Ei-iE

“Raise your hand if you have ever been a victim of racism.” That was the first sentence I said to my pupils in a secondary school class, in order to discuss the issue of racism and its social ramifications.

Many raised their hands, including myself. The white-skinned boys and girls too. I asked them to speak their minds.

“I've been told I'm too fat, and called a whale”, said one girl.

“I've been called Pinocchio, because of my nose”, said another student.

"I’ve been called Casper the ghost. It happens all the time. I'm subjected to racism all the time because I'm very white," said the student, rubbing her skin to emphasise her whiteness.

"We can't confuse the issue. I'm talking about racism, not bullying", I interrupted, provoking confused or wary looks.

Racism is different from bullying, from insults hurled by other pupils. It's true that there's a fine line between them: after all, both attack the person physically and psychologically, in other words, they offend, humiliate and violate. That's why we generally confuse the two. What's more, the discourse within schools tends to consider these two elements together, to confuse them as forming a single "content".

I go on: "Bullying is a different phenomenon from racism. Raise your hand if you've ever been followed by the security officer in the supermarket or by the police in the street. Who here is afraid of the police, or who has ever been humiliated or mistreated by the police without knowing the reason why?”

Suddenly, a black student speaks up: “A few days ago, I was in a chemist's, waiting to buy some medicine. There was no one else waiting to be served. There was nobody there. Just me. But nobody wanted to serve me. When I asked the assistant: “Can't you see me? I'm here, tired of waiting, will you please serve me?” The pharmacist replied: “Stop it! Your kind are used to waiting."

"That's not racism," said a pupil. "I think it would be racist if she had compared you to a monkey or called you a gorilla.”

Explaining the specific nature of racism in school

In Brazil, a young black person aged between 15 and 29 is up to 147% more likely to be murdered than a young white person ^[1]. 73.3% of Bolsa Família ^[2] beneficiaries are black, over 50% of them are under 24 and 60% of them have only an incomplete basic education ^[3]. 96% of television news presenters and 94% of journalists are white ^[4]. In Brazil, black workers earn only 57% (R$ 1,374.79 ^[5]) of the pay earned by their white counterparts (R$ 2,396.74 ^[6]). Finally, 86.5% of magistrates are white. ^[7]

In order to combat racism in schools, it is necessary to explain the after-effects of racism, because they are much more profound and subtle than in the case of bullying, which is physical or psychological violence considered to be outside the norm or abnormal, in other words outside what is accepted, and therefore to be combated.

Racism is not a distortion of behaviour, i.e. it is not part of the subjective field, as is the case with bullying, which is linked to the idea of prejudice (a hasty judgement, which does not pass through the filter of reason, but which exists in the mind of an individual or a group of individuals who reject or do not accept the other).

In the case of racism, this process of rejection, exclusion, aversion and humiliation goes beyond the subjective field and invades the objective field, i.e. the field of norms, by becoming normalised and natural, since it is seeded by the political, legal, economic, cultural and social field. Racism is part of the norm or normality, because it is perpetuated by the very structures of society and the State.

The historical roots of racism in Brazilian society

It must also be stressed that racism is in Brazil's DNA. It has been a tool in the very genesis of the Brazilian nation, which has been structurally consolidated, enabling Brazil to abolish slavery without breaking down the social hierarchies created during the slavery period.

Black people have not been fully granted the citizenship they so desired during the colonial and slavery periods. You only have to look closely at the social landscape to see that black men and women remain disadvantaged, continue to suffer the worst working conditions and are treated as second-class citizens.

It is true that the abolition of slavery enabled black people to emerge from their status as objects, things and commodities, but it did not completely eradicate their subaltern status inherited from the colonial period.

Talking about racism in the classroom means dismantling the myth of racial democracy and showing that racism in Brazil is not linked to the individual or to a variation of subjective prejudices. Of course, individual actions must be fought and denounced, but we must also talk in schools about the racist ideology used to perpetuate privileges that are increasingly inaccessible to the majority of the population. In this respect, it is necessary to elucidate the more structural issues of Brazilian capitalism, which supports racism by fuelling the existing divide between the black and white populations.

In other words, being racist not only means rejecting, humiliating, offending and physically and psychologically degrading someone, but also endorsing the murderous and exclusionary function of the State, which takes the lives of those who are considered degenerate, superfluous or second-class citizens. And here, to paraphrase Foucault, taking life does not necessarily mean direct murder, but also everything that can be indirect murder: exposing people to death, increasing the risk of death for some or, simply, political death, expulsion and rejection.

If school is the first place where racism must be discussed and fought, it is urgent to talk about the roots of racism in Brazil and its development and consolidation in today's neoliberalism. We will only be able to overcome racism when black people enjoy the same universal citizenship and the same rights as white people, through equal access to politics, dignified work and economic, social and legal bodies.