Using a simplified definition, anti-racism is about actively identifying and opposing racism. It is rooted in action and its purpose is to actively change the policies, behaviors, and beliefs that perpetuate ideas and actions that are influenced by racism. Many of the critics of anti-racism describe it as a politically-motivated ideology, which I don’t agree with. But I want to stress that my disagreement comes from how this characterization of anti-racism shuts down important discussions about race and racism.
When anti-racism is perceived as a radical ideology it has a polarizing and chilling effect on productive dialog. Anti-racism is often conflated with the more abstract concepts of critical race theory and systemic racism, as if all these concepts are one in the same. I argue that although they are linked, they are not one in the same, and those differences deserve to be explored.
To begin, I want to question whether engaging in anti-racism requires me to adopt the vocabulary of critical race theory, or if it simply asks for an open mind. What if engaging in anti-racism means being open to the exploration of systemic racism and the problems it presents in institutions and social systems? Or, what if anti-racism was an exploration of one’s own humanity? Can engaging in anti-racism make me a better person? A better citizen? This approach to anti-racism adopts the philosophic view of pragmatism, and connects anti-racism to evolution, learning, and our survival as human beings.
Instead of thinking about anti-racism as an ideology, I like to think of it as a practice, and a good example is the work I am engaged in to change the under representation of jazz music and jazz music educators in formal music education. There is plenty of evidence that shows how race and racism has played a role in the structure and function of academic institutions, and music education is no exception. Historically there has been very low representation and a marginalization of faculty of color, creating a sense among Black musicians that they did not belong in formal music education programs. Moreover, it has become impossible to ignore the missing appreciation for music through the lens of the African American experience.
Music scholars have been paying more attention to these issues and, through the lens of critical race theory, have exposed the privileging of Western European music and white composers in the determination of what music is valued in music schools and conservatories, and what musics, musicians and composers are deemed legitimate for serious study and performance. This is important scholarly work that informs anti-racism and aids in formulating solutions to the many problems created by this dominant influence. But this is not my main motivation for pursuing anti-racism in music education.
What excites me most about this work is the healing power of embracing a more global view of music and music education. It is indisputable that jazz was born out of the Black music of call-and-response field hollers, church music, and the blues. This tradition of African American music making has been continued by generations of musicians who, beyond jazz, have incorporated many influences into ever evolving styles of music that include spirituals, rhythm and blues, soul, funk, gospel and hip-hop. All of this music, and our collective American experience with it, is the lens through which we can begin to understand the full scope of our uniquely American relationship with music and our participation in music as a democratic society. Yet for decades these contributions to American culture and society have been systematically left out of the music education curriculum in public schools and universities.
An anti-racist music education embraces all these traditions, yet it is much more than just learning to play different styles of music. A more equitable and inclusive music education enhances students’ image of themselves and what they can accomplish. It engages them as musicians in trying to address society’s challenges. They learn about how music can be a way of asserting one’s humanity and dignity, in the same way it was for enslaved people or during the civil rights movement of the 1960s. All this leads to an expanded understanding of the American experience through the lens of music.
Thinking about music education this way poses a lot of challenges to the status quo of music education — how success is measured, how excellence is defined, how the impact of this work, both the private and the public benefits of music education, are valued. But facing into these challenges is how we bring about change that leads to healing.
The Greek philosopher Aristotle believed that the ability to ponder and engage in these types of conversations is what it means to be human. And the ability to reflect and reason can lead us, as humans, to embrace ingenious and ethical ways to overcome conflict between groups. I believe Aristotle would see anti-racism in music education as being the work of what he called “good citizenship” — constructing societies that enable the full expression of our essential humanity and the flourishing of all.
Hello, I'm Lisa Meyer 