Racism & Colonialism in the Bahamas

by Andrew Allen

Helen Klonaris, a white Bahamian, recently published a letter on the issue of racism and colonialism in the Bahamas. Her letter prompted several responses, among them a rebuttal last week from The Nassau Institute.

While it is easy to disagree with some of Ms Klonaris' suggestions (such as the supposed racism of most whites, or the extent of 'white' economic power in The Bahamas today) it would seem that the writer of the institute's response either did not understand or did not want to understand the broader thrust of her arguments.

In fact, to her credit, Ms Klonaris sets out, in a compelling way, some of the legacies of the colonial and racial domination that did undoubtedly blight most of our history.

While we may or may not agree with her observations about race relations today, her basic ideas about some of the psychological effects of a colonially imposed value system are not effectively countered in the Institute's long-winded response.

It is perhaps natural that the Institute should focus on economic theory in addressing some of Ms Klonaris assertions. But it is unfortunate that, having initially taken up what would seem to have been her central point, the letter from the institute then fails to directly address it.

That point is that there is, in our society, a "well defined system of relationships" including "educational curricula, the legal system, Judeo Christian church hierarchies and the English language itself whose effect is to "suppress, condemn and ghettoise " other cultures.

It would be interesting to see how the critics of Ms Klonaris can directly deny, for instance, that, where Judeo-Christian values have been imposed among indigenous peoples, their proponents have uniformly stigmatised and undermined the legitimacy of the thought systems they have sought to replace, including in The Bahamas.

This also ties in with the experience of colonial interactions throughout the world, where seemingly indisputable patterns emerge.

THE FILIPPINO AND JAPANESE EXPERIENCES

Japan's first contacts with the west occurred in the 16th century. This was an era in which European maritime powers, taking advantage of the newly discovered Cape of Good Hope, began large scale trade with many East Asian societies.

These trade relations evolved into domination in some instances, such as in the Philippines (named after a particularly unsavoury Spanish King). Here, evangelism and guns went hand-in-hand to create a western satrapy, whose language, customs and native religions were all either obliterated or bastardised.

What replaced them was a society organised along predictable lines, with a small, highly westernised elite presiding over a large, ghettoised majority. Those with 'native' characteristics (such as followers of the old religions) were made to occupy a sub-class, while the ruling oligarchy lost all sense of social responsibility toward the masses, to whom they were now culturally alien.

Were it not for the wise decision of the 17th century Shogun, Tokugawa Hidetada, to totally ban the propagation of the Christian faith in Japan, there can be little doubt that Japan would have suffered a similar fate. Hidetada, sensibly, was happy for the west's guns, its technology and its learning, but had no interest in its religion, which he saw as the vanguard of an attempt to psychologically dominate Japan and undermine her independence. So he sent in his Samurai and expelled all westerners except for a few useful, clever Dutchmen.

At the time of the ban, missionaries and European "authorities" at the ports of Nagasaki and Deshima (the two points where western trade settlements were initially allowed) had already begun a campaign of burning Buddhist and Shinto texts and had begun debunking Japanese traditional histories (such as the origin of the Imperial family) as shameful, savage myths. Hidetada's expulsion of westerners and banning of their faith was therefore a timely one, and probably saved Japan from the fate of the Philippines, 'discovered' by the Spaniards at around the same time.

Today, Japanese people are probably more at ease with themselves, their ancestors and the historical achievements of their country than almost any non-European people. Their faith, an easy accommodation of Chinese, Indian and native religious traditions, has proved highly adaptable to the rapid changes through which their country has gone in the last 400 years. Japan, incidentally, has the lowest incidence of Christianity of any major country.

THE INDIAN EXPERIENCE

Though India was the victim of colonisation, it had the relative good fortune of being colonised for commercial, rather than evangelical purposes. This was a feature that distinguished British (and, even more so, Dutch) colonial policy from that of Spain or Portugal. India was also fortunate in having a complex and extremely old value system of its own that was not easily susceptible to penetration by alien ones.

These factors saved India's original thought system intact and spared it the marginalisation and stigmatisation that have inevitably resulted elsewhere from total colonial immersion. Though Indians did and still do suffer some of the traditional ill-effects of colonialism, a rejection and stigmatisation of everything associated with Indian-ness never took root.

THE NEW WORLD SLAVE SOCIETIES

The African in the new world is often wrongly thought of as a blank slate who only began accumulating culture upon contact with his new colonial society. In fact, he brought with him a fairly complex system of social rules, beliefs and values, including religious ones.

In the case of the Yoruba, for instance, he brought a pantheon of Gods, including Ogun, the chief god of the Santeria religion still practised in Cuba today. So he did have values of his own.

But unlike the Indian or the Japanese, the totality of his immersion in the colonial system produced a psychological lack of resistance to the prejudices and presumptions by which these were deemed worthless or even worse. In this respect, he had much in common with the Amerindians of the Andean nations especially.

Insofar as Ms Klonaris sees racism as being responsible for the ghettoisation of New World blacks, I would disagree. Like so many indigenous peoples, from Australia to Bolivia, it was the New World black who internalised the colonial value system, and so ghettoised himself.

To empowered people, the "racism" of others is a trivial matter. The tragedy facing the new world African, the Amerindian and others was not someone else's "racism". Rather, it is that he has internalised someone else's values not on the basis of a free exchange, but on the basis of an uncritical hierarchy, which places anything originating outside western institutions or western values at the bottom.

He was psychologically penetrated to the point that he no longer recognised value in anything arising from his own heritage, ancient or modern. In fact, he became an active accomplice in the stigmatisation of such things.

Take, for instance, the hierarchy of religions. To the colonialised new world black, while Hindu pantheism connotes a neutral Eastern mysticism and Greco-Roman pantheism connotes high classicism, African pantheism connotes a savage and unequivocally negative "black magic".

THE BAHAMAS MOVING FORWARD

So where does this leave The Bahamas? For good or ill, most Bahamians, black, white and otherwise, today share cultural and religious values derived from sources from which only a minority of Bahamians physically descend. Most have also come to accept a basically western narrative of history, even though this narrative sometimes propagates harmful myths and assumptions.

None of this need be fatal to harmonious national development for The Bahamas, so long as our self-image is constantly "tweaked" to reflect the interests of the Bahamas as an independent nation of many races.

But huge and monstrous legacies of the colonial psychological system remain. Black Bahamians routinely associate African bone structures, curled hair and dark skin with ugliness, and seem to assume that there is some universality to that view.

In religion, it is shocking to observe the extent to which black Bahamians have taken up the almost militant Christian bigotry that once stigmatised their own ancestors. Only recently, Rastafarian students complained of the horrendous discrimination they faced at the College of The Bahamas.

From time to time, local pastors rail about 'black magic' and voodoo is often cited among the reasons for looking down at Haitian immigrants.

Less exposed black Bahamians, of course, will never realise that all these things come back to a rejection of the legitimacy of their own ancestors and, ultimately, of themselves.

On the other hand, some better educated black Bahamians may assume that whiteness in the Bahamas is a monolithic phenomenon, there being no diversity of views among whites on these very important, sensitive issues.

Which is why honest, well thought-out contributions from intelligent white Bahamians like Ms Klonaris are so helpful.

Comments

[drew Roberts]

Something is missing.

It seems that in this view, "Christianity" is something native to Western Europe. Isn't it the case that "Christianity" did to Europe's previous religions just what it is being accused of doing to that of others?

I could say more, but I will leave it simple to see what develops from this thought.

all the best,

drew

[CBR]

This is all fascinating, especially when tied to Nicolette Bethel's recent Guardian article asking whether "Wendy's" is "a part a we cultcha". (Is spaghetti Italian? Or Chinese?)

Much of the present discussion seems coloured by contemporary fashion which does not smile on anyone in the "intelligentsia" speaking positively of Christianity - or colonialism. There can be nothing positive in either, can there?

Both the pessimistic "any time in the past was better than the present" and the incredibly arrogant "we are living in the most enlightened times in history" are patently wrong. The latter seems to be what drives much of the condemnatory comments in this discussion. The former is behind a lot of the rebuttal.

One of the main reasons Christianity was so successful in the first century C.E. [trying hard to be PC here!] was that it blasted through the social restrictions on slaves and women among other things (just to narrow the range down a bit) which were a huge part of the Greco/Roman civilization of the day.

And there is soooo much more to consider before casting our views in concrete ...

Can we really equate "judeo-christian" culture with "Christianity"?

Does "colonialism" really equal Christianity?

What part did William Wilberforce play in the abolition of slavery? What absolutely DROVE him to his position? Was there anything "colonial" about what he did ... how he worked out his convictions?

What about Shusako Endo's take on on Christianity in Japan? Read "Silence" and "Deep River" (among others) by Japan's leading modern (Christian!) novelist.

Why are various branches of Christianity growing so quickly in parts of Africa, Korea, China, Latin America? What do they offer that their new adherents crave? Is it simply neo-colonial or something much deeper?

To be intellectually honest we must consider the other side of the question where one can find historical sociologist Rodney Stark's very accessible body of work. He began his career from a decidedly agnostic position on religion (though I don't know if that's where he's at today - he teaches at Baylor FWIW). Some of his books include "THE RISE OF CHRISTIANITY"(quite old), the fascinatingly titled "FOR THE GLORY OF GOD: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery" (can anyone say "even-handed"?) and "THE VICTORY OF REASON: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism & Western Success" (which kind of flies in the face of some of the back and forth in this discussion).

As to cultures which have been transformed by [non-culturally specific] Christianity, I would prefer to leave judgement in the hands of that culture itself as to whether it is a net positive or negative. We might well lament the passing of certain elements of an imagined idyllic existence in the Amazon rain forest ... but if you've lost your husband/wife, child, mother, father, etc. to inter-tribal warfare, you might have a different take on things!

And don't let's start on why most indigenous Latin Americans so quickly fed at the "colonial" trough! Suffice it to say it wasn't the size of the invading armies.

Bottom line: If what one wants is an amorphous entity on which to attach all the evils of society as well as the personal suffering and discontent of one's own life and that of everyone else, Christianity is a great target! It doesn't fight back nowadays, and it's not fashionable to defend it. So is "Colonialism". These are wonderful wellsprings for the nihilistically inclined.

On the other hand, none of it explains the ills, attitudes or mores of contemporary Bahamian society - which as Mr. Allen makes clear, is NOT a monolith by any means.

If we remain ignorant of history ... the WHOLE story ... we are indeed condemned to re-live it.

[Global Warrior]

Being away from the Bahamas, I was unaware of the article in question. However, I commend Bahamians for having the tenacity and wisdom to discuss and deal with the racism that existed (and exists) in our country. Far too often we stick our heads in the sand on the issue, and now we can improve and learn from our history and present condition. America hasn't truly dealth with slavery, thus, other problems continue to rise up. Similarly, for the Bahamas to develop fully, we must address the UBP, racism and the fact that after such revelation, Bahamians of all hues should unite and work cohesively together.