In his book White Bound, Nationalist, Antacist, and the Shared Meaning of Race (published by Stanford University Press in 2016), Matthew W. Hughey studies the relationship between the heterogeneous interpretations of race and the long-term staying power of racism and racial inequality in six areas: identity formation; organizations; mass media; political engagements; science and technology and public advocacy.

His ethnographic work attempts to understand the current state of racism and racial discrimination in the United States of America, an immensely diverse nation, from a unique vantage point. The author spent a little over one year, from May 2006 to June 2007 doing his ethnographic research in two organizations that he gave pseudonyms viz., 1) WRJ – Whites for Racial Justice and 2) NEA- National Equality for All. During this period, he visited their headquarters, even some of the member’s homes, and took part in the discussions and deliberations in the organizations all the while trying to understand how ‘whites’ understand racism. And how they could end up holding opposing positions. This he does by comparing the lived experiences of the members, which are quite similar in these organizations, and then trying to understand how similar socializations lead to such polar positions that the people are in.

The methodology that the author employs is carefully crafted. Instead of relying on secondary data which might be fabricated or biased, the author chose the much harder and potentially riskier way of participating in the day-to-day activities of both of these organizations and collected primary data. During this ethnography, even though the author had to participate in racist, white supremacist events, he points out that it is not his intent to rile up hate and start his observation with preconceived notions, as he mentions in the chapter Racists versus Antiracists. “My point is not to provoke but rather to draw attention to how whites come to construct their own identities in ways that are simultaneously distinct and surprisingly similar” (p.3).This point about identities and shared experiences comes as an element of surprise when we read about the members of the two organizations, both of which are composed of predominantly white, male members with a total of three female members combined, but their ideology and goals lie on the opposite ends of the spectrum. While the WRJ believed that being ‘white’ in a society like America came with its own set of ‘unearned’ privileges, the NEA on the other hand believed that whites were the ones being oppressed today. This was aptly explained in another chapter titled ‘The Ironic Value of Dishonor’, where the narrative of the logic of white stigma has been analyzed. This is one of the main driving forces behind organizations such as the KKK or as in this case the NEA, with the idea being that in the current state of things just being born white means that one must shoulder the notion of ‘white guilt’ as whites are by nature ‘superior’ to the other races. An excellent example was given in the book which I will quote below. 

To tell you the truth, this whole ‘white antiracist thing’ is more than a little difficult. . .. White people, we’re, we’re conditioned to see the world in racist ways, as though we’re the natural owners and administrators of the planet. That weighs on me constantly, you know? (p. 58).

This is exactly the narrative being addressed here and is the one we need to analyze through the lens of the people who are socialized in such an environment. Using this very narrative the author looks at the cases of racial profiling in the chapter titled White Panic. He shows how most white supremacist organizations tend to use issues of illegal immigrants and black people committing crime as their agendas, how they try to influence the society, considering these people as the NEA calls them ‘illegal aliens. Interestingly, one would naturally assume that this narrative would only be propounded by the NEA, but as the author points out, both organizations play a part in the reproduction of the ‘black pathology’ narrative and both see themselves as the superiors in this context. 

The chapter, Saviors and Segregation builds upon how this narrative of black men’s violence becomes instrumental in articulating a logic of racial segregation. Giving the example of how a fashion choice which was associated with black identity, that being wearing saggy pants was criminalized in the town of Delcambre, Louisiana, with anyone caught wearing the mentioned clothes would be met with a $500 fine. An interesting observation that is mentioned here is the attitude of both NEA and WRJ towards gendered policing. While the NEA has the opinion that white people should simply stay away from people of colour, the WRJ, on the other hand, saw themselves as the protector of women and often saw black males as ‘dangerous’ to women. Hughey relates a particularly disturbing incident when a member of WRJ tells women of colour at a domestic violence shelter to “stay out of black and lower-class neighbourhoods” and not to “go to black men’s houses at night” to protect themselves from further violence” (p.103). 

The most interesting part of the book was the one towards the end titled “Hailing Whiteness”, which looked at understanding racial dichotomies with the help of popular culture, especially rap music. Hughey meets with a member of the NEA who also happened to be a music teacher, his interpretation of rap music which he strictly associated with black culture, was “it’s just nonsensical noise, it’s no music a sane person would listen to”. He went on to attack the references to drugs, violence, and objectification of women in the lyrics of particular music and proceeded to generalize his view of black culture on this basis. When the author brought up this topic of ‘rap music’ representing the culture of the blacks in the WRJ, it stirred up a discussion that spanned several days with no clear response as to what exactly they thought rap music indicated about the people of colour. My opinion about this topic would be that rap music, especially in the late 80’s and the 90’s served as an outlet for dissent, a way in which black people could show their solidarity against the crimes being committed against them, the best example being the infamous song “F*** the Police” by the band N.W.A, which became a sort of anthem, played at almost every protest or demonstration. 

Reading this book is difficult, not in an academic sense but in the sense that it comes as a cultural shock to the reader. There are accounts in the text where unimaginable things have been said about the black community, which one can find quite hard to read and understand, especially when coming from the perspective of a country like India where ‘race’ is a question that is often not taken very seriously. I find this book both fascinating and an anomalous read. Understanding both the NEA and the WRJ helps understand a perspective of how white people uphold and reproduce the race narratives and how these narratives can be challenged and changed. As to who might find this book interesting to read, I would say, people who are looking for a fresh perspective on racism, especially those who are trying to understand this subject from a unique vantage point of the people who propagate race-based hate.

***

S. Vasudev is pursuing an MA in Sociology at South Asian University (SAU), New Delhi.