In many of my classes, it has become apparent to me that I am deliberating people deliberate themselves. People trying to socialize their right in the world most and be perceived by the world in the same light they perceive themselves.

The journey of identity, both external and internal, is encompassed by philosopher Alan Watts’ quote “I believe that if we are honest with ourselves the most fascinating problem in the world is: who am I?” This is the question we spend much of our life attempting to answer. This is the question we intellectualize through paintings, films, and novels. This is the question we continue to politically disregard though it is the foundation for all our politics. For many people of color in the United States, this is the question dictated by racial stigmas, which demands that the development of who they are is dependent on how they are racially categorized.

And what is a person of color? What by the existence of that identification alone is implied about humanity? I think it means that we, as people of color, live as an additional or almost, accidental people. Why is it not enough to just say person when I speak about myself or when someone else speaks about me?

After reading the article “Third World Quarterly row: Why some western intellectuals are trying to debrutalise colonialism,” and the piece “I am a Coolie” I began to think about the more subtle, intimate consequences of colonialism. Be it the exploited people reclaiming derogatory terms like ‘n****r’ and ‘coolie’ to rather reflect all they’ve endured and overcome. It is a constant navigation for pride in one’s natural self through abstractions like language, love, and beauty that have been perverted by colonialism. I wrote a poem that I feel embodies the hurt and confusion when you can’t find that pride because it has been systematically stolen from you.

In English class, she learned
that Juliet is the sun and she has spent years
trying to feel her light. Years of sitting beneath
scorching heat scalding the tips of her girlhood
ears while generational echoes tell her to
unkink the Dominican in her hair. The stench
of burning curls becomes the scent of
apprehensive conformity and the blood lining
the insides of her cheeks taste the way longing might.
She looked to Juliet, to the sun, to see
remains of herself but she never found them.
Instead she cried the secrets of colonialism,
because she is Julietta, never Juliet.
The moon tried to whisper to her “Va con paz,”
on a bright morning before she realized the
sun had risen and she was to be lost, once more
and always, in its light.

After reading Vijay Prashad’s “Third World Quarterly row: Why some western intellectuals are trying to debrutalise colonialism”, I could not have agreed more. All throughout my history of learning here in the United States, I’ve been unaware as to the effects of colonialism. In fact, I didn’t even know what European colonialism was. Even in tenth grade World History, the effects of European colonialism weren’t dwelled on, let alone even mentioned. Throughout my high school history courses, European colonialism was simplified into European expansion, which failed to convey the brutalities of European colonialism. It just frustrates me that I wasn’t properly educated on the effects that European colonialism has caused to third world countries such as African and Latin American nations. The fact that to this day, most historians fail to convey the severity of European colonialism, goes to show that the white supremacist ideology is still rooted in our society, for the history of European colonizers invading, and ‘bleeding nations dry’ of their resources for the benefit of their own nation, goes to show that a bias amongst history exists and is still prevalent until this day.

When I first read the article by CityWorldNews, “Native American Council Offers Amnesty to 240 Million Undocumented Whites”, the first thing I thought about was the controversy on immigration now. That article talks about Native Americans offering amnesty to the illegal whites in America. In my head, the article was describing the current ongoing fight of Dreamers to attain citizenship. It is ironic to think that it could have been whites asking for an amnesty, but today it is mainly Hispanics fighting for citizenship; fighting for rights in a country they’ve lived and worked for years. This past week thinking a lot more about colonization, made me realize we’re demanding citizenship from people who originally didn’t own the land, from people who believed their customs and skin color were superior to the indigenous people living here. Today, the fight for an amnesty is much more than obtaining rights, it is also proving to the country that we’re valuable and that our ethnicity doesn’t define our intelligence or work ethic. It is exhausting and frustrating dealing with this struggle, but we will stay determined to soon end the ethnical-race hierarchy that was created years ago.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” -Martin Luther King Jr.

How do you live a life of pure kindness? The answer, you cannot. The world today is built on social constructs that create boundaries between humanity. Race is a component that perpetuates these false ideas on people’s character. I read recently this week Sam Selvon’s book, A Brighter Sun, in it, the diverse characters representing the variety of Trinidad. In the text, it details the relationship of an East Indian and African descent couple that are being judged by their own people for helping each other as neighbors. It is a sad moment when kindness can be overshadowed by prejudices. Their friendship is being questioned because of the connotation of each other races and how culturally they are different. I find this to be significant within the context of marginalized communities because everyone’s struggle should be cared for by everyone else. Intersectionality is the answer towards a united people. Until we as a people realize that the hegemonic power does not have to separate us oppressed groups is when we will truly live a life. Character should be a defining factor, not race. 

Selvon, Sam.  A Brighter Sun . London: Heinemann, 1995.

Rajkumari Singh defines a Coolie “To be an Indian or Chinese laborer who has emigrated under contract to a foreign land”. I never really heard of this word nor its origin until I read the text, “I am a Coolie”. Although I am completely in agreeance of Guyanese people reclaiming of the word proudly, I can also see why many of them along with other people of East Indian descent from Guyana would prefer to leave the word in the past. The word, coolie, was “a European’s name for a hired native labourer in India or China” as Singh described. Any word coined by Europeans in relation to marginalized groups is motivated by racist ideology or this sense of racial superiority. For example, during the height of slavery in the 18th century, The n-word with the “-er” attached, was referred to not just any slave but a black slave as way to belittle them while empowering whites as a superior race. Today, the context of the word has changed and many people especially the popular culture (music industry) are pushing for the frequent usage of the word as a source of empowerment. I think this word should be left in the past along with slavery. Slavery is one of the most brutalities that I know of and feels very personal so whenever I hear someone use the word regardless of what race the person is makes me very uncomfortable and deeply disturbed. I am surprised in the first place that this word still lingers today and is even more popular in youth’s vocabulary. Many people defend the word’s usage as meaning, “a friend” and even some go to the extend of saying that the ending of the word has been changed from”-er” to “-a” and therefore, the meaning is not the same. Regardless of how it is spelt today or what it means today should not be an excuse for anyone other than black to use the word. I don’t even think the black community should be using the word because, it motivates other races especially whites to feel the need to use it too. A white person asked to stop using the word would argue that someone is using the word and therefore it is okay and they don’t want to “feel left out”. Even words used to target LGBTQ communities such as “queer” and the f-word are also now being reclaimed as terms of endearment when those words used to be derogatories that have been used against them in the past. Now today, some people use the n-word, the f-word, and “queer” in the historical context to attack the targeted groups. Every marginalized groups should have the choice to decide whether or not they want to accept certain terms in the context of words of endearments. Within marginalized groups, there are varieties of opinions and experiences so the fact that one is fine with one term doesn’t mean all of the group is fine with that term.

The first few chapters of A Brighter Sun allowed me to see the topics we are discussing in class personalized through the characters in the novel. In the beginning, we follow a young Indian couple, Tiger and Urmilla, as they are thrown unexpectedly into the realities of adulthood and struggle to discover what it is to be a man and a woman. On their journey, they meet a creole couple Joe and Rita and we begin to see the stereotypes discussed in class being used in fictionalized dialogue. In one instance, Rita complains to Urmilla about her aggressive husband, and asks her “Why we creole can’t live like Indian, quiet and nice?” (31) even though Urmilla knows that they share the same hostile reality. We also see racial tensions in this novel when Tiger and Urmilla’s family disapprove of their friendship with Joe and Rita, “Is only nigger friend you makeam since you come?… Indian must keep together” (47). After studying indentureship in the Caribbean, we get to experience a characterized personality of a freed man. There is  a character, a  drunken Indian man named Sookdeo, who had “come to India to work as an indentured labourer on the white man’s plantations” (65). Also, in class, we learned that a majority of the Chinese population in the Caribbean became shopkeepers and were known as the “perfect settlers” (Williams). There is a Chinese character called Tall Boy who owns a successful bar and shop, with which the town appears to depend upon. Reading this novel we gain a new viewpoint on the specificities of race and ethnicity in the Caribbean.

Works Cited

A Brighter Sun by Sam Selvon

“Stains on my Name, War in my Veins” by Brackette F. Williams

I found our class discussion on the term “hegemony” to be very interesting. Some useful starting terms that served to build towards an actual definition were “oppressed accepts the imposition of values of the dominant group” and “coercion” (Moonsammy, 2018). At first, I considered that the term “coercion” was too pejoratively connoted to be used to describe hegemony, but after we were given a legitimate definition of the term, my understanding was enriched. Hegemony was defined as a “process by which subordinated groups internalize the value system of the dominant group” and that “after dominance is gained, this process is rethought.”

Moreover, this definition was paired with the idea of “givers” and “takers.” Initially, I was unclear on how these ideas were connected with the term hegemony. However, after looking back at my notes, I found the Baronov and Yelvington reading to be extremely useful in unpacking denotations. The definition of the term “mestizaje-créolité” helped me understand the idea of givers and takers. Mestizaje-créolité is defined the concept that those groups that gave the most in the past are now the most privileged (Baronov and Yelvington 240). This term was a little confusing to me, after realizing that all of these terms connect with the term multiculturalism, terms became comprehensible.

Multiculturalism is defined as a term which embraces all peoples while emphasizing the important contribution, and the importance of maintaining each individual cultural identity (246). The result of this embrace is a reverse hierarchy, where the subjugated are seen as the “givers” or those that contribute most to the nation, while the “takers” are viewed in a negative light. Nonetheless, the ultimate question becomes: how can one prove that they are a giver or a taker, and how is it possible for a subordinate group to make any decision based on entitlement to resources when dominant groups set the parameters within which the subordinates operate?

Works Cited

Baronov, David, and Kevin A. Yelvington. “Ethnicity, Race, Class, and Nationality,” in Understanding the Contemporary Caribbean, edited by Richard S. Hillman and Thomas J. D’Agostino, 226-40. 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., 2009)

van Leeuwaarde Moonsammy, Patricia. “Post-Colonization.” Lecture, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA, February 27, 2018.

The story of Saheedan Ramroop is really that of a super-hero and brings up the invincibility of an East Indian woman who despite her inferiority status of a woman, brings change in her community. I think it is important to talk about figures like her in history because women like Didi and the impact that they have on their societies gets ignored for the simple fact that they are women, and also for the reason that history often revolves around the contributions of man. What really appeals to me in her story is that when gets offered the position of foreman, she rejects it even if it meant rejecting the opportunity of “living better” because this tells you that Didi was never about the money but about not abusing her own people, but rather protecting them and fighting for them. Didi put her ideals and her people’s happiness first, which is something that not everyone can do. She was special.

Throughout my life, I have come to hear, learn, and have conversations about words that are considered derogatory. Some words are just disrespectful and rude when said to any individual, however there are other words that are historically rooted that mean much more when said to certain peoples of different races, religions, etc. The word “coolie” is something I had not heard about until very recently, but as I read I have become to realize that it is very similar to some other derogatory words that I know. The origin of this word is very similar to the word “nigger”, while one was used by white people to label and belittle indentured servants, the other was used to do the same for African slaves. The most interesting thing about some of these words is how the groups who were once labeled by them, take the word, bring power to them and use them openly within their communities. Time and time again we have seen marginalized groups use words that previously were oppressive towards them, and confidently make the word apart of their cultures and identities. It was interesting to see that the word “coolie” took this path as well, and how people like Rajkumari Singh find beauty in it and feel as though it represents heritage. However, for me this always brings up the conversation of who is allowed to participate in the appreciation and renewal of the word “coolie”. I have struggled with this issue for the n-word, and constantly wonder who should be allowed to say and use it, if anyone. Now that I reflect more, I think to myself if anyone has the right to even argue if people can recreate, use, or not use these words. I am taking rural education this semester, and in knowing peoples from rural backgrounds are very marginalized even though they might be of a privileged race, it seems as though the word “redneck” might be able to enter this conversation as well. Again, it is a word that for a long time has been used to setback specific groups of people, but some of these people also have come to accept the word, and have made it parts of their identities. In the end, words are extremely powerful and fascinating, and it will be interesting to see how different words change in meaning and power for the upcoming generations.