Search

The field of epigenetics research shows us how we are constructed by what is without—materially, socially and environmentally—while also taking us beyond narrow genetic determinants of heredity. If misappropriated, epigenetics research risks pathologising particular social or ethnic groups as biologically damaged. However, epigenetics may also allow us to better conceptualise the biopsychosocially constitutive nature of racist environments. In this article, I argue that epigenetic understandings of embodiment allow us to follow Achille Mbembe’s recommendation: that to account for postcolonial relations of power—their effectiveness and psychology—we need to go beyond the binary categories (like passivity vs resistance) so frequently deployed in the analysis of domination. To demonstrate this, I offer a literary example from apartheid South Africa. In Bessie Head’sThe Cardinals, embodiment is imagined as the hereditary effect of segregated environmental space.The Cardinalsthus offers something like a literary imagining of the epigenetic (as a material change that is heritable), before contemporary advances in epigenetics research made the connection between environment and embodiment more sensible in molecular terms. Head radically calls into question the certainty of biological identity: characters are ‘marked’ deterministically by their environments but ultimately the mutability of such ‘epigenetic’ markers is revealed when the individual transcends apartheid’s spatial and racial demarcations. Writing in the context of apartheid, Head’s engagement with non-genetic understandings of identity is a motivated attempt to evade the stigmatising categories and ‘genetic’ assumptions of scientific racism, which constructed races as biologically distinct (modern genetic science shows us that there is no genetic basis for ‘race’). Instead, Head positions environmental spaces, including the Indian Ocean (a conduit for South Asian arrivals and for new philosophies and the potential political affiliations that arrive with them) as points of genealogical origin and as constitutive of identity in non-deterministic ways.

The Enlightenment is commonly held accountable for the rise of both racial classification and modern scientific racism. Yet this argument sits uneasily alongside the birth of a modern rights langua...

The case of Angelo Soliman − a black man raised in the royal courts of eighteenth-century Vienna who appeared during his lifetime to have attained significant social status and acceptance into bourgeois society, only to have his body stuffed and exhibited after death in a natural history museum − is discussed in the context of Enlightenment race theories at the core of a then-new ‘scientific racism’. This article explores his representation in its wider discursive and historical context, and critically reflects on predominant narratives and typologies associated with him. The piece then reflects on contemporary attempts to retell his story – via museum exhibitions, literature and film – some of which started to critically reflect on age-old European stereotypes of blackness used in earlier representations of Soliman. The piece promotes a discussion of Soliman’s life from a more critical, historically reflexive, de-colonialising and anti-racist position that questions white normativity and the scientific racism of the European Enlightenment and colonialism, the foundations of modern racism.

Throughout his life, W.E.B. Du Bois actively engaged the scientific racism infecting natural sciences and popular thought. Nevertheless, he also demonstrated a sophisticated and critical engagement with natural science. He recognized that the sciences were socially situated, but also that they addressed real questions and issues. Debate remains, however, regarding exactly how and why Du Bois incorporated such natural scientific knowledge into his own thinking. In this article, we draw on archival research and Du Bois’ own scholarship to investigate his general approach to interdisciplinarity. We address how and why he fused natural scientific knowledge and the influence of physical environs into his social science, intertwining each with his broader intellectual and political aims. This investigation will offer a fuller understanding of the scope and aims of his empirical scholarship. At the same time, it will illuminate a sociological approach to natural science that can still inform scholarship today.

This article contributes to the understudied histories of scientific racism and cultural pluralism in Canada by exploring the early life and thought of Watson Kirkconnell. Kirkconnell, a university...

The historiography on the concept of race in the post-war sciences has focused predominantly on the UNESCO campaign against scientific racism and on the Anglo-American research community. By way of contrast, this article highlights the history of the concept of race from a thus far unexplored angle: from Swiss research centres and their global interconnections with racial researchers around the world. The article investigates how the acceptance, resonance, and prestige of racial research changed during the post-war years. It analyses what resources could be mobilised that enabled researchers to carry out and continue scientific studies in the field of racial research or even to expand them and link them to new contexts. From this perspective, the article looks at the dynamics, openness, and contingency of the European post-war period, which was less stable, anti-racist, and spiritually renewed than retrospective success stories often suggest. The pronounced internationality of Swiss racial science and its close entanglement with the booming field of human genetics in the early 1950s point to the ambiguities of the period’s political and scientific development. I argue that the impact of post-war anti-racism on science was more limited than is frequently assumed: it did not drain the market for racial knowledge on a continent that clung to imperialism and was still shaped by racist violence. Only from the mid 1950s onwards did a series of unforeseen events and contingent shifts curtail the importance of the race concept in various sectors of the human sciences.

Psychology has a history of discussing race in a sparse and fragile way, sometimes flirting with scientific racism. This is related to the Eurocentric hegemony present in the field, which ends up reproducing oppression, such as the lack of inclusion of the race/ethnicity categories in the studies, as well as the scarcity of Black authors in the area. In addition, in an intersectoral logic, we live in a society with gender relations guided by patriarchy, which leads to the production of knowledge marked by institutional sexism. This theoretical chapter seeks to discuss the view that has been cast by developmental psychology on the processes experienced by adolescents and children, based on race and gender relations, which are structural aspects in current societies, as well as in psychological theories and practices.

The premise of this chapter is the elucidation of a different ontology of global politics and order of the nineteenth century. International relations theory takes for granted a largely ahistorical state-centric ontology, which reifies a specific Eurocentric state and state system as the embodiment of global politics. Instead this chapter focuses on an alternative ontology of race, racial hierarchy, and racial difference as significant for defining the content of an imperial global politics and order. The chapter places into context the emergence of scientific racism and social Darwinism as key intellectual elements in defining a political imaginary that influenced the politics of difference and violence. The chapter shows that this intellectual history reveals a global order that was fundamentally racialized and that global violence was understood and practiced as race war.

This work approaches the origin of physical anthropology as part of the general anthropological project, on the basis of the principle that all knowledge translates to ways of interacting with the world. Thus, physical anthropology was built with a heterophobic and racist vision of the human diversity. This, stemming from the so-called scientific racism, justifies the exclusion and marginalization of human collectives.

This Roundtable on Visuality, Race and Nationhood in Italy brings together scholars from the arts, humanities and social sciences to discuss historical constructions of Italian whiteness and national identity in relation to the current xenophobic discourse on race and migration, stressing their rootedness in as yet unchallenged modern notions of scientific racism. Building on postcolonial historian and anthropologist Ann Laura Stoler’s definition of the colonial archive as a ‘site of knowledge production’ and a ‘repository of codified beliefs’ in Along the Archival Grain: Epistemic Anxieties and Colonial Common Sense (2009: 97), the discussants conceive the archive as a multi-layered, collective repository of aspiration, dominance, desire, self-aggrandizement and fear through which the development of society’s self-image can be revealed but also – through a systematic and critical approach to the (visual) archive of coloniality – contested. Based on the analysis of visual cultures (photographs, news footage, advertisements, propaganda, fiction film, etc.) the Roundtable addresses and connects wide-ranging issues such as: the gaze from above and below in colonial-era ethnographic film; the depiction of migration in the Far Right’s rhetoric; representations of fears and fetishisms towards Others in Federico Fellini’s work; and the exploitation of the colonial past in the Italy–Libya Bilateral Agreements on migration. The Roundtable was organized in response to the surge in xenophobic violence sparked by the Italian Parliamentary elections of March 2018 and to mark the publication of Gaia Giuliani’s monograph Race, Nation, and Gender in Modern Italy: Intersectional Representations in Visual Culture (2018).

The premise of this paper is the elucidation of a different ontology of global politics and order of the nineteenth century. International relations theory takes for granted a largely ahistorical s...

“Hypertension in Blacks is a salt disease,” Dr. Anderson 1 explained. “Too much salt overloads their renin-angiotensin system and their kidneys can’t handle it. It’s just the way their bodies work....

Arnold Arluke and Clinton Sanders (1996) have argued that human societies index both humans and animals as belonging to particular rungs of the social hierarchy. They term this multispecies ranking the “sociozoological scale”. This paper will investigate how claims at the 1875 Royal Commission on Vivisection about the sensitivity of particular species and breeds not only reflected assumptions about human social hierarchy but also blurred the boundaries between the human and the animal in the process. It will further be shown how these claims were informed by 18th and 19th century humanitarianism, classism, scientific racism and evolutionary theory, and how these influences combined in claims-making about the relative capacity of particular animals to sense pain and ethical duties towards them that followed from this sensitivity. Particular attention will be given to the opposing efforts of commissioners Thomas Henry Huxley and Richard Holt Hutton to demarcate human and animal sensitivity and exempt companion animals from vivisection respectively. The paper concludes by considering the sociozoological orders constituted by the 1876 Cruelty to Animals Act, particularly through its focus on calculating pain, and the legacy and limitations of this constitution.

Este artigo analisa o não lugar da questão racial e das epistemologias afrodiaspóricas no pensamento social e na sociologia latino-americana. Argumentamos que ainda é incipiente uma produção do conhecimento no campo sociológico que atente para o caráter marginal conferido às epistemologias africanas e afrodiaspóricas, resultado do racismo científico e da invisibilização dessas epistemologias. Problematizamos este debate enfatizando a necessidade histórica de uma produção sociológica que leve em consideração as epistemologias diaspóricas no processo de teorização sociológica e de seu papel na interpelação do suposto caráter universal de uma ciência eurocentrada e branca em detrimento de outros referentes epistêmicos do fazer sociológico.Palavras-chave: questão racial | epistemologias afrodiaspóricas | sociologia Latino-Americana | racismo epistêmico | descolonização científica. Abstract:This article analyzes the absence of the racial question and African diasporic epistemologies in Latin American sociology and social thought. We argue that the production of knowledge that addresses the marginalization of African and African diasporic epistemologies in Latin American sociology is still incipient, as the result of scientific racism and the lack of visibility of these epistemologies. We further this debate by emphasizing the historical need for a sociological production that takes into account diasporic epistemologies in the process of sociological theorizing, and their role in questioning the supposedly universal character of an Eurocentric and white science, to the detriment of other epistemic referents of sociology.Keywords: racial question | afro-diasporic epistemologies | Latin American sociology | epistemic racism | scientific decolonization.

Resumen El artículo analiza la educación superior en Chile en contexto mapuche, específicamente en La Araucanía. El método utilizado es un análisis y discusión bibliográfica que considera 4 libros de referencia, 17 artículos científicos y 8 documentos normativos, sobre educación superior en contexto indígena. La tesis plantea que la educación superior está arraigada a un racismo científico institucional que no incorpora la episteme indígena en la formación y construcción de conocimientos de estudiantes mapuches y no mapuches. Concluimos que el racismo científico en la educación superior trae consecuencias como bajos resultados académicos, debido a la descontextualización curricular. También, mantiene y perpetua las desigualdades sociales, académicas, políticas y económicas en el contexto regional, desvaloriza lo propio y valora lo ajeno. Abstract This article analyzes higher education in La Araucanía, a Mapuche region, Chile. The method used is an analysis and a bibliographic discussion that considers four reference books, 17 scientific articles, and eight normative documents on higher education in an indigenous context. The thesis suggests that higher education is rooted in institutional scientific racism that does not incorporate indigenous epistemology in the formation and construction of knowledge of Mapuche and non-Mapuche students. We conclude that scientific racism in higher education has brought consequences such as low academic results due to the decontextualization of curricula. This racism has also maintained and perpetuated social, educational, political, and economic inequalities in the regional context, devaluing what is proper and valuing what is foreign. Resumo O artigo analisa o ensino superior no Chile em um contexto mapuche, especificamente em La Araucanía. O método utilizado é uma análise e discussão bibliográfica que considera 4 livros de referência, 17 artigos científicos e 8 documentos normativos sobre o Ensino Superior no contexto indígena. A tese sugere que a educação superior está enraizada em um racismo científico institucional que não incorpora a epistemologia indígena na formação e construção do conhecimento dos alunos mapuches e não mapuches. Concluímos que o racismo científico no ensino superior traz consequências, como a baixa escolaridade, devido à descontextualização dos currículos. Também mantém e perpetua as desigualdades sociais, acadêmicas, políticas e econômicas no contexto regional, desvalorizando o que é próprio e valorizando o que é estrangeiro.

Objectives Our aim in this study was to understand how genetics ideas are appropriated and mobilized online toward the political projects of White nationalism and the alt right. Studying three different online venues, we investigated how genetics is used to support racial realism, hereditarianism, and racial hierarchy. We analyzed how these ideas are connected to political and metapolitical projects. In addition, we examined the strategies used to build authority for these interpretations. Methods We analyze three online venues in which genetics has been mobilized to advance racial realism and hereditarian explanations of racial differences. These were (a) the use of genetic ancestry tests in online nationalist discussions, (b) blogs and other venues in which the human biodiversity ideas are articulated, (c) activities surrounding the OpenPsych collection of online journals. Ethnographic and interpretive methods were applied to investigate scientific and political meanings of efforts to mobilize genetic ideas. Results We found that White nationalists use genetic ancestry tests to align White identity with ideas of racial purity and diversity, educating each other about genetics, and debating the boundaries of Whiteness. "Human biodiversity" has been mobilized as a movement to catalog and create hereditarian ideas about racial differences and to distribute them as "red pills" to transform online discourse. The OpenPsych journals have allowed amateur hereditarian psychologists to publish papers, coordinate activity, and legitimate their project at the academic margins. Conclusions These various appropriations of genetics aim to further racial realism and hereditarian explanations of racial social and behavioral differences. Beyond these substantive aims, on a "metapolitical" level, they serve to reframe concepts and standards for political and scientific discussion of race, challenge structures of academic legitimacy and expertise, and build a cadre of ideological foot soldiers armed with an argumentative toolkit. As professional anthropologists and geneticists aim to accurately communicate their science and its implications for understanding human differences to the public, they must contend with these substantive claims and metapolitical contexts.

This Commentary is a response to a Commentary published in the May/June 2020 issue: Nattrass N. Why are black South African students less likely to consider studying biological sciences? S Afr J Sci. 2020;116(5/6), Art. #7864, 2 pages. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2020/7864 Responses to the Commentary in the May/June 2020 issue have been published collectively in a special issue of Volume 116.

Eugenic principles originated in the nineteenth century, along with the related subject of racial hygiene. Eugenics became popular globally, not just in Germany, and was seen as a solution to society’s problems of poverty, crime, and mental illness. Neuroscientists flocked to eugenics, but long before that they helped popularize scientific racism by espousing ideas about smaller skull sizes in so-called “inferior” races. Even famous neuroscientists of the nineteenth and early twentieth century became staunch eugenicists, including Forel, Möbius, Anton, Lundborg, Lennox, and Foster Kennedy. Thus, it isn’t surprising that leading up to the Nazi era, neuroscientists were some of the biggest proponents of forced sterilization and even euthanasia programs as negative eugenics measures to rid society of unwanted elements, including neurologic and psychiatric patients who were seen as “burdens.” Notably, not all neuroscientists believed in eugenic measures on these patients, with some calling for “exoneration of the feebleminded.”

In 1988, Molefi Kete Asante founded the world’s first Black doctoral studies program at Temple University. It was an expression that Black Studies departments should be raising Black Studies scholars, just as other disciplines were raising their own scholars. Asante also maintained that the existing disciplines, which had historically trained scholars studying Black life, were racist and Eurocentric. This essay reveals the founding racist fathers of most of the disciplines. As such, the founding of Black doctoral studies was a profoundly antiracist idea.

This note corrects an error in Winston (1996) regarding the testimony of R. T. Osborne at the 1963 Stell vs. Savannah-Chatham County Board of Education lawsuit. Context for the correct version of O...

This article traces the development of Italian eugenics and scientific racism from their origins in nineteenth-century positivist anthropology to the 1938 Manifesto of Racial Scientists. I follow the biographical trajectory of the Sicilian racial thinker Alfredo Niceforo (1876–1960), the last member of Cesare Lombroso’s positivist school, a founding father of Italian eugenics and a prominent statistician throughout the fascist regime. I argue that the peculiarity of the Italian path to eugenics was its ‘internal orientalism’, caused by the poverty and perceived backwardness of the Italian South. Blending Niceforo’s biography with his ideas, I chart the social and intellectual history of Italian scientific racism from the transformation of Lombroso’s school to the fascist ‘Aryanization’ of Italians.

This article evaluates the historiography of late nineteenth-century sciences of race. A key aspect of this historiography is the idea that sciences of race were designed specifically to justify preexisting ideas about race. This aspect is defined as the ‘derivative explanation of scientific racism’. I critique this explanation by focusing on one specific science of race, craniometry, and using one particular craniometrist, Dr. J.C. de Man (1818–1909), as a case study. I argue, first, that historians of the derivative explanation cause confusion because they apply current racial language in their characterization of craniometry of the past; second, that they overlook the emerging ideal of objectivity in science; third, that they tend to reduce social motivations for practicing science to being racial by definition.

Of all the terms in modern social science, none is more reviled by academics today than “civilization.” Post-colonial theorists such as Aime Cesaire and Edward Said have influenced generations of scholars who see the term as little more than a veil for scientific racism and colonial aggression. The sociologists Norbert Elias and Pierre Bourdieu have also portrayed European conceptions of civilization as justifications for social hierarchy and exclusion. This article highlights the convergent denunciation of “civilization” by these theorists. The article provides a fresh perspective on the history of the word “civilization” by highlighting the role of the term in generating an atmosphere of self-critical reflection. The word “civilization” post-dates, and bears a strong trace of, Rousseau’s indictment of modern society in The Discourse on Inequality. The first author to use the word “civilization,” the Marquis de Mirabeau, spoke in a Rouseauian fashion of “false civilization” and “the barbarity of our civilizations.” In nineteenth- and twentieth-century usages, “civilization” was a central term in the framing of questions about the contradictory nature of progress. The term even figures prominently in debates about the basis of colonial authority—debates sponsored by some colonial administrators themselves. Some of the top colonial administrators in the early twentieth were pioneers in advancing cultural anthropology. These administrators forged the viewpoint that natives had valuable “civilizations” of their own. The radical theorists discussed in this article have portrayed “civilization” as a sign of colonial arrogance inherited from a hyper-rational and chauvinistic Enlightenment. In contrast, this article traces how a keyterm was born in the liberal atmosphere of the Enlightenment and generated an expanding space of self-doubt afterward. When we appreciate that a large slice of modern Western civilization is a critical inquiry about the meaning of itself, and when we recognize that the language of civilization helped create a public sphere of doubt even within the colonial enterprise, we can conclude that the radical theorists discussed in this essay are less than reliable guides to the contours of European cultural history.

Este ensaio busca trazer reflexões sobre a construção do sistema de verdades no qual se fundamenta a Ciência Moderna e Contemporânea e, mais especificamente, como o ensino de ciências, que sempre foi pautado numa lógica científica branca que nega o conhecimento produzido por corpos negros, posiciona-se nessa discussão negacionista do “outro”. Argumentamos que, no que concerne à própria estruturação da argumentação científica e de seu status quo, a Ciência Hegemônica — eurocêntrica e branca — é, por si só, um estado de pós-verdade para pessoas negras e suas epistemologias. As atuais preocupações da comunidade branca de ensino e divulgação de ciências, em relação ao negacionismo científico e à construção de narrativas que negam as produções da ciência branca, desconsideram que esse sempre foi o comportamento que tiveram com as epistemologias negras e os conhecimentos "estrangeiros". Ao longo do texto, trazemos exemplos de conhecimentos que são tidos como fatos objetivos e, no entanto, são fatos produzidos por uma comunidade racista e segue sendo reproduzida na educação em ciências, contribuindo com a perpetuação do racismo antinegro em nossa sociedade. In this essay, we reflect on the construction of this system of truths on which modern and contemporary science is grounded. Specifically, we discuss how science teaching, always guided by a white scientific logic that denies knowledge produced by Black bodies, positions itself in this negationist discussion of ―otherness‖. We argue, as far as the structuring of scientific argumentation and its status quo is concerned, Hegemonic Science – Eurocentric and white – is, in itself, a post-truth state for Black people and our epistemologies. The current concerns from the white science education community, in relation to scientific negativism and the construction of narratives that deny the production of white science, disregard that this has always been the behavior they had with Black epistemologies and "foreign" knowledge. Throughout the text, we bring examples of knowledge that are taken as objective facts are, in reality, produced facts created by a racist community. These produced facts continue to be reproduced in science education, contributing to perpetuate racism in our society.

Frantz Fanon’s concepts of racialized psychological development and dynamics have seldom been tested, let alone employed in actual research, research design, or applied in data analysis. With word of the imminent publication of Fanon’s “clinical papers” in 2014 by Palgrave Press under the editorship of Nigel Gibson, new ground for an “empirical turn” was at hand. Fanon’s ethnopsychiatry is not only distinguished from the scientific racism of Algiers School ethnopsychiatry but from left-liberal French social science. The vector of Western social sciences as they operated in colonial fields of study and research was redirected in Fanon’s fieldwork/therapy. Fanonian ethnopsychiatry not only undermines the monopoly of academic ethnography, but the institutional basis of psychiatry. Reconnoitering the preterrain of Fanon’s psychotherapeutic and research practices as his very original pathway to revolution is the burden of this monograph. In formulating a decolonized ethnopsychiatry, Fanon contributed to political decolonization and to the creation of the “new reality of the nation”.

This chapter documents how eugenics, scientific racism, and hereditarianism survived at Harvard well into the interwar years. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, Thomas Nixon Carver and Frank W. Taussig published works in which they established a close nexus between an individual’s economic position and his biological fitness. Carver, writing in 1929, argued that social class rigidities are attributable to the inheritance of superior and inferior abilities on the respective social class levels and proposed an “economic test of fitness” as a eugenic criterion to distinguish worthy from unworthy individuals. In 1932, Taussig, together with Carl Smith Joslyn, published American Business Leaders – a study that showed how groups with superior social status are proportionately much more productive of professional and business leaders than are the groups with inferior social status. Like Carver, Taussig and Joslyn attributed this circumstance primarily to hereditary rather than environmental factors. Taussig, Joslyn, and Carver are not the only protagonists of our story. The Russian-born sociologists Pitirim Alexandrovich Sorokin, who joined the newly established Department of Sociology at Harvard in 1930, also played a crucial role. His book Social Mobility (1927) exercised a major influence on both Taussig and Carver and contributed decisively to the survival of eugenic and hereditarian ideas at Harvard in the 1930s.

Since 1933 marked the end of autonomous and democratic women’s associations, historiography tends to neglect the study of feminist voices under National-Socialism. This paper looks at one of volkisch feminist movement’s leaders, writer and journalist Sophie Rogge-Borner (1878–1955), whose claims for gender equality were rooted in anti-Semitism and scientific racism. In its first section, the paper will present the core aspects of her racial-feminist discourse. The second section will discuss Sophie Rogge-Borner’s philosophy of education in detail to compare her conceptions to the official national-socialist ideology. By doing so, this paper will address the issue of women’s engagement, agency, and autonomy in the radical right.

Sasha Huber's Rentyhorn (2008), Switzerland, was a component of the Swiss Demounting Louis Agassiz campaign. The campaign sought to rename Agassizhorn, a peak bearing the name of Swiss-born scientist Louis Agassiz (1807–1873) a proponent of scientific racism. The article examines Rentyhorn, an intervention, by the Swiss/Haitian artist Huber (b 1975, Zurich), through concepts of re-mapping. Within Rentyhorn, the Swiss landscape is exposed through the naturalised systems of knowledge (geological mapping), making visible unacknowledged histories (Agassiz's legacy), and marginalised perspectives (postcolonial critique) within a geographical terrain. Positioning Rentyhorn as a critique of Swiss official ‘memory’ of Agassiz, as an esteemed scientist, highlighting how the processes of historical amnesia on Agassiz's role in the formation of racist theories, are a symptom of a wider societal disavowal of Swiss engagement with the colonial project. Challenging Agassiz's presence in the Swiss landscape emer...

In Racial Prescriptions, Jonathan Xavier Inda offers a critical and timely analysis of the making of BiDil, the first (and only) drug that was marketed exclusively to African Americans. Sibille Merz speaks to him about the re-articulation of racial politics under neoliberalism, the legacies of scientific racism and the molecularization of biopolitics in the genomic age.

O pensamento de Manoel Bomfim e Alberto Torres entra para o cenário nacional, principalmente, pela originalidade ao tratar o “Brasil-Problema” desconectando-se dos seus contemporâneos ao refletir o país pelo viés sócio-histórico e não racialista. Suas ideias soam como dissidentes numa época onde prevalece o racismo científico e a preocupação das elites concentrava-se na miscigenação, a mistura entre raças superiores e evoluídas (europeus) e raças inferiores e atrasadas (índios e negros). Destas preocupações surgiram análises sobre a realidade brasileira que, mais tarde, foram incorporadas à constituição de políticas de branqueamento no país. O presente artigo traz uma reflexão sobre a obra dos autores em questão evidenciando suas análises sobre o Brasil e as soluções que propõem para a situação do país ao buscarem contribuir para a formação do “Brasil-Nação”.

O objetivo deste texto e tracar uma breve analise das teorias raciais produzidas durante o seculo XIX, tidas como referencia na epoca, para que assim possamos compreender com mais propriedade sua utilizacao no contexto brasileiro, e a luta atual dos afrodescendentes por direitos e o combate ao racismo. Como os intelectuais brasileiros conseguiram amparar-se nessas doutrinas raciais e adapta-las a um contexto tao dispar como a realidade do Brasil. O racismo cientifico foi uma doutrina que, apresentando-se universal e racional, afirmava existir hierarquias biologicas entre as racas humanas. Tais doutrinas alcancaram a sociedade brasileira sendo absorvidas e fazendo parte dos discursos da elite intelectual do nosso pais, ajudando a forjar representacoes sociais diante de negros, mesticos, indios e imigrantes, que influenciaram fortemente os debates a respeito da mao-de-obra, sobretudo a partir de 1871. A reconstrucao de “memorias” acerca do significado do termo raca no Brasil, dando destaque para as ultimas decadas do seculo XIX e inicio do XX, e relevante para a compreensao de debates atuais como: as cotas raciais nas universidades publicas e nos concursos publicos, demarcacao de terras quilombolas, o cumprimento da Lei n.o 10.639/03, que trata da obrigatoriedade do ensino da Historia da Africa e dos africanos nas instituicoes de Educacao Basica. Palavras-chave : Democracia racial. Lei 10.639/03. Mesticagem. Teorias raciais. The influence of the racial theories in Brazilian society (1870-1930) and the materialization of the Law no. 10,639/03 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to draw a brief analysis of racial theories produced during the nineteenth century, taken as reference at that time, so that we can understand more its use in the Brazilian context, and the current Afro-descendant struggle for rights and the fight against racism. How the Brazilian intellectuals managed to rely on these racial doctrines and adapt them to such an unequal context like in Brazil. Scientific racism was a doctrine that, being universal and rational, affirmed there were biological hierarchies between human races. Such doctrines reached the Brazilian society being absorbed and part of the discourse of the intellectual elite of our country, helping to forge social representations before blacks, coloureds, Indians and immigrants, who strongly influenced the debates on the labor, especially since 1871. The reconstruction "memories" about the meaning of the term race in Brazil, highlighting the last decades of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, is relevant to the understanding of current debates such as racial quotas in public universities and in civil service exams, quilombolas’ land demarcation, Law No. 10,639 / 03 enforcement, which deals with the mandatory teaching of history of Africa and Africans in primary and secondary education institutions. Keywords : Racial democracy. Law 10.639/03. Mestizaje. Racial theories. Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

This review of The Scholar Denied by Aldon D. Morris emphasizes the importance of DuBois for the start of American empirical social research. A.D. Morris correctly shows why W.E.B. DuBois was rejected, forgotten and suppressed by white sociologists for almost 100 years. Racial prejudices and scientific racism among American sociological elites prevented both Du Bois and his work from receiving the attention they rightly deserve. But my paper accentuates the role of Du Bois in the development of sociology as an empirical social science discipline. He created and published a programme of research on the African-American population. Publishing ‘The Philadelphia Negro’, he provided an excellent example of how to do such research. He also headed the first school of sociology on the American continent at the Atlanta University from 1898 to 1910.

In this piece, I reply to the principal criticisms made by my five interlocutors regarding my conception of Eurocentrism. This entails two key aspects with the first section discussing the ‘E-Word definitional controversy’, where I argue, in the light of the forum, that there are various competing definitions of Eurocentrism in postcolonialism which yield commensurable competing non-Eurocentric antidotes. While I defend my own position, I am interested in revealing this complex picture because it has not been brought to light before and I urge postcolonialists to debate these different conceptions. The second section considers the ‘R-Word controversy’ wherein my interlocutors want me to row back on my claim that post-1945 social science theory is founded on subliminal Eurocentric institutionalism rather than scientific racism or neo-racism. There I consider some of the issues that are stake while concluding that modern Eurocentrism is indeed embedded in racialised thought.

This forum started out as a roundtable at the 2014 Annual Convention of the International Studies Association in New Orleans. Our interventions (then and now) zoom in on the distinction John Hobson draws, in his book The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics, between scientific racism and Eurocentric institutionalism. In this forum, we engage Hobson's distinction between scientific racism and Eurocentric institutionalism on two grounds: 1) the relationship between everyday life and academia and 2) the possibility of change.

This article investigates the health and science policies of the New Party, British Union of Fascists (BUF) and Union Movement, founded by Sir Oswald Mosley. Throughout his life, Mosley believed in science as a gamechanger. Health policies also mattered because the New Party and the BUF wanted a nation of ‘fit’ men and women. In reality, opportunism guided the parties in relation to these concerns. Only the BUF developed comprehensive health policies. Science was used to justify ideology, but was seldom integrated in party policies. Despite eugenics and scientific racism being available to lend credence to BUF and Union Movement attitudes, this avenue remained unexplored. Inter-war BUF racism targeting Jews tended to be cultural, though some was biological. Post-war Union Movement racism targeting Commonwealth immigrants was biological. Ultimately, however, science merely provided a convenient excuse for how the parties could promise results without making tough decisions.

In a highly controversial paper published in Hypatia, a leading journal of feminist philosophy, Rebecca Tuvel (2017) defends the concept of transracialism, exploring the potential parallels between...

Supported by Darwin and developed by leading Western scientists, eugenics or the “science of racial betterment” became the dominant scientific force in the study of human differences, including human emotions. This chapter describes the promotion of eugenics as the path to individual and communal utopian happiness, as well as the development of specific scientific methods used to test human differences and to control emotional expressions. It discusses the significance of the study of brains, genes, intelligence and personality testing in attempts to prove the inferiority of particular groups, as well as the promotion of strategies to socially engineer, and thereby improve, already superior groups. This discussion will highlight key role played by leading American psychologists in the development and promotion of eugenics worldwide.