On January 18, 1958, members of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina chased out the Ku Klux Klan in what is known as the Battle of Hayes Pond. Image from Life Magazine via Google Books
In the wake of the Charlestown church shooting, author Brit Bennett looks at the way race and terrorism are portrayed in mainstream America:
Media outlets have been reluctant to classify the Charleston shooting as terrorism, despite how eerily it echoes our country’s history of terrorism. American-bred terrorism originated in order to restrict the movement and freedom of newly liberated black Americans who, for the first time, began to gain an element of political power. The Ku Klux Klan Act, which would in part, lawmakers hoped, suppress the Klan through the use of military force, was one of America’s first pieces of antiterrorism legislation. When it became federal law in 1871, nine South Carolina counties were placed under martial law, and scores of people were arrested. The Charleston gunman’s fears — of black men raping white women, of black people taking over the country — are the same fears that were felt by Klansmen, who used violence and intimidation to control communities of freed blacks. Even with these parallels, we still hear endless speculation about the Charleston shooter’s motives. Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina wrote in a Facebook post that “while we do not yet know all of the details, we do know that we’ll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another.” Despite reports of the killer declaring his racial hatred before shooting members of the prayer group, his motives are inscrutable. Even after photos surfaced of the suspected shooter wearing a jacket decorated with the flags of Rhodesia and apartheid-era South Africa and leaning against a car with Confederate-flag plates, tangible proof of his alignment with violent, segregationist ideology, his actions remained supposedly indecipherable. A Seattle Times tweet (now deleted) asked if the gunman was “concentrated evil or a sweet kid,” The Wall Street Journal termed him a “loner” and Charleston’s mayor called him a “scoundrel,” yet the seemingly obvious designations — murderer, thug, terrorist, killer, racist — are nowhere to be found. This is the privilege of whiteness: While a terrorist may be white, his violence is never based in his whiteness. A white terrorist has unique, complicated motives that we will never comprehend. He can be a disturbed loner or a monster. He is either mentally ill or pure evil. The white terrorist exists solely as a dyad of extremes: Either he is humanized to the point of sympathy or he is so monstrous that he almost becomes mythological. Either way, he is never indicative of anything larger about whiteness, nor is he ever a garden-variety racist. He represents nothing but himself. A white terrorist is anything that frames him as an anomaly and separates him from the long, storied history of white terrorism.Get the Story:
Brit Bennett: White Terrorism Is as Old as America (The New York Times 6/19) Also Today:
Republicans Tread Carefully in Criticism of Confederate Flag (The New York Times 6/22)
Campaign Donations Linked to White Supremacist (The New York Times 6/22)
Defiant Show of Unity in Charleston Church That Lost 9 to Racist Violence (The New York Times 6/22)
After tragic shooting, Charleston church reopens with prayer, songs and tears (The Washington Post 6/21)
The GOP’s uneasy relationship with the Confederate flag (The Washington Post 6/21)
The Charleston magistrate who sparked a debate about who is a victim (The Washington Post 6/21)
Dylann Roof’s racist manifesto: ‘I have no choice’ (The Washington Post 6/20)
Join the Conversation
