Defining Capitalist Racialization

February 6, 2024 American Political Science Review, Journals, Public Scholarship Program Comments Off on Defining Capitalist Racialization

In the APSA Public Scholarship Program, graduate students in political science produce summaries of new research in the American Political Science Review. This piece, written by Samantha Chapa, covers the new article by Onur Ulas Ince, SOAS University of London, “From “Chinese Colonist” to “Yellow Peril”: Capitalist Racialization in the British Empire.“

In 1806, at the suggestion of Lt. William Layman, the British initiated what is now known as the “Trinidad experiment.” As part of this “experiment,” the British Empire transported hundreds of Chinese laborers to the colony of Trinidad to work the plantations and replace Trinidad’s enslaved labor. At the time, the British believed Chinese laborers to be an ideal replacement due to their higher levels of productivity and previous history of overseas settlement in Southeast Asia. By replacing the enslaved labor force with Chinese indentured servants, the British hoped to increase the economic value of Trinidad’s plantations. Though the experiment largely failed, it aptly illustrates several important components of what Onur Ulas Inces defines as “capitalist racialization,” in his new APSR piece.

Capitalist racialization, as defined by Ince, refers to the process by which social differences are reified into racial ones through their relationship to capital. Specifically, the term foregrounds how racial hierarchies are shaped by arguments over the capitalist articulation of land and labor. To demonstrate the concrete workings of capitalist racialization, Ince examines Chinese migration across British Southeast Asia during the 19th century. The article develops these arguments by analyzing a series of primary texts such as memorandums, pamphlets, and monographs from colonial officials, travelers, and those with expertise on Southeast Asia. It also includes secondary literature on the British Empire and political economy more broadly.

By the time of the “Trinidad experiment,” The British considered Chinese migrants to be ideal colonists due to their history of settlement and commerce in Southeast Asia. The Chinese developed sophisticated maritime systems, dominated various commercial sectors and trading houses, created a network of Chinese middlemen across different economies throughout the region, and established successful mines and plantations long before the arrival of the British. The extensive economic machine created by the Chinese required labor.

Chinese capitalists in Southeast Asia recruited indentured servants from China through a “credit-ticket system.” The system commonly resulted in debt peonage, as employers often extended servitude contracts beyond their original terms. The extension of contracts resulted in

intense exploitation of the laborers, which in part led to the belief that the Chinese were more industrious compared to other groups. In reality, the Chinese were not inherently more industrious. Rather, they were forced to produce at higher levels to gain their freedom. It was this confluence of existing Chinese colonization, along with stereotypes of industriousness, that made Chinese migration a favorable solution to labor shortages as the British Empire expanded. Chinese industriousness could be exploited by the British to generate as much wealth as possible. Race subtly assumed economic value and came to signify an imperial asset.

Ince explains how the relationship between race and capitalist production made Chinese indentured servants more appealing to British imperial capitalists than laborers from other areas of the empire, such as the Indians or the Malays. Levels of industriousness were directly equated with varying levels of civilization, where individuals from groups that were perceived as more productive were also perceived as more civilized. Labor productivities turned otherwise arbitrary differences between racial groups, into real, exaggerated, and measurable differences in the eyes of the British, so much so that British employers commonly noted that one Chinese laborer was the equivalent of at least two laborers from any other racial group. The Chinese thus emerged as the most civilized and useful to the British Empire.

“The relationship between Chinese settlers and laborers and the British Empire during the 19th century provides us with a concrete example of capitalist racialization.”However, the same stereotype of the Chinese as a capitalist, colonizing people ultimately became a threat to the British. Due to their history and their vast economic networks in the region, Chinese settlers often had an economic advantage over European colonists, sometimes even outperforming Westerners. With the growth of Chinese settlement, British economic superiority could no longer be assumed. Notable British figures began to fear that their world would quietly become overrun by the Chinese. A series of anti-Asian exclusion acts along the Pacific Rim soon followed. Though the anti-exclusion laws were formulated in the language of racial difference, they were largely implemented to prevent the “industrious” Chinese from gaining a larger economic foothold. In other words, they were implemented for the very reasons for which the Chinese were initially desired: their relation to capital.

The relationship between Chinese settlers and laborers and the British Empire during the 19th century provides us with a concrete example of capitalist racialization. Understanding the process of capitalist racialization encourages us to examine how ethnicity, caste, or other hierarchical structures in colonial societies could also obtain their meaning through their relation to capitalism. The term also provides insights into the connections across different imperial, capitalist structures, such as the importation of indentured servants from Asia to the Caribbean — an experiment that could not have existed without the prior circulation of ideas across the empire. Ince thereby invites us to investigate racial capitalism with greater theoretical precision and historical specificity.