IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/social/y2022i1p81-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Critiquing American structural racism: a comparative analysis of the cases of Muhammed Ali and Collin Kaepernick

Author

Listed:
  • Pillay, Anton M.
  • Madzimure, Jeremiah

Abstract

In fighting for justice and equality in the face of American institutional racism, Muhammed Ali became an internationally known and respected figure. His 1976 auto-biography, The Greatest, with Richard Dunham and edited by Toni Morrison is a fast paced and well written book. It showcases the intellect, humanity, and determination behind the globally recognized icon. The auto-biography is interesting in the sense that it places boxing on the periphery and instead focuses on Ali’s struggles and disappointments, to be recognized as a man in the American South, which would later morph into the greater struggle for civil rights for American minorities. In fighting against what this research terms ‘structural racism, what emerged was a battle against the very fabric of core norms and culture, which establishes white American hegemony. In taking on established structures, Ali faced the wrath of ‘the Establishment.’ The idea of this term becomes vivid via comparative analysis of other case studies, which reveal that those who question American structural racism are met with similar reactions and consequences for their criticism. This study is thus relevant because it exposes how Ali’s own fight for justice and racial equality 60 years ago is essentially no different than it is today.

Suggested Citation

  • Pillay, Anton M. & Madzimure, Jeremiah, 2022. "Critiquing American structural racism: a comparative analysis of the cases of Muhammed Ali and Collin Kaepernick," EUREKA: Social and Humanities, Scientific Route OÜ, issue 1, pages 81-89.
  • Handle: RePEc:nos:social:y:2022:i:1:p:81-89
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journal.eu-jr.eu/social/article/viewFile/2264/1852.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nos:social:y:2022:i:1:p:81-89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Helen Klimashevska (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://eu-jr.eu/social .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.