The Complexity of Blackness: Definitions and Myths in South Asian Contexts

While there is a widely recognized academic discipline such as Negritude, there remains a deep-seated confusion about the classification and perception of blackness, particularly in the South Asian context. This article explores the definitions of blackness and the challenge of racial classification, with a focus on the Dravidians and Vedda, and dispels some common myths surrounding the term.

Understanding Blackness in Global Context

The concept of blackness has been constructed and redefined by global networks, with multiple definitions created by white supremacists. These definitions often vary widely depending on geopolitical, cultural, and historical contexts. It is crucial to recognize that the Dravidians of South India and the Vedda of Sri Lanka are not part of this racialized perception of blackness. These indigenous groups have not been racialized, and they do not fit within the labels created by white supremacist networks.

The Dravidians and Vedda: Indigenous Civilizations

The Dravidians, also termed as Desi, are responsible for the Sumerian and Harrapan civilizations. These civilizations were among the oldest and most advanced in the ancient world. The Dravidians and Vedda do not fit into the racial definitions of blackness. They are often classified as brown Caucasoids, sharing a similar "Caucasoid skull" with European populations. They are closer to Whites than to Blacks, as evidenced in various anthropological studies.

Defining Blackness in South Asia

In South Asia, the term "blackness" primarily refers to the Dalits, or the once-known "Untouchables," who are often identified by different names such as tribal groups. The Andamanese, who share similar physical characteristics with Sub-Saharan Africans, are categorized under the Negrito race. This classification is a result of Eurocentric racial categorizations, which are deeply rooted in colonial and postcolonial histories.

Multiplicity of Definitions

To complicate matters further, white supremacists have created numerous definitions of blackness, each tailored to different contexts. Some of these definitions include:

The "One Drop Rule" in the USA, where any trace of African ancestry is enough to classify someone as black. The "Reverse One Drop Rule" in North-Eastern Saharan and Horn Africa, where identification with blackness is less rigid. The Negro stereotype, often associated with African Americans. The "Blackfellas" or Australian Aborigines. The Negrillo stereotype, referring to the "Pygmies" in Africa. The Negrito, referring to the diminutive Blacks in Asia. The Yellow Men of Central Africa, Bantu speakers who do not fit the typical Negro stereotype. Elongated type of Africans, such as those in the Saharan and Nile regions. The Melanesians, the aboriginal Blacks of Southeast Asia and Oceania.

Each of these definitions changes depending on the interests and agendas of the creators, further emphasizing the fluidity of the concept of blackness.

Conclusion

The term blackness is often misunderstood and misused. It is crucial to recognize the diversity and multiplicity of definitions and the impact of colonial and postcolonial narratives on current classifications. The Dravidians and Vedda of South Asia, for instance, do not fit into the Western racial categories that often define blackness. Understanding these complexities can help in addressing and challenging systemic biases and misconceptions about these populations.

Further Reading

For a deeper understanding of these issues, readers are encouraged to explore works such as Shobhana Shankar’s third chapter in the book "An Uneasy Embrace," which delves into the nuances of racial classifications in South Asia.