Race, Racism, and Antiracism: UNESCO and the Politics of Presenting Science to the Postwar Public
Year: 2007
Type: article
Abstract: In December 1949, with the Holocaust still a raw, immediate memory, an international group of scholars gathered in Paris to author a final authoritative rebuttal to Nazi-style scientific racism. Organized under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the project reflected postwar liberal optimism about the power of internationalism and science itself to prevent human tragedy, as well as a collective sense of remorse. Just thirty years earlier, according to a project director, “Europeans could still regard race prejudice as a phenomenon that only affected areas on the margin of civilization.” The war had been “a sudden and rude awakening.” Like many contemporary social scientists, the project directors believed that Nazism, and racism more generally, had “thrive[d] on scientifically false ideas and … ignorance.” Education as a remedy for racism was a liberal article of faith shared by many scientists, as well as many of the American and European functionaries in UNESCO. Charged by the United Nations with creating a “programme of disseminating scientific facts designed to remove … racial prejudice,” UNESCO leaders proudly, and somewhat naïvely, declared in 1950 that UNESCO now had “the will and the means to make available to everyone the achievements of science.”1 For science, they believed, had already produced the correct antiracist knowledge about race when it traded in the old “scientific racism” of cataloguing, and occasionally fabricating, innate racial differences for a new paradigm emphasizing an environmental and genetic understanding of human variation.2 Although many scientists remained blind to the subtle racism permeating the predominantly Western scientific establishment, a large number were newly committed to “breaking the bioscientific tie of race, blood, and culture” that had enabled wartime genocide and now threatened postwar unity.3 Accordingly, the first project assembled experts in Paris to “define the concept of race” itself. The resulting statement went so far as to declare that race was more “social myth” than “biological fact,” and the term might be dispensed with altogether.4 But the statement project, which involved more than one hundred scientists directly and many more indirectly, as well as various diplomats and UN member states, soon became mired in transnational scientific and political controversies and ultimately, and perhaps predictably, fell short of its ambitious goals. Project directors discovered that little consensus existed beyond agreement about the wrongness of Nazism, and scholars who had begun to challenge the scientific basis of the race concept itself proved to be in an increasingly embattled minority. Within a year, scholarly criticism forced UNESCO to assemble a second gathering to rewrite the statement. Although a majority of scientists had rejected the premises of scientific racism some years earlier, the second statement project revealed how much the categories, premises, empirical records, and authority of an older, supposedly discredited body of work once dedicated to measuring difference continued to influence the science of race. Most postwar scientists favored dissemination of a more politically and scientifically palatable definition of race, and few could be fairly described as “racist” by postwar standards. In the end, however, most proved unwilling to question the validity of race as a natural category. The second statement recanted the first group's social constructivist position, returned to a biological definition of race, and, significantly, also affirmed older scientific traditions (and languages) by noting differences between “non-literate” and “more civilized” people on intelligence tests.5 Although the final statement was clearly a rebuttal to a certain style of scientific racism, it was not the straightforward repudiation of racial thinking that UNESCO planners had initially envisioned. UNESCO's project presents an interesting and revealing case study in the history of race, racism, and antiracism, and an ideal place to engage criticism about how this history is, and should be, done. Scholars are now beginning to challenge historians to move beyond the insight—and, some lament, now largely ceremonial observation—that race is a social construction to do the neglected work of historicizing race and racism. As Thomas Holt has observed, there is a tendency to treat racism either as a unified, timeless, autonomous phenomenon attributed to human nature as of some about race UNESCO who to the went to a and newly social has been to historicizing antiracism, as UNESCO's project to racism are and in the social as racism how race was as a biological a when scholars were Nazi-style scientific racism and the to and the authority of science, is to postwar But in a more the UNESCO also an to the between the race concept and racism, a as that historians the of the they to as an now a that and political and of and the construction of racial as the the the few of the nature of the race that The history of race science a there the of scholarly race is in to of ideas about and In that believed race and how that is in the history of the when ideas about human more But of race not a of the of thinking of race as a social construction also and the of how treat race in the race statement project a about the of the of of the concept the nature and of the concept itself in the and in Although the UNESCO been as of how the new antiracist consensus had in the postwar the of this science was to scientific racism was a had the about racial In of the of racial the nature of and the of the race the majority of that race and racial differences As a the the of the most one the of the by to be the of fell on who an the of the collective scientific that a more of the race and an for thinking of race as a and of human As observed, “the first of racism is in of the race postwar an in a of racism. Although the is largely to the United and is it that the many by UNESCO were an in the of old and new of race and racism the the of the scientific racism had in as and the scientifically of innate biological differences between to racial as has by … to the the UNESCO project revealed many and to be the the most scientists scientific racism as few were to it scientists in the United and for had believed that on political was with the to be the of scientific and antiracist to a in the scholars more to of than the of the war in a American declared it only has the been the has also been For antiracist as however, the for a scholarly to remained most scientists to a of that in that in the of the American people the question Although in some in race it was as has a The of in the in the race and revealed the of racism. The racism, when most the of about the innate of people of of for revealed that of believed that were in scholars attributed to and were in became a of to racism. Although occasionally that people who will most that was the means of in the … of scientists were forced to was for creating for racism and for the in they as more study revealed that of American and the concept of and to about and The in racial differences in for had once been a of in But the and that the had been discredited the most scholars had an environmental of racial differences in a between race and race is the and the Western it to of discovered that many were the term in a of to and as The contemporary on in one American been by the war little to new ideas about race. In the American by race in to American a that also the of the The of by who had “the on the race the of in was by the as and by the and the of the that than on that The wartime international about of that a on of the scientists had to that was that were The between science and on race had already some scholars of the to the of the term In and in of that to the should be and the and term should be In the United of the term in In the American of by “the concept of race to be and Most an for a and a in to the of the validity of itself. years the first UNESCO race statement the that race was a “social it was largely of as a on race and on the UNESCO in and in the United under and had as a in the of Although forced of the in the in scholarly about race. so with little and, as a little of for described as of the most and in American the most … in the that the with and the race be to that it was a and to it as to in the on race in of In the history of science, the of the first UNESCO statement has been attributed to political and to to in science, believed that were in contemporary science and a of As a of and with and to the of scholars work In had been for a to according to and for the one which they were to the of human had race as as to some this as the of a group … a and the resulting as a however, existed only in “the in “the of the to that was little more than a for in had been to the number of by to many the race by to of to In a American to the genetic a and genetic to human that had begun to the old in by the and the of in the a of by an of people as that and differences in also the of on for more than one of the genetic of human became and only when a the of also race as a a a by the of scientific racism, not only a a Most that some were one to be in some that it was of … as than as and to of the of which the of as The of was to a the this a of group and a new of Although many the of few the an work a genetic of race, that could not to the of and for the to was not racism that was the a to could that they had proved “the of the of there it be a short to and to that “the of and and as much as still that race might with difference in and with that soon to be as was more that term be as race already some in the of term was the of which was that it the … to it by who first that with … an in not scholarly differences of about how to with it make the of racism a The 1950 on a in ideas about the of science to the most of racism, the statement declared that to the intelligence basis for in differences in and, biological existed for Although the statement and by that and were not many contemporary social scientists, between of racism. differences could be attributed to the statement it that were few when to the genetic of and to the number of to human The most in the is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social and “biological revealed a natural the of who as and The second which the premises of by not in the of to the old about an innate racial The first UNESCO statement was one of that in the years As has a of shared of under by race to the of an antiracist In the United this international political the and and an international as human As this of a transnational racial a of American to the of in the United Nations to make the UN an of antiracism, to people by member and to remedy human In the a antiracist in the American a of and and social scientists that racism in and The of that in the was the concept of race than a of wartime to racial and The by this of antiracist to that a in the racial and as the postwar the The to as a authority in and international racial as human became in the and the for human itself became in the as an with the and Although criticism of with new political also a of as the under the and a and the of human and the of antiracist to a for as the of and the American to antiracist when UNESCO its first the and had many of the antiracist that had once had the to traditions and The nature of the statement project initially an the were fell and which to criticism of the race concept in the The continued to that race might to innate for for of the of intelligence to the that there were differences between racial it as the and of the scientific that for the most many as that the statement by the of the of racial and the that differences be with genetic of and to in the and the of many as race that might be genetic in that the statement went far in its to of racial that the statement might be for do however, for the believed that UNESCO's was to and not to scientific Although to make the final the final statement of … in to and The 1950 statement and international with of and as well as in American and But in the scientific the statement a of the a criticism in the that could not be … by they the statement “the statement that is a biological than a social the to with and the that there was an innate in the that the statement was the of much to had been to the means the itself only was the term … and will that for the years to that this will be it do on political and scholarly soon to UNESCO social science the and … in has not been and they that “the will on the basis of The to criticism of American racial its also were and in some this a science to the old scientific racism. the statement in the with the that are In the United between and social also produced The that the statement the of race with the racism, a by the that the by the had the in the social is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social that the statement the so with a definition that not is and that to the as well as the of the American that of scientists had the statement and it UNESCO project that the was the to place on the UNESCO to of that UNESCO a second of and to to be to a more the of the and that few biological scientists had been of the with of the race The second UNESCO statement more reflected the of race science in that to to Western on however, its Scholars to that by and that were not by one to one of the few work a challenge to racial was by and American traditions of the and was largely to Western and the United were increasingly traditions not the American tendency to to an and was to that many experts in were a that this UNESCO once criticism that people who are not directly with human race are the for who scientists the of ideas about race. the a that attributed to as was as an and 1950 article by for had that genetic differences some certain and were of to European that they are could be attributed this to than The was with the which to be by as a about the of the of racial which the natural that be and only to a on one of the to as the The author of UNESCO's and and of the and had ideal was to the political of scholars in the of by in and in the the second UNESCO group in however, the more immediate was an one of how to with the question of racial differences in a that of the first statement. that were by a on the of to the on had been “the of much intelligence became in the about Although had largely the older that to many scholars remained to its that some differences were about new about the of The of the was between the of the on the and the most to a The first statement had declared in a that the in that intelligence could not between environmental and innate and that the of The second of of of that do not in racial had differences between more and some scientists that differences were some scientists that and were by and of were produced by and the with an that were not to many it that this was by a that had to do became a which might be The second group also rejected the first that race was a social The was to of But the was to that … not that “the and the in the that the the scientifically and of which in the of the the immediate of the of “the in the with the the group affirmed the that revealed about an biological that was a term by its … and … they could not on an In a they race” for of in that fell on the as well as the of race as a the second UNESCO to consensus by a of of scholars of scholarly and the influence of as But only the to had begun to “the to a which might the consensus of most scientists was not an … which might the In of the on for that for were of about the nature of the scientists, for had on the in the racial differences in of the group of intelligence not the member of the also the of its of the group of … most of the that … to the to the of that the of the when with its might with the that … differences in innate intelligence will be that to a … by and there were of measuring innate on the that scientists little about differences in … this not be as a basis for that differences do not In scientists should not the that this could not be also had to with some more as and with to science with to who the that shared an innate for and be to the statement the to about the of racial on the basis of of the this statement be to to an by scientists, scholars UNESCO's to consensus to the political of the and the that not of scientific to a social that is the are and In the end, on the consensus and to the and a of the The of in which had so much for the of had the were when it to race, and this when with some of the and the of the when it to the question of nature were by most as with a in be more in one group than many who were on the statement that empirical that some were was to that were was not a to it had when as many that it be, to In it that between number by in this of and be attributed to innate also for the that racial differences were than a of social for that “the of some differences of a nature … it be there were not also some differences the more to the of that only the to a certain the when it to race was the were also For the that is the of racial difference was that of the for racial so to as to be In however, there was little that could about the genetic of in beyond an and its to In of remained largely and and in of empirical could to and to to a only when a could be in as it to the of remained to Most on as and to a about innate racial differences were on the basis of first an and a to the for that the statement should “scientific knowledge a basis than for that the of in innate for and for this not it was not that one could that do in a large number of The of and the challenge to the a for this in the is that are the the difference is and the of on who the that In the case of race, the was with difference and the of on who scientists had the and that older about racial had a that race and innate racial differences the of for difference that it was an to that scientific knowledge basis for that the of in innate this described the of the Scientific could be to is not it to that could be by ideas with still under that it was a to the of differences in intelligence differences were are on a only one that they be had not and could that there were differences between by many But significantly, of a genetic to intelligence to that this to race. it was not a case of the faith in that historians with postwar science, one had empirical should historians this as to the old of the of a The about be proved in to the of the question itself. As in a to years of had for thinking that “the of in with race. scientists might to that differences between in be to be to “the of that the question of should not the scientific question of for an of human differences as an to “the of race for the of that racial should not human as of of UNESCO to on an in when the and of the of human to on that and to many not scientists were of as on human it was also that in Western and not the Although the is to UNESCO's project also some the scientific the statement went Most the statement as a straightforward of and to that the nature of science the and authority to in the scholars in and not in this UNESCO project, had begun to question one of its that as an racism. as in prejudice a of could a phenomenon that is in its The of UNESCO and however, that they the as not only of the statement and to do The statement project, as well as UNESCO's in the postwar was on the that most racism was and could be by scientific But who and to the proved much and than the of they to engage in a that described as that for as and with The first challenge for UNESCO was historians of science the UNESCO statement as of a in the contemporary were to subtle by and the on environmental the statement on in the and that they not and leaders in 1950 that an not make it the first to the the on certain also revealed a between the of scientists and of the to the the of race which they as to political they so not on the basis of the of the on and the to phenomenon the of United Nations member who believed that of with the some authority on to they on the race The American to a UNESCO about the believed that it and about the race in the United that the might to the of some of the of “the they might on forced to a of were on the science on the in they were on the political of science might about race for when the on an in in were scientists were for the Although UNESCO were to the statement in the and the the of of this the had the it the one on the of and the of race with The had been to that race had human history and in the of the are race The was a of the on the of racial group than between racial as a of the of racial was a as as of the of had an older by in the of racial the the a on people are to that it is to an and are not The the on many the the on the the that the are and who to be in to a in that be far to The in postwar scientific also proved to the about race that in the United in the of the of Education the of a of scientific racism, which enabled in by scientific The that biological to scholars and and was by to In a of in and to that not the for as scholars it as that of science and scholarly of in the of in racial is But that author could not declare that this was only the that and that about not been scientifically for this rebuttal was the UNESCO statement. with the in the biological of race, for in the scientific and an In The of the a of and the of a to the as far as study of and The new scientific also to and of the of a of scientific racism not a is a and with who a with to in American that who had that were one to the who the once the and In the as a that it was to as and racism of a and as antiracist a and of the of who in racial in had committed to according to and one has In and the science of difference became the the and political of to a authoritative scientific racism. in a in the it and of and The of scientific racism is to it to for for But it is that in of its in scientific racism and, as a was by the of and of and it for and The the and of and who in it as an that the that had … and scientific of as as has not the nature of and the a that more than and attributed by the scientific to the of the about genetic differences between the UNESCO statement as a of by The of scientific racism was perhaps the more the of postwar antiracist in the of American the liberal with the of the American had in the the the had in and The had the in the and the of racial But this not the in racial thinking that and some antiracist scientists had in is that the social science of Education not to the of as an for on the that had on racism in the United was by a the on to about Although most in and the revealed the of about racial in believed that were believed that they to a of The as a and not the But the that of one antiracist on the of of had not a of the scientific of of human In the of to to a to racial definition to the of and to people believed race to The of human the of as it to between in the United Although with race became increasingly in in the the question of innate racial difference continued to the about racial in and antiracist that as the were to with to than now not with of with an that and a that of reflected of innate the in of social might to that the UNESCO the and had to racial by not the that race existed as a biological which was with that had the of racism, many the that race was not only a also an one that differences between of innate differences in new of race in the and as the the to and for social the about
Source: The American Historical Review
Author: M. Brattain
Language: English
Topic: Race, Genetics, and Society
Subfield: Genetics
Domain: Life Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2076167983