In commenting on the high crime rate in a nearby city, a white colleague said, “but that’s just black-on-black violence.”
Just? Say what?
First, in a country that is essentially still segregated (and not necessarily by black people’s choice) what race do you expect for both victim and perpetrators to be? Language like ”black-on-black violence” effectively smacks a racial label on problems that are socioeconomic and thus the collective, moral responsibility of every American.
At this particular moment in our history, it is more important than ever to reject these kinds of racialized explanations. They are being used to slander public school children as incapable of learning; to deem affordable housing a hopeless cause. In gentrifying cities, ”black-on-black crime” is used as a weapon to encourage public policies that treat black people as blights on the new urban aesthetic. There is a moral imperative to challenge these assumptions.
Every. Single. Time.
That’s The Root’s Natalie Hopkinson, persuasively arguing that black-on-black violence is a myth. She says the term should be retired and points to the Guardian newspaper’s stylebook take on the phrase, which is unequivocal:
black-on-black violence
is banned, unless in a quote, but even then treat with scepticism (imagine the police saying they were “investigating an incident of white-on-white violence between Millwall and West Ham supporters”)
The Urban Politico’s Janitor responds to that with this:
the inference being, of course, that Whites and Blacks are absolute equals in America and since they (Whites) don’t have this burden, then we (Blacks) should not have this burden either…but socially the two groups have never been on the same footing, even within the same socioeconomic brackets. The social ills of one group, such as “Black-on-Black” violence (or whatever nomenclature you care to use in order to define it) have nothing to do with the social ills of the other group. So we can’t say, just because White people don’t have problem X, then we should likewise not have problem X. First of all, we’re not White. Which means, we do not constitute the majority population of America or receive any of the perks or privileges associated therewith. In other words, we don’t have the luxury of playing the “we’re all just individuals” card. Problems, such as Black-on-Black violence inform the majority’s opinions and policies towards our community whether we like it or not.
Now don’t get me wrong, I would rather that race DIDN’T matter. I would rather that there was no need to be cognizant of Black-on-Black crime. The scenario you advocate towards in your article sounds like a nice place to live. The only problem is we live in a country that has been burdened with the issue of race since it was founded.
I will not use the term and will argue against it whenever I hear it used. But, sadly, Janitor makes a valid point.
You can find me @jwindish, at my Public Notebook, or email me at joe-AT-joewindish-DOT-com.