Stephanie Toussaint
Professor Creaney
Composition For Creative Expression FIQWS

November 25, 2021

For this paper, I will be looking at an article which reported on the Capitol Riot of January 6, 2021 and will be examining that event and article through the lens of another article, this article being about racism and one that we have read during class. The article that we will be examining is “The Legacy of Racial Hatred in the January 6 Insurrection” by Marcus P. Nevius, and published online on February 24, 2021 at JStor Daily.org, a website that bills itself as “Where news meets its scholarly match”. The article that we have discussed in class and that we will be using as the lens to look through is Stanley Thangaraj’s Racism is a Virus? Challenge the Discourse and Remake the Nation, July 2021.

In stumbling upon the online article by Marcus P. Nevius (February 24, 2021) and looking at the title of the article, “The Legacy of Racial Hatred in the January 6 Insurrection”, while being confronted by a picture of some insurrectionists in front of the Capitol, I immediately thought of the article “Racism is a Virus?” and decided that Nevius article was worth looking at through the lens of “Racism is a Virus?….Remake the Nation.” Just how would Thangaraj’s article’s title which includes “Remake the Nation” allow me to understand the Nevius’s article title which includes “Legacy of Racial Hatred in the….Insurrection.” While both articles’ titles reference race related terms, “Racial” for Nevius and “Racism” for Thangaraj, could the Nevius article be writing about remaking the nation; as does the Thangaraj article? In looking more closely at both articles’ titles, I see that Nevius’s includes the word “Insurrection.” Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines an insurrection as “a usually violent attempt to take control of a government,” so by golly, were these insurrectionists trying to gain control of the government and as Thangaraj’s title states “Remake the Nation?” No, it would be unseemly to think that in the 21st Century, Pro-Trump protesters (the insurrectionists who were thus categorized by Nevius), would be there to remake the nation. Could a group of people violently seizing control of a democratically elected government, be capable of remaking the American nation. The juxtapose of looking at a group of people violently seizing a government through the lenses of Thangaraj who is asking for us to remake the nation, is difficult to imagine. Could Thangaraj possibly have imagined remaking America through the violent seizing of America’s political power? Certainly not, as his article posits that we are responsible for our actions, and we must work towards “organizing, mobilizing, and envisioning a world free of racism.”

The subtitle of the of the “target” text, states “…..racial hatred are sustained by a culture of making political compromises when bold action is required”, while our lens article’s subtitle

states “challenge the discourse, remake the nation.” Thangaraj (our lens author) writes of challenging the conversation, thereafter to remake the nation. Nevius (our target author) writes of the commonplace occurrences of compromises in America’s politics, when instead strong, decisive action is needed. Thus, whereas Thangaraj speaks of the power of speech to remake a nation, Nevius’ title references the requirement for decisive action to effect change in America’s politics. Is it any wonder that the target article has a picture of the protesters gathered in front of the Capitol, waving separatist Confederate flags? Would that (as called by Nevius) group of “Pro-Trump protesters” be capable of conversations, or for them, decisive action means storming the Capitol building? It is evident that discourse was not a part of the Pro-Trump protesters’ actions on January 6, 2021.

If as Nevius’s article states, there is legacy of racial hatred in America, why then are the insurrectionists white and not black. As Thangaraj writes “simplistic accounts of race and racism cannot foster change.” If there is a legacy of racial hatred in America as the target article posits, should not African Americans be the ones to express racial hatred at their history and role in the formation of America. As the author Stanley Thangaraj would be the first to note in his article, how is it possible that the perpetrators of injustice against blacks in America (going back to the days of slavery and the enslavement and exploitation of stolen people from their home continent of Africa), how then should we be presented with an Insurrection in which the only participants are white. If there is any racial hatred that is the result of America’s history, surely then it should be the blacks who might have hatred against the perpetrators (generally non-blacks) of those transgressions. So why is it that we have protesting white participants at the center of an article that deals with the legacy of racial hatred. The lens author, Thangaraj would state that racism is at the very foundation of this nation, that people are not exempt from being morally responsible for their

actions, and because these individuals can reproduce and survive without a host cell, these insurrectionists must be held responsible for their deadly actions on January 6, 2021. Thangaraj posits that race is the “main text” when this nation was being formed, and that anti-Black racism and anti-Asian racism are on the rise. However, the need for white insurrectionists to “take back a stolen election” is turning on its head, the belief that minorities do not have power, and that they are the ones subjected to discriminatory actions by majority groups.

Early in Nevius’s article, he writes “As we acknowledge Black History month in 2021, we should also acknowledge that the gathered mob’s white supremacist rage tapped into a deeply engrained politics of racial hatred that, like the history of slavery, lays at the core of U.S. history.” (Nevius 2021) Nevius writes as though the behaviors of white supremacists in current period can be relevant, explained, and could be equated to the sufferings and history of America’s Blacks. Conversely, Thangaraj’s lens article posits that America as a young nation, “celebrated, profited, and backed the enslavement of Africans.” Additionally writes Thangaraj, whites were deputized to “capture, contain, and kill fugitive slaves and Black people (Paul Ortiz’s Emancipation Betrayed, 2004). Thangaraj would probably dumbfoundedly want to know why credence should be given to the racial hatred that allowed whites to perpetuate injustices against blacks centuries ago, and just how exactly does this racial hatred equate to the meaning behind Black History month in America? That Nevius would equate the celebration of Black History month to the racial hatred of whites that lies at the core of US history, probably would be unfathomable by Thangaraj.

Nevius writes that “the nation’s deep-seated politics of racial hatred” is caused by compromise, while Thangaraj writes that blacks, in spite of their betrayal by America’s political structure, should engage in dialogue in order to change how race is perceived and acted against in America. While Thangaraj proposes dialogue to effect change in how blacks and minorities are

perceived and treated, Nevius rails against whites engaging in political compromise and believes that decisive, forceful actions would better allows whites to be successful.

Nevius further states that this politics of racial hatred started in response to “Black radical protest traditions” which went against “white Americans’ characterizations of the new nation as a beacon of liberty and independence.” Thangaraj posits that the exploitation of black labor, the killing of Black people, the denial of human rights and basic human needs, continued even after the Emancipation Proclamation (Thangaraj 2021) . If, in response to these grievances, “Black radical protest traditions” were created, how would those traditions be responsible for the politics of racial hatred felt and demonstrated by whites, even in current period?

Thangaraj states that racial crimes against Blacks, Asians are surging, and that although racism is a “structural matter,” having “structural force,” we need to be analytical; devise solutions to remake the nation and end racism, since it appears that only whites are unaffected by racism. Nevius believes that the politics of hatred, borne of the nation’s original sin – slavery, is resurging, and that whites need to assert their will, as demonstrated by the insurrectionists who provided the dire warning that “we have much with which to reckon.” America cannot erase the role of slavery in its formation. Just as it cannot erase the varied opinions of how slavery affected race and race relations in America.

Works Cited

Desiballer. “‘Racism Is a Virus?” Challenge the Discourse and Remake the Nation.” Tropics of Meta, 15 July 2021, tropicsofmeta.com/2021/07/15/racism-is-a-virus-challenge-the- discourse-and-remake-the-nation/.

Nevius, Marcus P. “The Legacy of Racial Hatred in the January 6 … – JSTOR DAILY.” The Legacy of Racial Hatred in the January 6 Insurrection, daily.jstor.org/the-legacy-of-racial- hatred-in-the-january-6-insurrection/.