Game of Race

Appiah brought up the argument against Du Bois’s Dusk of Dawn. “How can something he shares with the entire non-white population bind him to only part of it?” How does this “game of race”, which includes many different imaginary rules and extensive cultural game pieces, bind anyone together? Would the result not be an overload of confusion? I believe that is exactly what has happened to philosophers trying to become an expert at this game of race and all they did was tangle their hands while trying to advance their own cultural game pieces. This occurrence left philosophers with no idea where they were going.

Yes, I understand that exclusion of many culture groups did occur and many of these “game pieces” went straight to jail and did not collect $200. But why was enslavement the idea of winning this game? Like enslavement, this game of race can be imagined as a bully taking all of the other players’ property. Just how the game monopoly relies on location and it’s play on chance, surely the game of race can be interpreted in the same way.

So how does one win the game of race? Du Bois believes that race must be asserted, Appiah believes that race should be rejected to justify Du Bois. Am I the only one that believes that race can still exist?

We know that race cannot exist biologically but it still has a role in culture and politics, present and past. I believe that today, we need to approach the term by contrasting historical trends with the current relevance that we now have with science. We must look at race in a matter of who we were and who we are now, rather than what we were and what we are now. I believe that America is in the process of this movement with not only our first nonwhite president, but also in various other achievements such as our first African American Disney princess; the list is growing! Even without race as a biological matter, current anthropologist can still make use of the term race. 

Rules to win the game of race:

In order for race to advance in meaning and become multicultural, all of the cultural game pieces must advance at once and in unison. Otherwise, cultural game pieces must become singular and the game must become one player.

I believe the next step for anthropologist must include an improved “how to play manual”. Anthropologist must begin researching factors that lead slavery without looking at “race” as the leading factor. How can cultural game pieces with at a game of race? It is impossible. 

 Appiah claims that Du Bois honors just the badge (skin) of the insult and not the insult itself. The insult was the previous slavery of his Negro ancestors. According to Appiah’s metaphor, how can the insult itself be prepared without any discrimination or insult on another culture’s “badge”? During the beginning of slavery, didn’t the oppressed only possess this “badge” which further leads to this hierarchy of slavery? If Du Bois was placed in the past with his ancestors he would certainly face the same fate. If we forget about badges, then we no longer look at race as a factor in our multicultural game. Any idea as to what the goal might be then? Or is this game of race not multiplayer at all..