This post will be a summary of the article, “Equity, Inclusion, and Antiblackness in Mathematics” by Danny Martin. The main thrust of this article is the author’s belief in the oppression blacks experience when they are learning math.
Martin makes several strong claims in his article using critical analysis. The word “critical” in this context always has to do with relations of power between the “oppressed” and “oppressor”. He states that math has held a privileged position within education. By privileged he may mean that math is held above other subjects in terms of importance. Naturally, there is no clear reason why math is somehow more important than other subjects except for perhaps its role in science and technology which are key movers of the economy.
Martin also claims that people of color are underrepresented in math. However, it is rare to find equal distribution of people in almost any field or discipline. For example, minorities often dominate sports without any complaints from people. Since professional athletes generally make more money than mathematicians focusing on athletics may make more sense in specific circumstances. For people who like the physical tools for athletic excellence, math provides another route to success.
To deal with the challenge of math supremacy and the underrepresentation of blacks in this field, Martin wants an aggressive and fast overturning of the existing system. He critiques strongly the slow incremental reform that has been used over the years as too sluggish and does not threaten the status quo. Supporting revolution is to be expected from Marxist-leaning writers as the current state of affairs is always one that is dissatisfying to them.
Major Movements in Math
Martin next breaks down how there have been three major movements for math reform in the US. The first was in the 1950’s which was math refroms in reaction to Soviet success during the Cold War. The next reform was in the 1980’s and was a standards approach in reaction to the work published in “A Nation at Risk.” The last reforms came in the 2000s and were the common core state standards. For Martin, each of these reforms found one way or another to exclude people of color from success in math. Inclusion was a goal of each of these reforms yet Martin claims that the inclusion never happened.
The inclusion that these reforms offered included marginalization or assimilation. Marginalization is essentially treating people of color as second-class citizens within the discipline of math. Assimilation involves people sacrificing their identity and or culture to be a part of the community. For Martin, either of these actions is not true inclusion.
Martin provides several examples of how the government has supported whites in math. Examples include GI Bill which allows whites to go to college and thus study math. Other examples include the New Deal and the Fair Deal. The latter two are not explained in detail in the article but were reform programs.
Violence and Dehumanization in Math
The article states that black students experience violence and dehumanization through math education. Violence is manifested by looking for deficiencies in the math ability of black students through diagnosing these weaknesses. In other words, if a black child learns that they are weak in math this is a form of violence toward the child as it labels them. Thus, math illiteracy was invented to exclude people of color from the discipline of math by telling them they were illiterate in math. Again, this is the opinion of the author of the article.
Dehumanization is not as clearly defined by Martin. However, if it is the same as Freire’s view of dehumanization it means that the students are not awakened politically to the injustice around them and the need to fight it. For Friere, if a person is not aware of their oppression they are not fully human. Martin shares Freire’s views but he did not define this term and that may be because he assumes his audience already knows this.
The violence and dehumanization that black students experience in math are examples of antiblackness within math. In other words, these tools discussed above are used to keep blacks out of math. Martin claims that math is a space for people who are not of color and that this has become a racialized experience.
Refuse
Martin ends his paper with an appeal to the axiom of black brilliance. An axiom is a self-evident truth or a claim that does not need support. In other words, the axiom of black brilliance means somebody is brilliant simply because of their skin color. This is conflicting given that stupidity can be found in all cultures and people groups. Assuming black brilliance is just as bad as assuming black stupidity given that there is a spectrum of intellectual ability in all people groups from dumb to genius. Mislabeling either way is a problem that should be avoided. Injustice on one side should not lead to injustice in the way. Performance rather than skin color should determine the success or failure of an individual.
Martin also shares the idea of refusal in and refusal of. Refusal in means refusing white benevolence and not learning math in the current system of oppression. Refusal of means refusal of current math practices. Although this is a catchy term it lacks practicality as math has a long multicultural history involving India, the Middle East, Africa, and other places of color in addition to recent contributions by Europeans.
Conclusion
Reading the works of critical race theory proponents is always interesting. The anger and frustration that come through their writing is powerful. However, seeing the world through a lens of race is just one of seeing the world. There are other interpretations of how math is taught besides the cry of racial injustice.