We must recognize that modern-day forms of intraracial colorism are either rooted in or reinforced by the interracial history of colonialism.
However, there’s another truth that challenges the typical notion that colorism is merely a subsidiary outcome or tactic of racism:
Race is a social construct, but skin tone is a biological fact with socially constructed meanings, one of which is race itself. -Dr. Sarah L. Webb
Watch the Live Stream or Scroll to Keep Reading:
Interracial colorism perpetuated by European colonialists against indigenous people on other continents was a strategy to reinforce the notion of their own superiority in constructing the concept of whiteness.
The mere fact that races are widely classified by colors is indicative of the role that skin tone has played in the social construction of race.
“The first difference which strikes us is that of colour…. And is this difference of no importance? Is it not the foundation of a greater or less share of beauty in the two races? Are not the fine mixtures of red and white … preferable to that eternal monotony, which reigns in that immoveable veil of black which covers all the emotions of the other race? Add to these, flowing hair, a more elegant symmetry of form… Besides those of colour, figure, and hair, there are other physical distinctions proving a difference of race.” -Thomas Jefferson
Jefferson’s quote exposes a few things relevant to this conversation:
- Physical features, especially color and hair, were core factors in defining racial categories, and assigning value and asserting social hierarchies based on those physical features.
- The entire project of constructing race was a tool for asserting and maintaining hegemonic oppression. In order to validate their notion of superiority as “white” people, they have to enforce a hierarchy that values “non-white” people based on how similar or how different they are to “white” people, physically and in other ways, or based on how much European ancestry they have, etc. (i.e. colorism and related systems).
- Constructing ideologies about beauty is inherent to racism and white supremacist oppression. Beauty is not a trivial distraction. It has and continues to be a primary channel for reinforcing white-supremacist ideology and hegemony.
Obviously, this brief article is not meant to reflect all of colonial history. I wanted to underline a less often discussed aspect of history, which is the ways skin color and hair were essential in constructing our modern-day notions of race itself. So it should not be surprising to us that skin tone continues to matter in tandem with racial hiearchies.
If you’re interested in my speaking, training, or consulting services, please contact me here.
HOMEWORK: Recall a time when learning something about history helped you better understand the present. What was the lesson?
AFFIRMATION: I seek to understand the past so I can be more empowered in the present.
This post is part of an ongoing series based on my ebook Corporate Colorism: Why Business Leaders Must Upgrade Their Antiracist Strategy. If you’re a studious student who wants to read ahead before class, you can purchase the Corporate Colorism ebook, or download a free PDF resource.