Book Description
Seminar paper from the year 2009 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Culture and Applied Geography, grade: 1,0, Ruhr-University of Bochum, language: English, abstract: This paper will argue that the claim is not practical enough and that it only addresses a small group of people who have academic background knowledge about Critical Race Theory already. It will also show that people, who try to act along Ignatiev's guide lines, only harm themselves even when they mean well. The case of Condoleezza Rice is the opposite of what Ignatiev is talking about, because of Rice being African American and not Caucasian and, obviously, it was not a clever move to start her fight for equality by taking away one of the few privileges the African Americans have, but her intention was genuine. A Caucasian would not be judged differently at all if he behaved like Rice did. He would be accused just the same, although he would fight for equality and would want to get rid of race distinctions. Rice was called a race traitor and completely misunderstood, and so would be any other person, no matter the skin color or ethnicity. The paper will proof that the theses are inapplicable to neither mainstream nor individual and that they are too theoretical to be acted out. The intention of Ignatiev's claim is good, but his ideas are doomed to remain simple theory. He is naïve to believe that by following his rules, racism and suppression of the suppressed can be ended. In the first part of this paper, I will give background information on Noel Ignatiev and on his views on political and sociological issues in general, and on New-Abolitionism in particular. In the second part, I will then critically look at "What we believe" by the Race Traitor Journal. In a third and last part, I will try to find out how useful these theories are and in how far their ideas help to create the society the editors have in mind. I will check for the actability of the ideas in order to evaluate
