The recent brouhaha created by the words of famous American talk show host Whoopi Goldberg is absolutely fascinating.
Not only did her words throw up the question, what is a Jew? But also led into the scrutiny or examination of the well-established and accepted categorizations of the world’s population by colour or more specifically, skin colour.
Whoopi publicly proclaimed the idea that the holocaust was not about race. She immediately received a tremendous amount of backlash and even though she sincerely apologized for any offense that she might have caused, she was suspended from her TV talk show for two weeks by network executives.
Many media celebrities showed up to weigh in on the subject such as British comedian and Author David Badeil, amongst others, but to this point though they have all stated that Whoopi is wrong and the Nazi persecution of the Jewish populations of Europe, was most definitely about race, none as yet have been able to coherently and definitively categorize what the Jewish populations around the world are. Are they a race, or an ethnic group, or an ethno-religious group or just a religious faction of the white race?
Leaving that there for a moment, this brings us to the categorization of populations by skin colour and the hierarchical significance that underscores it.
Although the British are not credited with the invention of “race” as a concept, as with many inventions on the planet, they embraced it, adopted and adapted it, fomenting the skin colour categorization ideology that we all live by today.
Even though the categorization of populations or the world’s people by their skin colour does not really work in reality and is generally an unsatisfactory premise for defining people, the idea has persisted for a very long time, but now generally is boiled down by the media to only two main factions, black and white.
The world we live in today is given to understand that blacks are people of African descent and whites are of European descent, everyone else is either side lined, ignored or deemed as inconsequential. This is because it becomes too complex and as stated, categorizing people by their skin colour does not really work in reality.
So what is the foundation, the core premise and hierarchy of skin colour categorization? Well, it begins with English “supremacists”. English supremacists define what a “white person” is. Fundamentally, a white person is person of English nationality, first and foremost, who speaks the English language. It is that simple. Rich or poor, if you were born in England, to English parents and your skin is white, you are a white person.
The concept is then extended to the Scottish and the Welsh unreservedly, constituting what we now understand to be “British”. The Irish are seen as somewhat troublesome and though generally seen to be white by the English, they are accepted into the group with a kind of arm’s length provision, like a jail bird cousin.
This premise now established, was exported, propagated and came into general acceptance in every part of the world where the British went. This included North America, Canada and Australia as extensions of British territories.
And so today, real white people are the white skinned British, the white skinned North Americans, the white skinned Canadians and the white skinned Australians.
When using the term “white skinned”, it should be noted that other populations such as the “Europeans” who appear to be white skinned, are not fully accepted by the supremacist British as having the same level of whiteness as British whites and those previously mentioned.
So for example, the French, the Spanish, the Italians etc. all constitute a kind of second tier white person, not quite as good as the British, while the Portuguese and the Greeks are not really considered at all.
Having said this, there are groups and populations that the British supremacists do respect as first tier white people, although not British white, but definitely a “good” white, and these groups are northern Europeans. Danes, Norwegians, Swedes. The British view these populations as the original white people as they have for the most part, maintained their purity and not been contaminated by any other race.
There is also a healthy respect for the Germans, quiet as it is kept, since the Germans are probably the British people’s closest relatives in Europe, though somewhat corrupted by Jews or other factions, they remain second tier white people along with the Austrians, but with a stigma.
The Dutch, the Belgian, though white, are given no credence, they have no distinction or prominence, even though they adhere to the white skin supremacy principle, in their own right.
Eastern Europeans such as the Polish are seen as white by the British supremacists and may even enter the first tier, but in general are viewed as inferior to British whites, intellectually. Czechoslovakians, Bulgarians and Hungarians, also accepted as white, but like the Dutch, unremarkable second tier fodder, though allies.
The Jews however are a population that British supremacists would like to embrace as white because of their wealth, ingenuity and influence on the world stage. But the Jews are problematic because of their strict adherence to certain cultural traditions, religious practices and separateness socially. They are in fact, though white skinned, different to all other European engendered whites and the intersectionality for the British at least, only occurs at the level where wealth outweighs cultural assignation.
So powerful, so embedded within the European psyche and places around the world such as North America and Canada, is this hierarchical concept of white British supremacy, that Jewish people would change their surnames to better fit in and not be singled out for discriminatory treatment.
Greenberg became Green, Stadler became Steadman or some such, so powerful was the British white supremacist construct. All other aforementioned white skinned populations fell into line with this and accepted their place, the Irish, the Italians, the Polish. This was probably because the premise was also reinforced by language.
The most commonly spoken language was English and of course though your skin may be white, if you did not speak “English” like an English man, you were naturally a lesser mortal and deemed somewhat inferior.
It is still the same way today, even though to a lesser degree in Britain itself. But in North America, Canada and even Australia factions of white skinned populations violently adhere to the fundamental principles of British white supremacy, denigrating all others while holding themselves to be superior.
Nowadays, it is simply referred to as racism and it can be found to be alive and well in most populations of white skinned people around the world. In fact the principle of the skin colour hierarchy has been so powerful and successful, that even groups of colour such as Aisians who are deemed as Yellow and Latinos, who are deemed as Brown, use it to discriminate and denigrate others, such as Africans, who are deemed as black.
The British engendered white skinned supremacy concept has caused pain and suffering in this world beyond biblical proportions and continues to this day. It may not have been intentional or planned with malice aforethought, but there are still those who embrace it and seek to promote it, so unless it is counteracted and eradicated wherever and in whatever form it might appear, this world will be in perpetual disunity and disarray.
So what about the Russians, where do they fit in? The Russians are viewed by the British white supremacist as a brother from another mother. Unrelated, unconnected, but respected and tolerated if they have a lot of money, because of course at the end of the day, their skin is white.
Jason Steinmetz Esq.