ABSTRACT
Antiracism is a common term with little consensus on what it entails. What is to be challenged? by whom? when? and for how long? remains a constant source of difficulty for many. Antiracism is as much a paradox as racism and as such the dangers of oversimplifying the causes of racism through poorly constructed interventions is ever-present. Reinforcing racial categories through the use of reductionist categories or through fixed or static views of racism are not uncommon in sport (Back, Crabbe and Solomos 2001, Garland and Rowe 2001). Antiracism in sport often focuses on explicit, high-profile concerns, and such initiatives are often seen as the answer to racism. Rugby league’s ‘Tackle It’ or awareness-raising campaigns like Thierry Henry and Nike’s ‘Stand Up Speak Up’ cannot be viewed in isolation as they are often historically located and resourceled with some form of political or ideological position to uphold (Gilroy 1992, Solomos and Back 1995, Bhavnani et al. 2005, Swinney and Horne 2005). This becomes even more transparent where public organisations like local authorities or non-governmental bodies fall under a critical lens where equal opportunities and antiracism are often conflated. This final chapter draws together many of the theoretical and conceptual tensions stemming from the ambiguous and transitory nature of racism as it explores the pragmatics of theory, policy and practice. The implications of the assumptions that underpin antiracist behaviour are explored through a consideration of the work of Beneton (2001), Taguieff (2001), Essed (2002) and Solórzano and Yosso (2005), whose work has interrogated some of what amount to essential problematics for antiracists in sport today in terms of how critical lenses applied to antiracism can facilitate more rigorous cutting-edge transformatory activities. Beneton’s (2001: 83) suspicion of racism and antiracism leads him to conclude that ‘One has to maintain firmly the two following propositions: (1) racism is a false idea; (2) all forms of antiracism are not valid’.
