Believe it or not, there are several Bible verses that seem to prophesy the last 400 years black slavery in America. In fact, these verses contain so many subtle details, that they have opened the eyes of many to the possibility that black people in America might be the true descendants of the Israelites. Let’s look at and dissect each of these verses. As always, I encourage you to read each chapter in it’s entirety for context.
When I was first approached with the idea that black people in America might be descendants of the true Hebrews, I wasn’t very receptive to it because of who was telling me and how they were telling me. The hatred displayed by many of the people that have come to this knowledge, is a complete turn off intellectually, so I ignored it. Because of that, I decided to write this introduction to the subject, without all of the hateful extras. If you find it helpful, please share it. I credit my interest and research into the subject to Xavier Jackson and TEOTW.
Exhibit A – The Eagle Reference
“The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand;” – Deuteronomy 28:39
No matter which direction you go, America is the end of the earth, so that’s not what we’re going to look at first. In my opinion, the very specific reference to an eagle is the more interesting fact, especially in a chapter that warns Israel about future enslavement if they disobey the Lord.
Many people have interpreted this invading nation as Rome, but notice that the prophesied nation comes from the far end of the earth, and as we’ll learn later, they do it in ships. The following maps will give you an idea of the proximity of Rome (now Italy) to Israel:
While Rome could’ve come via ship, they certainly did not come from the ends of the earth, and as we will see below, the Romans did not take millions of Hebrews away from Israel as slaves via ships. The above prophecy does not fit Rome, even though they did use the eagle to represent their empire.
Rome Didn’t Remove The Hebrews
In the New Testament, we see that there are Roman soldiers stationed in Israel, alongside the Hebrews that were living there. In fact, it is one of the main points in the story of the crucifixion. The Hebrews were celebrating Passover, which made it necessary for the Romans to crucify Christ, because the Hebrews could not stone him to death during Passover. This is important because the invading country had to take the Hebrews to a place where they would never see home again for many generations.
“And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.” – Deuteronomy 28:68
Rome did not remove the Israelites from their land by ships or otherwise. It’s important to understand that not all Hebrews lived in Israel, but many would journey to and from other countries, and back to Israel freely. We see this in the New Testament, when Joseph and Mary flee with Christ to Egypt (Matthew 2:13), and return years later, after the death of Herod (Matthew 2:21). Now that we can see that Rome does not fit the prophecy, let’s look at America and why I believe that it is a better fit to this verse.
If we look at the map carefully and honestly, the United States is the “the ends of the earth”. Europeans and Asians do not need ships to reach Israel. They can do it by land. The only countries that fits the description are the United States, Canada, and South American countries.
- To the west of Africa are North and South America.
- To the east of Asia are North and South America.
- Africa, Europe, and Asia are all physically connected.
The Americas are literally as far as you can go east or west before you start heading back toward Israel, so it is based on that evidence that I conclude that America is the country from the ends of the earth that is being referenced. The Americas are also where the slave ships came from to remove millions of people from Africa, across the ocean, rendering them unable to ever return to Israel again.
Another piece that fits this puzzle, is the fact that America also uses an eagle with outstretched wings to represent the country. This detail of outstretched wings will be touched on in Exhibit C.
The chapter goes on to make another very specific reference:
Exhibit B – Slave Ships
“And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you.” – Deuteronomy 28:68
Many people point to this as some of the strongest evidence that the slave trade was predicted in the Bible, and I agree. It is pretty strong. Many black slaves were kidnapped, which fits the part that says “and no man shall buy you”, and they were sold back and forth between slave owners, which fulfills the rest of the verse.
If we look at the following maps, we’ll see that there was no need for Egypt to use ships to get to Israel, because it was within walking distance. This fact leads many to believe that the referenced “Egypt” refers to a similar country in the future, and not literal Egypt.
The Israelites walked to Israel from Egypt in scripture, which lets us know that literal Egypt is not being reference. What we also know from history is that America did use slave ships to kidnap black people from various parts of Africa. In order to understand how Africa is tied into this prophecy, you have to understand that many Hebrews fled into Africa to escape the Babylonian, Greek, and Roman invasion. Many fled to West and North West Africa to start over. From there, they migrated south and west, spreading Hebrew culture as they went.
Here are the maps of Zimbabwe and South Africa, to give you an idea of where the Lemba are located. If you’d like to look more into the history of Jews in Africa, this link is a good place to get started.
Before we move on, let’s look at Hebrew culture found in Ethiopia. Some Ethiopians claim to be descendants of Solomon, through his son Menelik, whom he had with The Queen of Sheba.
Why The Egypt Reference?
I’ll be honest… This is of special interest to me because of the choice to reference Egypt. This choice of wording has led to speculation from many teachers, including myself, as to why this was done. Some of the similarities may relate to:
- Slavery in America may have been similar to slavery in Egypt.
- The time frame of slavery in America has been roughly 400 years, and may be over 400 years (we’ll come back to this), which was also the amount of time that the Hebrews spent as slaves in Egypt.
- Something in America may be similar to Egypt, which would make it extremely specific.
- It may be a combination of all of the above.
These are interesting comparisons, but I’d like to offer a third and very unique comparison: We have a miniature, but very impressive replica of Egypt, right here in my home town of Las Vegas, NV.
This has been in Las Vegas, NV since I was a kid… and in case you’re wondering, that light on the top is 100% real, but has been toned down because pilots said it was too bright. It shines all the way into space. You can see this light from anywhere in Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, and Summerlin.
In my opinion, if the original pyramids looked anything like this, the only word to describe them would be breathtaking. The Luxor Hotel even had a replica of the Nile River, that ran through the entire hotel, but it was later removed. Years ago, they actually bought King Tut’s sarcophagus and placed it on display. I’m not sure if it’s still there, but the rumor is they removed it after some strange deaths occurred, but that could just be marketing hype.
While this is in no way proof that this replica of Egypt was what scripture was referring to, it does offer an interesting “coincidence”. There is also another large piece of Egyptian architecture in our nation’s capital. The Washington Monument.
When we look at the larger picture, we can start connecting the dots. What are the odds that a country across the ocean would make a replica of Egypt in the Las Vegas desert, place an Egyptian structure in the nation’s capital, and both of those structures be standing around the time that black people are coming upon 400 years of slavery in America? If the Bible isn’t pointing to this, it is one of the biggest coincidences I’ve ever seen. To summarize what we’ve looked at so far, take a look at the following:
- The nation is associated with an eagle.
- The nation will come from the far ends of the earth.
- The nation would take slaves in ships.
- The nation is compared to Egypt.
Moving on to the next point in this study, we’ll see that those who would enslave Israel would come by sea in ships. This is a very unique identifier because we know that without slave ships, black slavery in America would’ve been impossible.
Exhibit C – Land of Shadowing Wings
“Woe to the land shadowing with wings, which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia: That sendeth ambassadors by the sea, even in vessels of bulrushes upon the waters, saying, Go, ye swift messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled, to a people terrible from their beginning hitherto; a nation meted out and trodden down, whose land the rivers have spoiled!” – Isaiah 18:1-2
The reference to a “land shadowing with wings” wouldn’t be so interesting without the previous reference to the eagle in Deuteronomy 28:39. The choice to use the word “shadowing” seems to indicate that this land being referenced is large, and casts it’s shadow over other nations.
While the Roman Empire had a presence in Europe, Asia, and Africa, the United States’ military reach is vastly larger than anything the Roman Empire ever accomplished. Look carefully at the picture below. It shows the full military reach of the United States, confirming that it is indeed a land shadowing with wings (click the map to enlarge).
Beyond The Rivers of Ethiopia
Geographically, it wouldn’t make sense to refer to Rome as the land beyond the rivers of Ethiopia, when Rome was located across the Mediterranean Sea. Let’s look at a map to see exactly where the rivers of Ethiopia are. If we look at the map to the right, we can see that The Nile and a few other smaller rivers run out of Ethiopia and into North Africa. The
In order to figure out what this reference is pointing to, let’s focus on the geographic location of Ethiopia. East of the rivers of Ethiopia is the Arabian sea and then India, but if we head directly west of Ethiopia, we run into the Atlantic Ocean, and then the Caribbean Islands, located between North and South America. This is something we’re going to dig into deeper in Exhibit D.
Since Israel is located on the east of the Nile, heading west from there would point us toward Florida. But by using Ethiopia as the point of focus, and heading west, we land right in the center of the Atlantic Slave Trade routes to North America, South America, and the Caribbean Islands.
The reason that I’m confident in presenting this theory is because of the part of the verse that reads, “that sendeth ambassadors by sea”. This reference almost definitively points to America being the focus of the prophecy, because of how slaves were taken from Africa to America.
Exhibit D – Scattered In The Islands
“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.” – Isiah 11:11
One of the most interesting and often overlooked verses concerns the regathering of Israel from the nations where they have been scattered and put into bondage. In these clues we find several references that fit the North Atlantic Slave Trade like a glove… but before we get to that, I want to point out something else very interesting about where God’s people are regathered from:
- Assyria (Arabia) – Founded by Asshur
- Egypt (Africa) – The Land of Ham
- Pathros (Africa) – Founded by Mizraim
- Cush (Africa) – Founded by Cush
- Elam (Arabia) – Founded by Elam
- Shinar (Arabia) – Founded by Nimrod
- Hamath (Arabia) – Possibly Asshur
This brings us to the islands. As part of the North Atlantic Slave Trade, some of the slaves ships passed through the Caribbean islands (West Indies), which are made up of the following islands:
As you can see, the people from these islands come in all different shades, but they are all ethnic. This isn’t proof that all of the Hebrews were people of color, but it is pretty strong evidence that they were. It is only through the above verses that we are continually pointed toward people of color in the west.
Exhibit E – Life Constantly In Danger
“And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind: And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life:” – Deuteronomy 28:65-66
This constant uncertainty of life has been a reality for black people in America for a very long time. First it was the slave owners murdering rebellious slaves, then it was the Klan killing black men for simply looking at a white woman, and now it’s the police killing black people that so much as breathe too hard.
Exhibit F – 400 Years As Slaves
The timing of black slavery in America is perhaps the most often used rebuttal to Deuteronomy 28:68 and to the idea that many blacks in America are descended from Israel. According to the Bible, Hebrew slavery in Egypt lasted about 400 years. The counter argument to the prophecy applying to blacks in America, is that slavery in America only lasted about 200 years, and was abolished by the 13th Amendment, but that is not true. Slavery in America never ended, and the 13th Amendment is concrete proof of that:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” – 13th Amendment
If we read carefully, we see that slavery was never abolished… it was made CONDITIONAL upon being convicted of a crime. We can look at the current American criminal justice system and see that locking black people in chains is still big business.
As we can see, black people are more likely to be imprisoned because we are 8x more likely to be convicted of the same crime committed by a white person. If you don’t understand how that works, let me say it another way. If 10 black people and 10 white people are arrested for the same crime, statistics show that 2 out of 10 of those white people will go to prison, but 8 out of 10 black people will go to prison. If we do the math on how long black people have been enslaved in America, including the current prison system, we get the following numbers:
Disclaimer: The first calculation uses a commonly accepted date of 1650 as the start of slavery, but the second set of numbers represents 1619 from other sources. These are not predictions of anything, but are meant to show the interesting timing in relation to current events in America.
1650 – 2016
- 366 Years (modern 365 day calendar)
- 371 Years (Hebrew 360 day calendar)
1619 – 2016
- 397 Years (modern 365 day calendar)
- 402 Years (Hebrew 360 day calendar)
Is the timing a coincidence or is there something bigger going on? Only time and more research will reveal what I believe was lost during slavery times.
The 10 Lost Tribes
I do not believe that the 10 “Lost Tribes” are lost at all. I believe that many of the Hebrews were shipped here to America, and were made “lost”. This was done gradually, by enforcing the following:
- Forcing slaves to learn English and punishing them for using their native language.
- Stripping slaves of their birth names, and giving them European names.
- Forbidding them from learning to read or write.
- Re-teaching the Bible as Eurocentric, instead of the Afrocentric text it is.
- Erasing all links to their Hebrew heritage in Africa.
Because of this culture stripping, black Hebrews in America were “blinded” to who they truly were, over time. Now that we are in the age of technology, many people are beginning to wake up to the truth about what really happened with slavery in America.
“For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.” – Romans 11:25
In my opinion, the slave trade purposely targeted Hebrews in Africa. The version of history that we know does not add up because natives could have been taken as slaves, but they weren’t. They were slaughtered, and millions of dollars were spent building ships, traveling to Africa, rounding people up, and bringing them to the United States.
The Future Deliverance of Israel
While the Hebrews were punished for their disobedience, God did indeed promise to deliver their descendants from the Gentiles, and it is my personal belief that we may witness this within our lifetime.
“Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name’s sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went. And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes. For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.” – Ezekiel 36:22-24
The following report on “The Power of the British Commonwealth Over the World” began when I was at the WTO meeting in Cancun in September 2003. There, several African countries held a press briefing in which they said that they would starve if America and other rich countries did not open their cotton and agricultural markets to them. I asked several questions about their vast natural resources (gold and strategic minerals) and if they had any monies left over after their World Bank loans were paid. They refused to answer. Afterward I spoke to each one and asked the following questions and received the same response. Since they were Commonwealth members, I asked if they could go to Britain for help. They could not. So I then asked why they don’t withdraw from the Commonwealth if there is no help. With great alarm, they told me they could not withdraw from this voluntary association. When I returned home, I called the British Information Office to see if they could tell me if the countries which Britain de-colonized in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s received a vote at the UN at the time of separation. The lady told me she would have to research my very good question. She called the next day to tell me that every time a country was granted independence from Britain, they were given a vote at the UN. Bingo!
I have always questioned how Britain would regain control of America when they were defeated by Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans in 1812. Are we so naive to think that they would not try some other way to “capture the world”? In the past ten years, as I have covered the UN, I have been amazed at the number of suggestions and key reports that come from the British which influence UN policy. So, just how much power does Britain have in the world today?
The first book that I wrote is ‘Prince Charles the Sustainable Prince’ which has to do with the role of the British Royal Family as the power behind the United Nations. This book asserts that the British ARE the power behind the United Nations. This opinion has not changed since I wrote Prince Charles. The prince is a key, behind-the-scenes mover and shaker and is responsible for the radical environmental agenda that perverts Genesis 1, 2, and 3 and puts the earth above man and not man above the earth as God intended. When I wrote Prince Charles, I was not aware of the information you are now going to read.
A Brief History of Britain
The following is taken from the Internet site, “britania,” and is from ‘England, A Narrative History’ by Peter N. Williams. What I have tried to do is to show the aggressiveness of this little island nation and its role in the world today. Some of the sub-titles are my interpretation of the material reprinted.
The Celtic culture in Early Britain developed about 1000 BC and came from Gaul, driven from their homelands by the Romans who invaded in 55BC under Julius Caesar. In 43 AD an expedition was ordered against Britain by Emperor Claudius who sent an army of 40,000 men. The Romans established their bases in what is known as Kent and subdued much of Britain in less than 40 years. They remained for nearly 400 years. After the Romans left, England entered a dark period. By 314 an organized Christian Church seems to have been established in most of Britain. By 410 Britain had become self-governing in three parts. In 597 St. Augustine was sent to convert the pagan English by Pope Gregory. Ethelbert had married Bertha, daughter of the Merovingian King and was practicing Christianity. The first Anglo-Saxon kingdom in Britain was an Anglo-Celtic kingdom. In 726, Aethelbold called himself “King of Britain” while his son Offa called himself “king of all the English.” For several hundred years, various kings in various part of Britain tried to gain control. In 896, Alfred occupied London. He was born in 849 and became King of Wessex in 871. Due to his battles with the Danes, he succeeded in becoming the first king of England. Throughout the 8th century, the Danes, Norwegians, Scandinavians, and British fought as to who would have power and control. The Normans invaded England in order to secure the throne for William of Normandy who was crowned King of England at Westminster on Christmas Day, 1066. With him, came feudalism and a new aristocracy. By 1086, other than small-estate holders, there were in the whole of the land only two Englishmen holding estates of any dimension. William insisted that landowners who had land from the king produce a set quota of mounted knights which produced a new ruling class in England. In this system, those at the bottom suffered most, losing all their rights as free men and coming to be regarded as mere property, assets belonging to the manor.
Feudalistic Sustainable Development
Further restrictions and hardship came from William’s New Forest laws and his vast extension of new royal forests in which all hunting rights belonged to the king. The peasantry was deprived of a valuable food source in times of bad harvests. In 1080, the “Domesday Book” was begun and was an attempt to provide the king with every penny to which he was legally entitled. It worked only too well, reckoning the wealth of England, “Down to the last pig.” William sent his men into every village and had them find out how many hides there were, what land and cattle the king should have in the country, and what dues he ought to have in twelve months from the town or village [JV: Does this sound like sustainable development and the UN Biological Diversity Treaty?].
From the rule of the Plantagenet’s to Richard the Lionhearted and the Crusades to King John who was forced to sign the “Great Magna Carta” in Runnymede on June 15, 1215, to Edward I, Longshanks to Henry VIII and to Queen Elizabeth I, the British kings and queens were concerned with holding on to the power of the monarchy.
As a result of the defeat of the Spanish Armada by Elizabeth I and her long reign, England saw remarkable economic growth and a time of calm from her chaotic past. Industry and trade prospered under the guidance of men like Secretary Cecil, later Lord Burghley. [JV: It should be noted that Lord Burghley perfected torture techniques and the secret police.] During her reign, many of the Dutch bankers and capitalists from Antwerp flocked to London to find a new and more secure international money and credit market. That year Thomas Gresham opened the Royal Exchange in London to make it the financial capital of the world. Cecil encouraged the fishing industry, the source of England’s navy and backbone of its sea power. English sailors began their mastery of the world’s oceans. Though little more than pirates, these seamen laid the foundations of their nation’s naval superiority which was to last for centuries. John Cabot discovered Newfoundland in 1497, Martin Frobisher established trade with Moscow in 1555 to trade with Russia. Sir Francis Drake searched the world for treasures.
Key British Economic and Trade Concepts In 1694, the Bank of England was formed by a private stock company which raised their own funds and issued their own money to be lent to the government “in perpetuity.” This started the concept of “central banking.” Then a group of merchants and sea captains at Lloyd’s Coffee House in 1688 formed marine insurance which would underwrite enormous expenditures in overseas ventures and shipping. On May 26, 1698, Parliament came up with the idea of granting monopolies in trade by an act of Parliament. This act created the East India Company. This company, with the newly formed Bank of England showed only too well the growing power of the British traders and financiers over the state government (emphasis added). [JV: This is very key for they still rule the world today.]
As a result of the East India Trading Company, the trading classes were able to control parliament. It became one of the ever-increasing problems for the country’s government: the interference of trade with legislation and administration was to become an inevitable part of the future.
In 1496, John and Sebastian Cabot discovered Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. England’s own era of exploration, initiated by the Cabots, was expanded by the journeys of Hugh Willoughby to seek a Northeast Passage to China and the spice trade. He reached Moscow by way of the White Sea and Archangel in 1553. As a result, the Muscovy Company was founded by Richard Chancellor to trade with Russia in 1555. Then John Hawkins, who began his career high-jacking Portuguese and Spanish ships in 1562, led to England’s entering the Slave Trade. David Ingram explored from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada and reported finding vines with grapes as large as a man’s thumb. English mariner Francis Drake undertook his daring voyage of 1572 to capture the Spanish treasure fleet returning from Peru, a feat surpassed by his even greater haul one year later.
In 1580, Drake arrived back in Plymouth having circumnavigated the globe in the Pelican, renamed the Golden Hind after the gallant ship had passed through the Straits of Magellan. Drake was knighted by the Queen after capturing the richest prize ever taken at sea. In 1584, Sir Walter Raleigh established a colony in Roanoke, Virginia. One year later, Chesapeake Bay was discovered by Ralph Lane and Davis Strait by John Davis.
In 1585, the first oriental spice to be grown in the New World, Jamaican ginger, arrived in Europe. In 1586, Sir Richard Cavendish became the third man to circumnavigate the globe when the ship the Desire reached England after a voyage of over two years. When the Portuguese closed its spice market in Lisbon to Dutch and English traders, the Dutch East India Company was created to obtain spices directly from the Orient. In 1600, the Honorable East India Company was chartered to make annual voyages to the Indies and to challenge Dutch control of the spice trade.
After James I made peace with Spain in 1604, he re-directed England’s efforts at colonizing North America and the Plymouth and London companies sent ships and colonists. Jamestown, Virginia was founded in 1607. That same year, Henry Hudson sought a route to China and sailed around the Eastern Short of Greenland. In 1610, Hudson’s ship Discovery reached the strait later to be known as Hudson Bay, Canada. In 1620, the Mayflower arrived off Cape Cod with 100 Pilgrims. In 1628, John Endicott arrived as the first Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In 1632, Maryland received its charger by a grant from King Charles to Cecil Calvert. In 1655, Admiral Penn captured Jamaica from the Spanish. In 1654, New Amsterdam was renamed New York after its capture from the Dutch. A year later, the New Jersey Colony was founded by English colonists. The 1674 Treaty of Westminster returned New York and Delaware to England. In 1681, Pennsylvania had its beginning in the land grant given to William Penn. In 1698, William Dampier sailed on his Pacific expedition to explore the West Coast of Australia.
In 1648, South Africa came to attention of Europeans when a Dutch ship broke up and the survivors urged authorities to establish a settlement for provisioning their East India fleets. In 1652, a small group of Dutch settlers founded Cape Town. In 1815, Britain gained its long-desired “half-way house” on the sea route to India when the Dutch ceded the Cape of Good Hope. The British arrived in 1820. When diamonds were discovered in the Orange Free State, the Boer War began. Then gold was discovered in the Transvaal in 1886. Cecil Rhodes who founded the De Beers Mining Corporation in 1880 was determined that the riches being discovered in South Africa were not going to the Boer farmers. Rhodes dreamed of extending British rule in Africa. Using his great wealth, amassed in the diamond and gold fields, Rhodes with other imperialists established British colonies to the north of the Boer territories. Both Northern and Southern Rhodesia were granted charters by London. Eventually the Boer republics were annexed to the British crown in 1900.
The South Sea company founded in 1711 had acquired a monopoly in the lucrative Spanish slave trade and other trading ventures in South America.
At the Treaty of Paris in 1763, Britain gained Canada, Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, the right to navigate the Mississippi, the West Indian Islands of Grenada, St. Vincent, Dominica and Tobago in the West Indies; Florida (from Spain); Senegal in Africa and the preservation in India of the East India Company’s monopoly, and in Europe, Minorca.
In India, Robert Clive defeated pro-French forces at Arcot in 1751 thus helping his East India Company monopolize appoints, finances, land and power. The British victory led to the withdrawal of the French East India Company. Then Clive defeated the local Nabob at Plassey to become virtual ruler of Bengal and opened up much of the country to further exploitation and control by the East India Company. India was regarded as the “jewel in the crown” of the British Empire; over two thirds of the vast sub-continent was ruled by the East India Company. Its finances and its troops were used to protect British interests, even overthrowing native Indian princes.
In 1769, Captain Cook discovered a country that consisted of two main islands, it was called New Zealand. In 1770, he explored the eastern coast of what was then called “New Holland.” He took possession of the island continent in the name of George III. Britain had found a new empire, Australia to resettle criminals and to accommodate early settlers to help with the overpopulation in Britain which the agricultural and industrial revolutions had contributed to. In 1822, an article by James Mill on “colonization” in the “Encyclopedia Britannica” offered emigration as a remedy for over-population.
Between 1768 and 1781, Captain Cook made three exploratory voyages to the West Coast of Canada. Because the Chinese were interested in receiving fur in exchange for the tea, silks and porcelain which was in demand in Europe, the British went further west. In 1788, a group of English traders settled on Vancouver Island. Spain still claimed the whole West Coast of America up to Alaska but after a confrontation at Vancouver between the two countries, England presented an ultimatum to the Spanish whose lack of allies and an effective navy forced them to accept its terms. The Spanish recognition of British trading and fishing rights in the area opened the way for the establishment of British Columbia and the creation of a British North America. In 1867, the British North America Act united Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in the Dominion of Canada.
When Admiral Nelson defeated a combined French and Spanish fleet near Gibraltar in 1805, the long struggle between Britain and France for world supremacy ended. English soldiers were involved in a war with China over British export of opium from India in exchange for silks and tea. When China forbade the opium trade and fired on a British warship, they were bombarded by a Royal Navy squadron. The Opium War ended with the Treaty of Nanking in 1842 that opened up five “Treaty Ports” for trade and gave Hong Kong to Britain.
Britain’s rise to a world power meant that she found interest everywhere. Not only was she now head of the self-governing colonies such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, but also the vast Empire of India and a veritable host of dependent territories all over the world’s oceans. Most of these had been acquired somehow to protect the merchants and traders of England. On the following page, you will find a chart of British interference and domination in the affairs of the world.
Observations of Commonwealth Countries While I could make numerous observations about the various countries that comprise the Commonwealth countries, I would like to offer the following:
1. There is an interesting mix between extremely wealthy countries such as Australia, Canada, Brunei, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and UAE versus the Highly Indebted Poor Countries-HIPC such as Bangladesh, Mozambique, Uganda and the Sudan.
Many of the HIPC have vast mineral resources which are used to pay for World Bank loans instead of building infrastructure. Please refer to Prince Charles the Sustainable Prince. For example:
Ghana – Rich in gold, bauxite, manganese, diamonds
Guyana – Rich in bauxite, manganese, gold, diamonds
Mauritania – Iron and copper ore
Senegal – Petroleum refining
Sierra Leone – Diamonds, chrome, bauxite and iron ore
Uganda – Copper and cobalt
Tanzania – Rich in gold, diamonds and coal
Zambia – Rich in copper.
2. By the number of countries that the British invaded, ruled and plundered, you can see that “the sun never sets on the British Empire.”
3. Israel was a British Mandate and then was made a country by vote at the United Nations.
4. The financial and economic power of some of the Commonwealth Countries and those invaded by the British is as follows:
Australia – rich in coal, gold, meat, wool, machinery, iron ore, bauxite, natural gas, uranium and petroleum.
Brunei – Rich in oil and gas with 79 million barrels of oil exported in 2001. It also has forests, fish, rubber and pepper.
Kuwait – Has 10% of the world’s oil reserves at 98 billion barrels.
India – Has textiles, chemicals, steel, transportation equipment, cement and petroleum.
Nigeria – The most populous country with proven oil reserves of 27 billion barrels and natural gas reserves of 4 trillion cubic feet along with coal, peanuts and palm oil.
Malaysia – Rubber, palm oil and electronics.
Oman -Has oil and natural gas with some copper, gold, manganese, and goal.
Qatar – Has 5% of the world’s oil reserves of 14.6B barrels and proven natural gas of 17.9% trillion cubic feet.
Singapore – Electronics, chemicals, transportation equipment, one of the world’s largest petroleum refining centers and an important ship-building center.
South Africa – The world’s largest producer of platinum, gold and chromium.
UAE – Has 10% of the world’s oil reserves estimated at 98.1 billion barrels and natural gas at 5.8 trillion cubic feet as well as largest producer of dates and fresh fruits, has a national shipping fleet of more than 4,000 vessels, produces aluminum, chemicals, paper and pharmaceuticals.
Zimbabwe – Coal, gold, copper, nickel, tin, clay, steel, wood, cement and chemicals.
While we are at it, let us make mention that most of the off-shore trading and banking is conducted in the Cayman Islands which is part of the UK. They have 40,000 companies as of 1998 with 600 banks and trusts. AT that time, banking exceeded $500B.
Definition of Commonwealth
The English word, “Commonwealth”, dates from the 15th century and indicates one of the following: a nation, state or political unit, a state founded on law by agreement of the people for the common good, a republic, and/or a federated union of constituent states. The Commonwealth of England was the official title of the political unit that replaced the kingdoms of Scotland and England under the rule of Oliver Cromwell.
The states of Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia are all “commonwealths” which emphasizes they have “government based on the common consent of the people” (Source: Wikipedia.Org.)
According to an Internet encyclopedia, Wikipedia.org, “The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association of independent sovereign states, mostly formed by the United Kingdom and its former colonies.” Countries that “acknowledge the British monarch as head of state are known as Commonwealth Realms” while all members recognize Queen Elizabeth II as Head of the Commonwealth.
The Commonwealth is the successor of the British Empire and has its origins in the Imperial Conferences of the 1920s. The Commonwealth was established as an association of free and equal states, and membership was based on common allegiance to the British Crown.
The old British Empire, we are told, was dismantled after World War II beginning with India and the activities of Mohandas Gandhi. A number of the countries that have been de-colonized are republics. Because several left the Commonwealth, they established the London Declaration which provided for members to accept the British monarch as Head of the Commonwealth regardless of their domestic constitutional arrangements, and are now considered by many to be the start of the modern Commonwealth.
The population of the Commonwealth is about 1.8 billion people which comprise about 30% of the world’s population. India is the most populous member with a billion people while Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nigeria have more than 100 million people. The land of Commonwealth nations equals about 1/4 of the world’s land area. Membership is open to countries that accept the association’s basic aims.
In recent years, the Commonwealth has suspended Fiji (2000-2001), Pakistan from 1999-2004, Nigeria from 1995 – 1999, Zimbabwe was suspended in 2002 and left the Commonwealth in 2003.
Organization and Objectives
Queen Elizabeth II is the nominal Head of the Commonwealth. Since 1965 there has been a London-based Secretariat. The current Commonwealth Secretary-General is the former New Zealand Foreign Minister Don McKinnon.
The objectives of the Commonwealth were set down in The Harare Declaration of 1991. While it is not a long declaration, part of it is reprinted only to show that there really is no real reason for the UK to have the Commonwealth except to control the UN through the Commonwealth. Its goals are exactly those of the UN. The Declaration states in part,
The Heads of Government of the countries of the Commonwealth reaffirm their confidence In the Commonwealth as a voluntary association of sovereign independent states, each Responsible for its own policies, consulting and co-operating in the interests of their peoples and in the promotion of international understanding and world peace.
The Commonwealth way is to seek consensus through consultation and the sharing of experience. It is uniquely placed to serve as a model and as a catalyst for new forms of friendship and co-operation to all in the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations.
We believe that international peace and order, global economic development and the rule of International law are essential to the security and prosperity of mankind.
Internationally, the world is no longer locked in the iron grip of the Cold War. Totalitarianism Is giving way to democracy and justice in many parts of the world.
Many Commonwealth countries are poor and face acute problems, including excessive population growth, crushing poverty, debt burdens and environmental degradation.
Only sound and sustainable development can offer these millions the prospect of betterment. Achieving this will require a flow of public and private resources from the developed to the developing world, and domestic and international regimes conducive to the realization of these goals: environmental degradation, migration and refugees, communicable diseases and drug production and trafficking.
Having reaffirmed the principles to which the Commonwealth is committed, we pledge the Commonwealth and our countries to work with renewed vigor, concentrating especially In the following areas: the protection and promotion of the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth.
How Voluntary is the Commonwealth?
You would think that if a country was de-colonized that Britain would have a “hands-off” policy. That is not the case. Every Commonwealth country that acknowledges the queen as head of state has a representative of the queen who is called a “Governor-General.” The Governor-General retains all the reserve powers that the Queen exercises in the UK which includes opening and closing parliament and abolishing parliament. Furthermore, the Governor-General appoints the prime minister and cabinet from the part with the most support from the House of Commons. In Canada, for example, the ten provinces all have a representative of the Queen! When Parliament is opened, both the prime minister and the Governor-General give a speech. The Governor-General delivers “The Speech from the Throne.”
Commonwealth Votes at the UN
When the UN was formed in 1945, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom had three votes. As the UK de-colonized countries, they were made voting members of the United Nations. Then between 1946-1959 when the United Kingdom de-colonized a number of countries, their votes increased by four: Ghana, Malaysia, Pakistan and Sir Lanka. During 1960-1969, twenty more countries were de-colonized: Barbados, Botswana, Cameroon, Cyprus, Gambia, Guyana, Jamaica, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Swaziland, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Zambia. During 1970-79, ten more countries de-colonized: Bahamas, Bangladesh, Dominica, Fiji, Grenada, Mozambique, Papau New Guinea, Samoa, and Solomon Islands. During 1980-89, seven more countries de-colonized: Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu, and Zimbabwe. The last country to de-colonize was Namibia.
In addition, associated states, external territories and dependencies include: Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Channel Islands, Falkland Islands, Isle of Man, Montserrat, Pitcairn Islands, St. Helena, and Turks and Caicos Islands. Those that come as a result of being part of Australia or New Zealand include: Christmas Island, Cocos Island, Cook Islands, Niue, Norfolk Island, and Tokelau.
Canada and the Free Trade Areas of the Americas Our neighbor to the north and our largest trading partner, Canada, is the largest member of the Commonwealth in this hemisphere. Canada is America’s largest trading partnerósurpassing our trade with Japan. On a daily basis the volume is over $1B or about $400B a year. Twenty-three percent of American exports are sent to Canada and more than 80% of Canada’s exports come to us. Canada is the largest export market for 39 of the 50 states. We import 80% of Canada’s wood, paper and pulp and 17% of their oil and 18% of their natural gas. Furthermore, we not only share energy grids all across the northern borders but New England obtains most of their power from Quebec.
From a military standpoint, over the past 46 years, America has been inextricably linked to Canada through our joint military efforts through the North American Aerospace Defense Command-NORAD. On September 11, it was a Canadian general who was holding the chair at NORAD that gave the order to initiate our defenses. As a result of September 11, more than 200 commercial planes were diverted to airports across our country from coast to coast. Since then both countries have implemented measures to strengthen military cooperation as well as law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In December 2002, they established the Bi-national Planning Group to develop joint plans for maritime and land defense, and for military support to civil authorities in times of emergency. In Canada, President Bush expressed hope that our two countries would move forward on a ballistic missile defense system.
In November, 2004 President Bush told Canada’s Prime Minister Paul Martin at a meeting on “Common Security, Common Prosperity, A new Partnership in North America, “It’s good to be home.” He went on to declare, “Both the U.S. and Canada participate together in more multinational institutions than perhaps any two nations on earthófrom NATO to the OAS to APEC in the Pacific.” He went several steps forward when he pledged,
My country is determined to work as far as possible within the framework of international organizations and we’re hoping that other nations will work with us to make those institutions more relevant and more effective in meeting the unique threats of our time.
With all this “interconnectedness,” I would like to seriously question our involvement with, not only Canada, but the Free Trade Areas of the Americas-FTAA which is a trading zone for all the countries in our hemisphere. Begun in 1994, the various cabinet level secretaries of the 34 countries have been meeting throughout the year since then to integrate our laws. In a the Western Hemisphere, Canada, Antigua, the Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago are members of the British Commonwealth. We are outvoted by 13 votes to our one vote in our own hemisphere! Let’s take a look at the voting power of the Commonwealth in the world today.
THE VOTING POWER OF THE COMMONWEALTH IN THE WORLD TODAY
Starting with the founding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in 1944, an economic international infrastructure was established which was followed by a political international infrastructure above the nation-states. Over the last 61 years, this infrastructure has been developed to include trade, law, the military and now intelligence as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America. Interestingly enough, the Commonwealth of Nations operates in each of these organizations. Not once has an American President said, “Chose either the UN or the Commonwealth.” On the following page, you will see the power of the Commonwealth. We are outvoted with our one vote at every turn.
Let me just make mention that on a regional basis, the U.S. and the world are also outvoted: Free Trade Areas of the Americas by 13 votes, two votes in the European Union, and seven votes at the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation!
Furthermore, whenever a committee is formed at the UN, they rotate “presidency”. For example, if there are 4 Commonwealth countries that are part of a committee of 15, that means Britain is president 25% of the time. This is occurring throughout ALL of the hundreds of committees, agencies, organizations, etc. throughout the WHOLE of the UN system.
In conclusion, I believe the purpose behind the construction of the international level is to transfer complete and absolute power to Britain.
I can now see why Prince Charles was working behind the scenes. For him to be center-stage along with the power of the Commonwealth would look like they are in the process of using Francis Drake’s pirating methods to grab the world! You can now see how The British have the majority of votes in the global organizations of the world through the Commonwealth and not one major power has questioned the ability of the Commonwealth to operate in tandem with the other global organizations!
And while we are on the subject of being outvoted, let us turn to the EU for a moment. When it came together the whole purpose was to create a “United States of Europe.” Now that the travel and trade barriers are down between the European states which now total 25, and they have adopted a common currency which is giving the dollar a run for her money, and they have a common parliament in Strasbourg, how come, they still have 25 votes at the UN instead of ONE? America has 50 states and we only get ONE vote! There, the Commonwealth has two votes: Malta and the UK. Globally Queen Elizabeth II has out-maneuvered more than what her namesake did when she defeated the Spanish Armada!
“Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder and cast away their cords from us. He that sits in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak to them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare: Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me and I shall give thee the heathen for your inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for your possession.” Psalms 2
Pop singer Michael Jackson’s features changed and the color of his skin lightened dramatically during the final decades of his life. Jackson denied changing his skin color to improve his appearance and claimed that he suffered from vitiligo, a condition in which the immune system attacks cells that produce melanin, which determines an individual’s skin color. Jackson said he was not trying to look “White,” but observers wondered, if that were so, what was the motivation for his straightened hair and the many operations to change the shape of his nose, chin and cheekbones?
In 2010, former Chicago Cubs baseball player Sammy Sosa was photographed at the Latin Grammy Awards in Las Vegas with noticeably whiter skin. Sosa originally had a very brown complexion but appeared to be nearly White in photographs. He told reporters that a cosmetic cream *76 he used to soften his skin caused the lighter tone. He said he had been using the cream for some time and it made his face look whiter than it actually was, but claimed he was not trying to look like Michael Jackson, nor was he suffering from any skin illness.
“Color Struck” is an old saying among African-Americans that refers to individuals who believe that a lighter complexion and European features represent the epitome of beauty and desirability. Color discrimination is often masked by a combination of subjective notions of attractiveness and unconscious stereotypes. Michael Jackson and Sammy Sosa were probably not consciously attempting to look White; it is more likely they were simply color struck.
Racism involves discrimination against individuals based on their racial category. Colorism, in contrast, involves discrimination against dark-complexioned African-Americans on the basis of their color. The hierarchy employed in colorism is the same as the one that governs racism; a light complexion and European features are considered to be more valuable and attractive than dark skin and African features. Color distinctions among African-Americans have never been recognized in the formal ways they were in the Caribbean and South America. However, among African-Americans, the distinctions are usually unstated but well understood. Lighter complexions and European features are more desirable than darker complexions and African features. A person is considered light-skinned by an application of the “paper bag test,” which looks to whether the person’s complexion is the color of a grocery bag or lighter.
*77 Although formal racial classifications were developed in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the preference for white skin, blonde hair and European features is rooted in antiquity. Beginning with Greek sculptures of Aphrodite and Roman depictions of Venus, and into the European Renaissance, pale complexions, blue eyes, and flowing blonde hair have been the gold standard for feminine beauty. When Europeans colonized Asia, Africa, and the Americas, they imposed their standards of beauty on the indigenous groups and on the Africans they imported and enslaved. Today, the European norm for beauty and attractiveness is ubiquitous and constantly reinforced in movies, magazines, television programs, online and elsewhere. Young children assimilate these conceptions at an early age, and they remain embedded in their psyches as they mature into adults.
African-Americans, South Asians, Latin Americans, and other people of color have, for many generations, internalized this Eurocentric standard of attractiveness. Using hair straighteners and skin-lightening creams, they attempt to look white without consciously realizing they are doing so. The evidence indicates that in America, socioeconomic disparities resulting from colorism can be as severe as those traditionally attributed to racism. As America becomes a more multi-racial society, old fashioned “Jim Crow” racism has slowly diminished, while color bias persists.
Leland Ware, Louis L. Redding Professor of Law & Public Policy, University of Delaware.
II. Color Discrimination
Discrimination on the basis of color, rather than race, has long been documented by researchers. In The Philadelphia Negro, W.E.B. Du Bois *78 described intra-racial colorism when he commented on that city’s “Aristocracy of the Negro population” in the late 1890s. Du Bois observed, “[t]hey are largely Philadelphia born, and being descended from the house servant class, contain many mulattoes.” Du Bois noted that Philadelphia’s Black elites did not interact with their less affluent counterparts in ordinary assemblages or promenading places. The insular and elitist nature of the group was reflected in Du Bois’ observation that “[s]trangers secure entrance to this circle with difficulty and only by introduction.” Decades later in the landmark study, An American Dilemma, Gunnar Myrdal wrote: “without a doubt a Negro with light skin and other European features has in the North an advantage with white people.”
In 1957, Sociologist E. Franklin Frazier made a similar observation in Black Bourgeoisie. He wrote: “a light complexion resulting from racial mixture raised a mulatto above the level of an unmixed Negro.” Frazier explained that “[p]artly because of the differential treatment accorded to the mulattoes, but more especially because of the general degradation of the Negro as a human being, the Negro of mixed ancestry thought of himself as superior to the unmixed Negro. His light complexion became his most precious possession.”
Over the last two decades, a large body of scholarship examining the detrimental effects of color discrimination has been produced by scholars representing a range of academic disciplines. In general, the research shows that dark-skinned Blacks are treated differently and less favorably than their lighter-complexioned counterparts. Legal scholars have complained about the courts’ reluctance to acknowledge color discrimination. In Colorism: A Darker Shade of Pale, Taunya Banks explored the history of color discrimination in America and analyzed the *79 problems it has posed in employment discrimination cases. Skin tone discrimination, she wrote, is an aspect of employment discrimination that courts have been hesitant to recognize. She found that judges are more willing to acknowledge color discrimination in cases involving ethnic Whites and Latinos, but are hesitant to do so when Black claimants are involved. Courts are skeptical of claims involving intra-racial discrimination as it does not fit the traditional paradigm of Whites discriminating against Blacks. Banks concluded that courts possess the legal authority to redress claims under existing antidiscrimination laws and should be more willing to recognize claims of color discrimination when African-Americans assert them.
Other scholars have made similar observations. In Shades of Brown: the Law of Skin Color, Trina Jones examines the history of colorism in America and the discrimination against individuals based on skin color. She distinguishes intra-group colorism from cross-racial colorism and traditional discrimination: the first involves lighter-skinned African-Americans and Whites disfavoring darker-skinned Blacks; the second involves Whites discriminating against all Blacks. In both cases, darker-complexioned Blacks are the victims. Jones complains that courts tend to minimize the significance of this distinction using a flawed interpretation of antidiscrimination laws. Jones argues that a more nuanced understanding of discrimination is needed to recognize color discrimination. In Title VII: What’s Hair (and Other Race Based Characteristics) Got to Do With It, D. Wendy Greene conducted a similar analysis and reached the same conclusion: color-based discrimination claims made by Black complainants are misunderstood and should be recognized, given that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race and color.
*80 Leonard Baynes examined the “Dark-Light Paradigm” of African-American and Latino colorism. He determined that an entrenched color hierarchy among non-White ethnic groups operates to the detriment of dark- complexioned Blacks and Latinos. Baynes bolstered his analysis with data that showed darker-skinned Blacks and Latinos tend to have smaller incomes, lower levels of educational attainment, and less prestigious employment positions than lighter-skinned Blacks and Latinos.
Colorism has even infected the criminal justice system. Research has shown that dark-skinned Blacks receive longer prison sentences than their lighter-complexioned counterparts. An article examining racial disparities in the criminal justice system cited a study of 67,000 male felons incarcerated in Georgia for a first offense from 1995 through 2002. The data showed that dark-skinned Black defendants received longer sentences than light-skinned Blacks.
In another article, the authors examined discrimination on the basis of what they called “Afrocentric” features, which they defined as darker skin color, fuller lips and broader noses. The authors collected and analyzed data that showed that Black defendants in Florida who had prominent African features tended to receive longer sentences than other Blacks whose racial physiognomy was less distinctive. Using photographs and other information about inmates, including the offenses for which they were convicted and their criminal records, the authors found that among African-American inmates, those with prominent African features tended *81 to receive longer sentences than others whose African features were not as prominent. The researchers concluded that Afrocentric features activated an unconscious stereotype of Blacks as dangerous criminals, which influenced the decisionmaking process and caused the imposition of longer sentences when dark-skinned defendants were convicted.
The disparities are not limited to male defendants. A recent study found that Black female offenders who are light-skinned received shorter prison sentences than darker-complexioned offenders. The authors collected data on 12,158 imprisoned Black women in North Carolina between 1995 and 2009. The study showed that women with light skin were sentenced to approximately 12% less prison time than their darker-skinned counterparts. The study examined factors such as prior records, conviction dates, misconduct while incarcerated, and having low body weight, as well as whether the women were convicted of homicide or robbery since these crimes carry heavier prison terms. The authors concluded that colorism demonstrates the complexity of racism in our society and added that “it is no longer sufficient to understand racial discrimination solely in terms of the relative advantages of Whites compared to non-Whites. Among Blacks, characteristics associated with Whiteness appear to have a significant impact on important life outcomes.”
Color discrimination affects a wide range of activities. Using a longitudinal design method that linked a sample of African-American men raised in the South to their census records, Mark Hill examined the influence of skin color on the socioeconomic attainment of African-American men. His findings showed the importance of skin color in directing the socioeconomic progress of African-American men. Individuals who identified as mulatto in the study had a higher adult socioeconomic status than Blacks with dark complexions. Hill’s analysis indicated that differences in social origins were responsible for only 10 to 20% of the color gap in adult attainment levels. Hill’s findings indicated *82 that color bias, rather than family background, was responsible for most of the color differences in the socioeconomic status of African-American men.
In The Skin Color Paradox and the American Racial Order, the authors used surveys to develop an empirical analysis that found:
[D]ark-skinned blacks have lower levels of education, income and job status. They are less likely to own homes or to marry; and dark-skinned blacks’ prison sentences are longer. Dark-skin discrimination occurs within as well as across races. Some evidence suggests, in fact, that intra-racial disparities are as detrimental to a person’s life chances as are disparities traditionally associated with racial divisions. . . . With some exceptions, most Americans prefer lighter to darker skin aesthetically, normatively and culturally. Film-makers, novelists, advertisers, modeling agencies, matchmaking websites-all demonstrate how much the power of a fair complexion, along with straight hair and Eurocentric facial features, appeals to Americans.
The discussion in this section shows that a large body of theoretical and empirical research demonstrates conclusively that color bias is real and has an adverse effect on the lives of dark-complexioned African-Americans.
III. The Geography of Colorism
Colorism operates on a global scale. There is a worldwide market for chemicals that lighten skin tones. Asia has the largest market for skin-whitening creams. In India and Pakistan, women are socialized to believe that a fair complexion equates to beauty and is the key to success in life, marriage, and work. During the colonial era, the idea that Indians *83 with fair skin were superior was usually unstated but well understood. The belief that a light complexion is superior to a darker one is embedded deeply within the Indian psyche, since skin color is an important consideration in marriage. Research conducted by a matrimonial website in three northern Indian states confirmed that skin tone is the most important criteria when selecting a partner.
A journalist wrote: “it is being called ‘Snow White syndrome’ in India, a market where sales of whitening creams are far outstripping those of Coca-Cola and tea.” According to Imani Perry, this practice exemplifies the perverse objectification of the female body in sexual partnering.
Colorism is also evident in advertisements. For instance, a television ad for the cream Fair & Lovely reinforces the idea that girls seeking a prospective groom should utilize skin-lightening creams in order to become more marketable for marriage. Beyond the simple advertisement for a flawless skin, it is implied that using this cream is also necessary to advance in all relevant aspects of life. But the use of lightening creams is not restricted to women. The popularity of these products is increasing among men and the availability of products for male consumers is highly advertised. A commercial shown on Indian satellite channels featured Bollywood star Shahrukh Khan promoting a skin cream called Fair and Handsome. In it, a glum, dark-skinned Indian man used the skin-lightening cream to become many shades lighter. At the end of the commercial he is shown smiling and walking confidently with a lovely woman at his side. L’Oreal hired Bollywood actor John Abraham to pitch its Garnier for Men skin-whitening lotion in an effort to challenge the *84 market leader, Fair and Handsome. Another skin-lightening cream, Unilever’s Vaseline Healthy White Body, is currently the most advertised cosmetic brand on Indian television. Unilever’s cream created great controversy with its Internet marketing strategy, which appeared to be racist, because it showed a distinct preference for lighter skin. Recently, further concerns have been raised regarding the dissemination of other desirable physical characteristics for young Indians. The homogeneity of color is becoming a new social expectation in order to overcome self-consciousness. Therefore, young Indians are being encouraged to start using deodorants and intimate wash products containing skin-lightening ingredients.
Skin-lightening creams increased $432 million in sales in South Asia during the first nine months of 2008, and the industry expects to continue growing as the levels of urbanization and affordability augment their target populations by expanding the market for men in the following decade. However, this phenomenon is not limited to South Asia. An increasing number of East Asians are using their rising incomes to purchase skin-lightening products. In Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea, and Taiwan, four of every ten women use a whitening cream. And, as is the case elsewhere, the cosmetics industry is reaping enormous profits. In Hong Kong, pale Asian models dominate the flat-screens and multimedia billboards of public transit. They appear on the pages of glossy magazines and cinema advertisements promoting such products as Blanc Expert, White-Plus, White Light, Future White Day, Active White, and Snow UV. Skin lightening has a long history in Asia. In ancient *85 China and Japan, a saying, “one white covers up three ugliness,” has been passed down through the generations. These attitudes are largely the same among many Asian Americans.
Colorism is also pervasive in Latin America. Unlike America’s “one-drop rule” in which any amount of African ancestry classifies an individual as Black, Latin America exhibits a more fluid classification system based on color gradations and appearance. Racial distinctions are based on phenotypes that focus more on physiognomy than ancestry. The flexibility in Latin America’s racial designation system is limited to those whose lighter complexions and European phenotypes allow them to distinguish themselves from darker-complexioned Blacks, since Blackness is subjectively perceived as an offensive racial category in the social hierarchy. In Latin America, individuals are valued by how closely their appearances, status, and progeny approach whiteness.
Mexico’s colonization illustrates how discrimination on the basis of color influenced the creation of a racialized hierarchy, which continues to affect the socioeconomic and political systems at present. Spanish colonizers imposed a stratified status system in Mexico where Whites were the elites and Native Mexicans the slaves. These groups intermingled creating a large population of mixed-race mestizos that resulted in the creation of a color hierarchy. Light-complexioned persons occupied the upper rungs of the social strata. The darkest persons were relegated to the lowest levels.
Colorism has concerned the Mexican-American columnist Ruben Navarrette since his childhood, when he realized his skin tone was different compared with the rest of the children in a United States kindergarten. Now, as an adult, Navarrette stresses that, a century after the Mexican Revolution, the division between urban and rural Mexico continues, along with the silent wars between the wealthy and poor, and *86 the light and dark-skinned individuals. He remarked that it is very common to find light-colored people in television, politics and academia, but it is unlikely to find persons from this racial category working at construction sites or kitchens, where darker-colored people prevail.
There is a conspicuous absence of dark-skinned Mexicans in telenovelas, commercials, and other forms of advertising, which are an inadequate representation of the country’s inhabitants. A study that examined the content of six Spanish-language telelenovelas and a drama on three Spanish-language television networks in the United States (Telemundo, Univision, and Azteca America) found that “lighter skin characters were more likely to play major roles, were more fit and younger, and more likely to be upper class than their darker skin counterparts.” A promotion for Televisa’s popular program, “Destilando Amor” (Distilling Love), presents an example of how color status is portrayed. In one scene, an upscale woman with blonde hair sits at a dinner table expressing her displeasure with a family member for falling in love with a working-class woman. As the fair-skinned woman speaks, a servant with dark, indigenous features stands silently in the background.
Colorism can be found elsewhere in Latin America. In Brazil, individuals are assigned to racial groups based on physical appearance rather than ancestry. This criterion of racial self-identification has resulted in ambiguous and numerous color categories. Many of the terms Brazilians use to describe racial mixtures are vague, and there is no consistent agreement on their meaning or to whom they should be applied. For instance, a 1976 census collected 135 popular terms, including “purple, dark chocolate, or Pele colored.”
Given the focus on phenotypical characteristics, some individuals may be identified in varying racial terms at various times by different people, and some parents and full siblings in the same family may be assigned to different racial groups. One article explained:
*87 Brazilian racial classification schemes defining a person based on the slightest variation of physical characteristics presumably associated with Black ancestry and/or white ancestry could either elevate or demote an individual on the racial ladder. The implementation of such a highly stratified method of categorizing race evidences an extreme effort on behalf of the white minority to preserve their economic, social, and political dominance over masses of people of mixed and unmixed African descent. Additionally, because of its relatively relaxed approach to manumission, which contributed to the rapid growth of free people of color, it was imperative for Brazil to develop a racial taxonomy based on infinite physical distinctions that simultaneously maintained its racial hierarchy and recognized the country’s widespread miscegenation.
The current official categories used by the Brazilian census are White (Branco), Brown (Pardo), Black (Preto), Asian/Yellow (Amarelo), and Indigenous (Indigena). It is estimated that the first three categories account for 99% of Brazilians. In 2010, a majority (50.7%) of the population identified themselves as Afro-Brazilians, a classification that includes both Black (7.6%) and mix-raced Brazilians (43.1%). In a 2010 census, more individuals identified themselves as Black than in 2000.
Despite the Brazilian efforts to project a racially neutral structure through what is known as a racial democracy, scholars have shown that a racial hierarchy composed of a graduated scale of color persists. The data shows that Afro-Brazilians are more economically, socially, and politically disadvantaged than their lighter-skinned counterparts. According to Seth Racusen, “all key socioeconomic variables demonstrate this wide gap between ‘Whites’ compared to ‘Browns’ and ‘Blacks.”‘
Brazilian media also reinforces the social preference for Whites by portraying them as symbols of “beauty, happiness, and middle-class success.” The concept portrayed in television seems consistent with the perception of reality. As indicated by Patricia de Santana Pinho, “the power of whiteness is lived by everyone in Brazil, and it is always operating either in opening or closing doors of opportunity and achievement.”
Given the strong negative stereotypes against dark-colored people and, on the other hand, the potential incentives that could be derived from affirmative action policies, individuals may have personal motivations to alter the designation of their race.
How individuals are classified does not depend solely on their physical appearance. The saying “money whitens” reminds Brazilians that the apparent wealth and status of a person, as well as the immediate social company, are important considerations for the observer who determines their race. Therefore, as individuals accumulate wealth they also gain color status. The ambiguity of race categories along with the deficiencies of the self-identification system makes it feasible for individuals to change their racial identities by becoming better educated or more affluent.
These attitudes can be found in other Latin American countries. Tanya Hernandez examined racial attitudes in Puerto Rico and Cuba, given the acceptance of race fluidity in the former country and the formal rejection of the concept of race in the latter. She found that, despite the apparent respect for social fluidity and flexible racial labeling, racial identity and identification are neither completely fluid nor neutral. For example, like in Mexico and Brazil, Cubans and Puerto Ricans also exercised the plasticity of race labeling in order to avoid Black designation in social status and self-identification. Today, many Puerto Ricans of mixed ancestry (usually called “triguenos” and “morenos”) prefer to classify *89 themselves as White rather than Black on census forms. This response, however, underestimates the long history of miscegenation and African ancestry of much of Puerto Rico’s population. Prejudice and discrimination against people of African descent are the principal reasons for this preference, since African ancestry is associated with slavery and extreme poverty.
Puerto Ricans perceive that having lighter skin and European features increases an individual’s socioeconomic opportunities. Darker complexions and African features severely limit an individual’s economic and social mobility. According to Wendy D. Roth, medium skin tones confer upon people a certain amount of status compared to those further toward the dark end of the color spectrum.
Research suggests that being discriminated against on the basis of color produces feelings of shame and embarrassment. Many Latin American Blacks harbor internalized attitudes about color and phenotype. Skin color, nose width, lip thickness, and hair texture weigh heavily on the self-esteem of Afro-Latinos, since these are considered racial signifiers of denigrated African ancestry. The belief exists among some Latin Americans that color is something that can be controlled by utilizing whitening creams and to “‘improve the race”‘ of their children.
Marrying someone with a lighter complexion is referred to as adelantando la raza (improving the race) under the theory of blanqueamiento. The concept of blanqueamiento refers to ethnic, cultural, and racial “whitening.” It is an ideology and a social practice that places a higher value on White culture while implicitly devaluing non- *90 White cultural norms. Blanqueamiento perpetuates a social hierarchy based on race by linking whiteness to status, wealth, power, modernity, and development, while implicitly associating blackness with a lack of cultural refinement, ambition, and civilization.
Despite the national ideologies of racial democracy, mestizaje, and racial blindness in Latin America, skin tone is a major marker of status and a form of symbolic capital. Light complexions and European features are highly valued; the darker, more African an individual appears, the lower that person is likely to be on the socioeconomic scale.
IV. Colorism in America
In America, skin color is an important signifier of beauty and social status. African-Americans’ preference for light complexions and European features dates back to the antebellum era when skin color determined an enslaved person’s work assignments. Dark-skinned slaves worked in the fields, while light-complexioned slaves worked in the slave owner’s home. James Stirling, a British writer who visited the American South in 1857, observed conditions on Southern plantations and wrote:
In judging of the welfare of the slaves, it is necessary to distinguish the different conditions of slavery. The most important distinction, both as regards numbers and its influence on the wellbeing of the slave, is that between houseservants and farm or fieldhands. The houseservant is comparatively well off. He is frequently born and bred in the family he belongs to; and even when this is not the case, the constant association of the slave and his master, *91 and master’s family, naturally leads to such an attachment as ensures good treatment. There are not wanting instances of devoted attachment on both sides in such cases. . . . The position of the fieldhands is very different; of those, especially, who labour on large plantations. Here there are none of those humanizing influences at work which temper the rigour of the system, nor is there the same check of public opinion to control abuse. The ‘force’ is worked en masse, as a great human mechanism; or, if you will, as a drove of human cattle.
The Hemingses of Monticello provides an example of how slaves with familial ties to their owners lived and worked during the antebellum period. Elizabeth Hemings was the daughter of an African woman and a White sea captain. She had 12 children, half of them by her owner, John Wayles whose legitimate daughter, Martha Wayles Skelton, married President Thomas Jefferson in 1772. After her father’s death, Martha inherited Elizabeth Hemings and her children and brought them to serve at Monticello. The Hemings were treated differently than other slaves at Monticello plantation. None of them worked in the fields. The women were considered a relatively privileged caste compared to others, and worked as house servants performing chores like sewing, mending clothes, looking after children, and baking cakes. The men served as valets, coach drivers, and butlers. Jefferson paid some of the men wages and gratuities, and others were allowed to hire themselves out to other employers of their choice. Sally Hemings, the young daughter of Elizabeth Hemings and John Wayles, was Martha’s half-sister and it was *92 said that the two bore a physical resemblance. Most historians now agree that Sally Hemings became Jefferson’s mistress and bore six of his children.
Lalita Tademy’s novel, Cane River, describes the intimate relationships among slave owners and female slaves that produced racially-mixed offspring. The characters are based on Tademy’s ancestors who she discovered after years of researching her family’s history. It is a narrative about four generations of women born into slavery along the Cane River in Louisiana. One character, Great-grandmother Elisabeth, had a daughter, granddaughter and great-granddaughter who bore the offspring of the French planters. In many cases, the children’s paternity was widely known and acknowledged by their fathers; but, since Louisiana’s laws did not allow slaves to be legally entitled to any property or money, these children were not allowed to inherit anything.
Prior to the Civil War, mixed-race Creoles in Louisiana had a social status that set them above enslaved persons. After the War, they were subjected to the “one-drop” rule, but they maintained family and community ties that distanced them from darker-skinned African-Americans. They were, as a Creole documentary put it, “too white to be black and too black to be white.”
After emancipation, the dark/light division was perpetuated by African-Americans who constructed social classes based on skin color. Blacks created “blue vein societies,” social clubs to which individuals were admitted only if their skin tone was light enough to make their veins visible on the underside of their arms. Color differences continued to *93 play an important role in the Black community. Mixed race individuals attempted to maintain the privileged status they had acquired during slavery. Separate communities were established in which access was based on skin color. Examples include Chatham and East Hyde Park in Chicago, and the Striver’s Row and Sugar Hill neighborhoods of New York.
Charles Waddell Chesnutt’s 1899 short story, The Wife of His Youth, satirized the pretensions of light-skinned African-Americans at the end of the nineteenth century. The protagonist of the story, Mr. Ryder, was the leader of the local “Blue Vein Society” who was dating a fair-skinned female member of the organization. Ryder claimed that he was free born and the product of a respected family, as this was a requirement for Blue Vein membership. He was confronted with a dilemma when a woman appeared in the community. She was an illiterate, dark-complexioned former slave who had spent years looking for her husband. Ryder initially denied knowing the woman. Eventually, his guilty conscious forced him to admit that he had lied about his background. Ryder acknowledged his marriage and reunited with the dark-skinned woman who was “the wife of his youth.”
Researchers have documented the ways in which many Black teachers in segregated schools during the pre-Brown v. Board of Education era were infected with the attitudes that preferred lighter-skinned children over darker-skinned students. Light-skinned students were selected as leads in plays and pageants, called on first in classroom discussions, and visibly favored by teachers. An example of this can be found in a recollection published by J. Saunders Redding, a writer and literary critic who was the first African-American to hold a faculty position at an Ivy League *94 university. Redding was the product of an influential Black family in Wilmington, Delaware. His brother, Louis L. Redding, was the attorney who represented the Delaware students in the consolidated cases remembered as Brown. In No Day of Triumph, Saunders Redding describes his experiences with colorism during his childhood. Wilmington’s Black population grew rapidly during and after the World War I years. A large number of Black families were moving from the rural South to work in factory jobs that were available in rapidly industrializing northern communities. The recent arrivals were poorer, less educated and often darker-complexioned than Wilmington’s Black middle class. To Saunders’ mother and grandmother, the new neighbors were perceived as a threat.
Redding recalled a public speaking contest in which he competed with a dark-skinned student. He was so nervous that he mumbled a few words before bursting into tears. In contrast, the dark-complexioned student’s performance was outstanding. Redding, who was lighter-complexioned and socially connected, was awarded first prize despite his dismal performance. A few years later, when Redding was in high school, the light-skinned, female principal discouraged him from maintaining a romantic relationship because the girl was poor and dark-skinned.
Wallace Thurman’s Harlem Renaissance novel, The Blacker the Berry: A Novel of Negro Life, is a satire in which the theme is colorism in the 1920s New York. The novel’s dark-skinned protagonist, Emma Lou Morgan, internalized biases against dark-complexioned people. She grew up in Boise, Idaho, where she experienced discrimination by the lighter- *95 complexioned African-Americans throughout her childhood. She left Boise to attend to college in Los Angeles. From there, Emma Lou moved to Harlem where she worked as a maid and later as a teacher. Throughout the novel, Emma Lou is plagued by anxieties about her dark complexion. Her obsession with color prevented her from enjoying Harlem’s excitement. In New York, Emma Lou encountered discrimination from Blacks and Whites. At a Harlem party, a character explained intra-racial discrimination, stating, “people have to feel superior to something,” and expounded that light-complexioned African-Americans who look down on darker-skinned African-Americans were perpetuating a hierarchy of discrimination imposed by the White majority. After some romantic disappointments with light-complexioned men, Emma Lou finally accepted her appearance. The book’s title is derived from an old saying: “the blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice.”
In the early decades of the twentieth century, colorism fueled conflicts among African-American leaders, including Marcus Garvey, who was the head of the Universal Negro Improvement Organization. The organization attracted at least a half-million members, and it competed for a time with the NAACP for the position of the premier African-American advocacy group. Many of the NAACP’s members were educated and middle class. Garvey’s group appealed to the masses. Unlike the NAACP, which fought for integration, Garvey proposed *96 migration to Africa as the answer to the “Negro problem.” In 1931, Garvey, who had a very dark complexion and African features, claimed that W.E.B. Du Bois and the NAACP practiced colorism:
It is no wonder that Du Bois seeks the company of white people, because he hates black as being ugly . . . Yet this professor, who sees ugliness in being black, essays to be a leader of the Negro people and has been trying for over fourteen years to deceive them through his connection with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Now what does he mean by advancing colored people if he hates black so much? In what direction must we expect his advancement? We can conclude in no other way than that it is in the direction of losing our black identity and becoming, as nearly as possible, the lowest whites by assimilation and miscegenation.
Du Bois fervently denied Garvey’s claim, but there was some truth to it. Walter White was the head of the NAACP from the mid-1930s until his death in 1955. White’s light skin, blonde hair, and blue eyes did not display a hint of his African ancestry. He took advantage of his appearance to pass for White while conducting undercover investigations of lynchings and other hate crimes in the South. White’s colorism was reflected in the image of African-American women he actively promoted in Crisis, a periodical published by the NAACP. In the 1940s, Crisis was the most important magazine of opinion among African-Americans. The editors used photographs of predominantly light-skinned, college-educated women in an effort to displace entrenched notions of Black women as “Jezebels” or sexual victims. The editors wanted to refashion the image of Black women, but in doing so they promoted colorism. During the World War II years, the light-skinned, African-American actress Lena Horne was featured on two Crisis covers to promote a new *97 image of Black women. As one scholar explained:
The magazine preferred headshots of well-dressed, light-skinned African American women who were college-educated ladies, beauty-contest winners, soldiers’ wives, or celebrated entertainers, over photographs of dark-skinned women engaged in war-production work. Jane Cooke Wright (August 1942), Barbara Gonzales (March 1944), and Katheryn M. Davenport (August 1944) represent the Crisis’s typical war era cover girl. All three women avert their eyes from the photographer; the photograph showcases their upper torsos, shoulders, and faces, highlighting their light skin and carefully coiffed hair.
Alluding to the organization’s perceived elitism, some Blacks joked that the letters “NAACP” actually stood for the National Association for the Advancement of Certain People.
Colorism lives on. Today, African-American entertainers and actors are far more likely to have light coloring than dark complexions. With the exception of an occasional dark-skinned exotic, most Black models can easily pass the “paper bag” test, and many have racially ambiguous coloring and features. African-American news anchors and reporters rarely have dark complexions. Female entertainers, in particular, tend to have light skin and hair that is dyed blonde and made longer with hair extensions. Consider Halle Berry, Rihanna, and Alicia Keys. In her hit song, “Creole,” Beyonce Knowles sings about her Creole heritage and being an attractive combination of “red bone” and “yellow bone” (terms that refer to light-skinned Black women).
Pop singer Fantasia Barrino rose to fame as the 2004 winner on the popular television show, American Idol. She was the object of a barrage *98 of negative publicity surrounding her affair with a married man and the lawsuit his wife filed against her. Barinno attempted suicide and later told reporters that the media criticism was based on her dark skin and ethnic features. She said: “[w]hen I did [American] Idol, it seemed like everybody there was Barbied out. Slim, long hair, light eyes, light-skinned. And here I come with my dark skin, full nose, short hair and full lips-it was hard.” “Barbied out” referred to the appearance represented by the Barbie doll, one of the most successful toys of the twentieth century. Barbies are grown-up looking dolls that allow girls to reflect their personality and dreams in the roles imagined for them. Their appearance is an icon of female beauty and the American dream. The classic thin figure, blonde hair, and blue eyes reflect the Eurocentric ideal, a look that a dark-skinned person with African features could never achieve. Interestingly, when Barbies were introduced at the 1959 Toy Fair, blonde dolls outnumbered brunettes two to one.
V. Importing European Standards of Beauty
The modern definition of race did not appear until the middle of the eighteenth century. During that century, European publications shifted from identifying groups on the basis of their nationality to a preoccupation with race. By the mid-nineteenth century the classification of individuals by race was ubiquitous. However, the current standards for beauty, which reflect and perpetuate colorism, can be traced back into antiquity.
A pale complexion, fine facial features, and light-colored hair became the social construct of feminine beauty during the Classical period *99 of Ancient Greece (ca. 480-323 BC). For example, a female Greek portrait from the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston is described as possessing finely shaped features: large almond-shaped eyes, beautifully arching eyebrows, a full rounded mouth with a plump and bow-shaped upper lip. During this period, Greek artists made a dramatic advance in the execution of their craft. They learned to express the human body in a life-like and naturalistic manner, characterized by a system of proportions. Their statues were detailed, and with anatomically accurate forms. Consider the nude Aphrodite of Cnidos, by the Athenian sculptor Praxiteles, as an example. Expertly crafted presentations of the human anatomy and musculature were depicted in marble, stone, or bronze.
Africans, known as Ethiopians by the ancient Greeks, were present in the Hellenic world and were considered exotic. African images of athletes and entertainers were displayed in pottery and vases by utilizing an attractive black glaze. Noticeably, they were not shown in heroic roles or as aesthetic symbols, since the Classic ideal of beauty was entirely Eurocentric. Angela Harris articulated with conciseness the perceptions of whiteness and Eurocentrism that have informed both art and history: “more white is more European, and more European is more refined; less European is more primitive, and more primitive is more dark.”
The Romans adopted the Greek standard of beauty. The goddess Venus represented love and beauty and was considered the quintessence of feminine beauty and harmony. The famous statue, Venus de Milo, is exhibited in Paris at the Louvre. Her naked torso has an elongated silhouette and a sensual nudity that contrasts with an impassive expression. The nose is a continuation of the forehead forming the *100 classic “Greek profile.” Along with other interpretations of Venus, this image sets the standard by which feminine beauty is measured.
During the Renaissance (ca. 1300-1600), the aesthetics of the Classical period were revived. Botticelli’s Birth of Venus depicts the goddess emerging from the sea as a full-grown woman. Her cascading blonde hair accentuates her slender body and alabaster complexion. In another Botticelli, Venus and Mars, Venus lies opposite her lover Mars, god of war, who has fallen asleep apparently after making love to her. Her alertness, as the goddess of love, represents the triumph of love over war. Although it is believed that Simonetta Vespucci inspired the work of Boticelli, Venus was the expression of the artist’s ideal perception of beauty. During the Renaissance, realistic interpretation was avoided and positive attributes were highlighted. Venus has perfect skin, a high forehead, and a sharply defined chin. Her hair is strawberry blonde, she has delicate eyebrows, a strong nose, narrow mouth, and full lips. This idealized depiction shows the conception of perfect beauty that prevailed during the Italian Renaissance.
Leonardo Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa, Titian’s Venus with a Mirror and Tintoretto’s Leda and the Swan are examples of art that celebrate beauty in the “whiteness” of European women. Other Renaissance expressions of feminine beauty were along the same lines: Caucasian women with pale complexions and fine features.
*101 With the advent of the Atlantic slave trade in the fifteenth century and the colonization of the Americas, Asia, and Africa, black skin became the personification of the undesirable. By the early nineteenth century, theories of scientific racism were developed and widely accepted. Samuel Morton, a professor of medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, published Crania Americana in 1839. In general, Morton claimed that differences in head shapes could predict a racial group’s intelligence and other personality traits. An appendix written by George Combe expanded upon the relationship between the natural talents and dispositions of nations and the development of their brains. Based on Morton’s findings, Combe highlighted the tendency of the Caucasian race to exhibit moral and intellectual improvement, while referring to the African race situation as one unbroken scene of moral and intellectual desolation, with the exception of some tribes. Combe’s opinion about the Native American race was even more critical: the author could not justify the miserable and savage conditions of these individuals, despite the long-term exposure of natives to European knowledge, enterprise, and energy.
Morton’s theory of Polygenesis hypothesized that racial groups did not share a common origin. This provided a “scientific” basis for viewing African-descended people as a different and inferior species, thus requiring interbreeding to improve the race. A lexicon emerged that equated “blackness” with negative traits. “Black,” “dark,” and “sinister” are considered adjectives stemming from the word “evil.” Common examples include “black hearts,” “black deeds,” and “black magic,” as well as referring to Satan as the “Prince of Darkness.”
*102 Whites expressed what it meant to be Black by portraying negative stereotypes of Blacks in entertainment and popular culture throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. In the late nineteenth century, White performers darkened their faces with burnt cork, painted exaggerated White mouths, donned woolly wigs, and performed minstrel shows. The common themes in these performances were jokes highlighting laziness, ignorance, and other negative traits using crude versions of the Black dialect. Characters such as Jim Crow, a na ve and clumsy slave, exemplify this stereotype. With the advent of motion pictures in the early twentieth century, negative depictions of African-Americans moved to the screen. Furthermore, the negative connotation against Blacks became available to children through cartoons. For instance, the 1941 animation, Scrub Me Mamma with a Boogie Beat, depicts the life of a Black river community called Lazytown. With the exception of some Mammies, all men and animals appear sleeping or slacking during the day. The crude scenes of laziness and abandonment are suddenly changed when a modern riverboat arrives and the beautiful White ladies from the crew bring their energy and good manners to the town. This cartoon highlights the cultural preferences of Whites and displays many of the negative stereotypes of Blacks described so far.
In Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies, and Bucks, Donald Bogle identified other stereotypes depicted in popular films. Toms were always loyal, never turning against their White masters or employers. Coons, in contrast, were irresponsible, lazy, and dishonest. The Mammy was depicted as outspoken, overweight, and cantankerous. The Black Buck was a large, fearsome, dark-skinned, and hyper-sexualized male. The *103 Tragic Mulatto was a fair-skinned female attempting to pass for White. She was a sympathetic character confused by a divided racial heritage. More recently, the “Jezebel” was depicted as seductive, promiscuous, and predatory. Racial stereotypes were a staple of films, cartoons, comic books, and novels well into the 1960s.
In the 1960s, the Civil Rights movement altered the legal status of African-Americans. The official regime of state-sponsored discrimination was eliminated by Civil Rights legislation. For a brief period during the Black Power era, Blacks embraced their African heritage. A rejection of Eurocentric standards of beauty and the establishment of the politics of representation were encouraged. Women were urged to abandon hair strengtheners and skin-lightening creams. The “Afro” hairstyle became fashionable, and African-inspired clothing communicated the wearer’s racial consciousness. The prevailing sentiment was captured in James Brown’s popular song, “Say it Loud, I’m Black and I’m Proud.”
The Black Arts movement introduced a “Black Aesthetic” to art, music, and literature. A revolution took place, which allowed Black artists to look at their social order from their own perspective. The 1960s were a time of protests, demonstrations, and urban riots; a *104 turning point in the way African-Americans perceived themselves. However, their hopes for a permanent transformation were too optimistic. By the late 1970s, the Black Power Movement declined. Opposition to Eurocentric standards survives today in the Black Studies Departments at Universities and in some “Afrocentric” organizations and charter schools, but it has largely disappeared from popular culture.
The commercialization of negative stereotypes has re-emerged and the entertainment industry is exploiting them for profit. Rap music is a multi-billion dollar industry. In the 1990s, “gangster rap” glamorized a ghetto subculture. This was reflected in behavior and attitudes that rejected mainstream values and glamorized dangerous and self-destructive behavior. Conspicuous consumption, ostentatious displays of jewelry, fast cars, and scantily clad women are the images that still predominate in music videos and magazines. Complexion Obsession: A Hip Hop Documentary is a two-part documentary created by Joy Daily. Using filmed interviews of several entertainers, the documentary shows how deeply colorism is embedded in the ethos of hip hop.
In a contemporary representation, the “Jezebel” character is the video vixen, a prominent character in gangster rap songs. Lil’ Kim and Nicki Minaj are current manifestations of this stereotype: they employ exaggerated expressions of femininity and sexuality in their performances; they present images that commodify Black female sexuality; and they are bound by an old stereotype in which Black women are predisposed to *105 sexual deviance and lewdness.
Rap’s product is an extravagant image of life in inner-city neighborhoods. Tough ghetto youths are shown driving luxury cars and wearing oversized shirts and baggy pants while displaying a menacing visage. The “thug” image that many rappers project is merely an updated version of the “Buck” character: a large, threatening, and hyper-sexualized Black male. The old expression “I don’t want nothing black but a Cadillac” conveyed African-American males’ preference for light-skinned women. This attitude persists in hip-hop culture. According to Patricia Hill Collins, the values of individualism, personal expression, and material well-being have prevailed in the hip-hop culture, while issues of racial failure have been overlooked.
VI. Internalized Stereotypes
In the 1970 novel The Bluest Eye, the celebrated author, Toni Morrison, deconstructed Eurocentric standards of beauty. Morrison’s novel conveyed the psychic damage that some Black women suffer as a result of the construction of beauty and desirability in a racially coded society. The story portrays the tragic lives of an impoverished Black family in 1940s America. The eleven-year-old protagonist, Pecola Breedlove, believes she is ugly because her conception of beauty is based on the Eurocentric standard. The title, The Bluest Eye, is derived from Pecola’s intense desire for blue eyes for which she prays every night. Pecola’s obsession and traumatic experiences eventually drive her insane. Pecola’s predicament was caused by internalized attitudes about what was considered attractive and desirable in her immediate reality.
*106 Since 1939, Kenneth and Mamie Clark developed research about self-identification in young children. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, they conducted a series of studies that became known as the “doll tests.” Their studies found differences among children attending segregated schools in Washington D.C. compared to those in integrated schools in New York City. They found that Black children often preferred to play with White dolls over Black ones. When asked to fill in a human figure with the color of their own skin, they frequently chose a lighter shade than was accurate. The children gave the color “White” attributes such as good and pretty, but “Black” was seen bad and ugly. The test was used to show the harm that segregation inflicted on young children, contributing to a sense of inferiority and self-hatred. The Clarks testified as expert witnesses in several of the NAACP’s school desegregation cases and their studies were relied on by the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education.
Over the last two decades, a substantial body of empirical and theoretical work in cognitive psychology has confirmed that the causes of discriminatory actions often operate at an unconscious level without the individual’s awareness of the source. Discrimination is an interaction of social cognitions about race and behavioral outlets that bring congruence to a person’s racial preferences and social settings. Many of these beliefs are formed during the early childhood years, and they serve as a basis for judgments about events, groups, and ideas during their adult years. Socialized beliefs can provoke negative sentiments when individuals make judgments about issues that activate stereotypes.
*107 Overt racism has diminished considerably in the years since the Civil Rights laws were enacted, but unconscious stereotypes about color persist, and they are triggered by the ways in which the brain processes information. “Categorization” allows the brain to quickly process large amounts of information. It operates at a level independent of conscious attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions. Categorization is an essential cognitive activity enabling individuals to reduce the enormous diversity in the world to a manageable level. Categorization is the process of understanding something based on an individual’s knowledge of that which is similar and that which is different. It allows individuals to relate new experiences to old experiences; the unfamiliar becomes familiar. Each object and event in the world is perceived, remembered, and utilized for predicting the future, inferring the existence of unobservable traits or properties, and attributing the causation of events. The process is spontaneous and measured in milliseconds.
According to Frances Aboud, who conducted research on prejudice in young children, categorization develops at an early age. In one of her studies with young children aged 3 to 5, volunteers were given a half-dozen positive adjectives such as “good,” “kind,” and “clean” and an equal number of negative adjectives such as “mean,” “cruel” and “bad.” They asked children to match each adjective to one of the two drawings. One drawing depicted a White person; the other showed a Black person. The *108 results showed that 70% of the children assigned nearly every positive adjective to the White faces and nearly every negative adjective to the Black faces. A subsequent study, also conducted by Aboud, demonstrated that these attitudes were not taught by the children’s parents or teachers. Commenting on Aboud’s research, Shankar Vedantam explained that children’s racial attitudes are the products of unspoken messages emanating from the environments in which they reside. Young children experience a world in which most people who live in nice houses are White. Most people on television are White, especially the people who are shown in positions of authority, dignity, and power. Most of the storybook characters they see are White, and it is the White children who perform heroic, clever, and generous things. Young children conclude that there must be an unspoken rule in society that forces Whites to marry Whites because everywhere they look White husbands are be married to White wives. Young children who are trying rapidly to orient themselves in their environments receive messages about race and color, not once or twice, but thousands of times. Everywhere a child looks, whether it is on television, in movies, in books, or online, their inferences are confirmed. As they grow older, these messages remain in their unconscious psyches and can be triggered by the categorization process.
Unconscious stereotyping is associated with the categorization process. According to Quadflieg and Macrae, upon the perception of a target, social categorization is expected to occur, which in turn activates stereotypical knowledge that is then used to evaluate, judge, or predict a person’s personality or behavior. Attitudes about African-Americans are internalized at an early age and retained into adulthood. This may explain why dark-skinned Black defendants get longer prison sentences than their lighter-complexioned counterparts and why most Americans prefer lighter to darker skin tones.
*109 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws protect against discrimination based on color, but courts have been less receptive to claims alleging intra-racial discrimination. Legal scholars have argued that courts should be more receptive to cases alleging discrimination based on color. These are accurate conclusions and important recommendations, but the color problem is much larger. Successful employment claims will not stop individuals from straightening their hair, donning blonde wigs, or wearing blue contact lenses. Laws will not diminish the worldwide, multi-million dollar market for skin-lightening creams. Court cases will not end the preference for light-complexioned models and entertainers. Regulations will not change the images we see in television, movies, magazines, online, and elsewhere that reinforce colorism every day.
In the classic jazz song What Did I Do To Be So Black and Blue, composed by Fats Waller in 1929 and interpreted by Louis Armstrong, a lonely, dark-skinned woman laments her inability to attract male attention:
Cold empty bed . . . springs hurt my head
Feels like ole ned . . . wished I was dead
What did I do . . . to be so black and blue
Even the mouse . . . ran from my house
They laugh at you . . . and all that you do
What did I do . . . to be so black and blue
I’m white . . . inside . . . but, that don’t help my case
That’s life . . . can’t hide . . . what is in my face
How would it end . . . ain’t got a friend
My only sin . . . is in my skin
What did I do . . . to be so black and blue.
*110 Colorism is a vestige of the colonial era when European countries invaded Africa, Asia, and the Americas and imposed their standards on the indigenous populations along with the Africans they imported and enslaved. Perhaps unconsciously, Michael Jackson and Sammy Sosa wanted to make themselves more physically attractive, which to them meant having a light complexion, European features, and straightened hair.
Colorism is well documented in academic research but largely ignored by policymakers. It is as alive today as it was a century ago. Dark-skinned African-Americans and other minorities do not have the same opportunities for advancement as those with light complexions. This form of discrimination is as injurious as invidious racism. Colorism is a combination of overt and unconscious discrimination that places a high value on light complexions and European features while devaluing dark skin and African phenotypes. As America becomes a more multi-racial society, old-fashioned racism is declining, but colorism and unconscious bias persist. If this trend does not change, it will mean that the darkest-complexioned, most African-looking people will continue to receive the worst treatment.