the force of a stick or a stone and leave marks on the body. In this case, I began to feel the posture of my body folding inward, as it were, under the attacks. Frantz Fanon talks about this as not being able to move lithely in the world.

       How does this relate to the intellectual history of racial persecution, oppression, and subordination, especially the denial of the right of black people, and specifically black intellectuals, to speak with their own voice in a public setting?

      I shared some of the malicious discourse used against me with some very prominent white public intellectuals. We began to exchange experiences. The exchange was helpful to me; it helped me to understand what is at stake when engaging in courageous speech. What was immediately clear, though, was the absence of specifically racist vitriol directed at these white public intellectuals, which in no way downplays their pain. Yet we must bring attention to the difference, to the perils of being a black intellectual. Not only was I being attacked for my courageous speech; I was being attacked as a black man. Yet I was also being attacked as a black philosopher.

      There were some very nasty remarks that were designed to question my status as a philosopher because I’m black. The implication of those messages was that to be black and a philosopher was a contradiction, because “niggers” can’t be philosophers. So I agree; the discourse was far more pernicious. But to understand this is to come to terms with the history of white violence in this country used to control and silence black people.

      To see my experience as a single episode or an anomaly is to deny the logic of the long history of white racist violence. bell hooks recalls that as a child she thought of whiteness as a site of terror. In a country in which white people would brutalize and kill a black person on a whim, that is far from irrational.

      For centuries, black people lived in fear of white terror. That fear partly captures the contradiction of being black and an American. Black people were not the American “we” but the terrorized other. The symbols of white sheets and cross burnings must be recalled. Think here of black World War II veterans who returned home from the war and were severely beaten and lynched by whites, even as they wore their uniforms. They fought against Hitler only to return home, to the land of “democracy,” to be attacked by what might be called white terrorists.

      Or think here of the slave trade, the institution of American slavery, black codes, convict leasing, the lynching of black men and women and the flaying of black flesh, the castration of black men, being burned alive. Violence, within these contexts, is a specific racialized form of inculcating black people with fear and controlling their social mobility. There is nothing episodic about it; this form of white violence is historically grounded and systematic.

      The coldhearted use of white violence was very effective. Not only were there actual beatings, there was the fear of possibly being beaten. So the black imagination, though never defeated, was weakened. The lynching of a black person wasn’t just a form of theater (where the root meaning suggests a kind of “beholding”) but also a way of communicating fear and terror through mass displays of violence. For someone white, the spectacle was a sport, a kind of national pastime activity, but, for a black person, one could always imagine that one was next and thereby stand in fear of what could happen at any moment.

      Cornel West talks about the “death shudder” as a kind of existential moment of realization that one is finite. I think that we are all open to experience that dreadful sense of our existence coming to an end. However, when black life is forever in a “state of exception,” it is an additional weight. Black people not only experience the death shudder but also a specific kind of shudder that involves an emotional intensity that speaks to the disposability of black life.

      For example, the other day, a white police officer walked into a store where I was buying some food, and I remember feeling this powerful sense of wanting to flee, of feeling as if the rules and laws that are designed to govern our (white) society didn’t apply to me. I could move “too quickly,” placing my hand into my pocket to pay for my food, and my life would end just like that. The white police officer would explain how he felt “threatened” and had “reasonable” suspicion. And I would be dead.

       These connections between the continuum