Colonial discourse distinguishes legal equality from factual inequality to justify hierarchy

Evidence

For me, the question of the equality of races, peoples, or cultures has meaning only if we are talking about an equality in law, not an equality in fact. In the same way, men who are blind, maimed, sick, feeble-minded, ignorant, or poor [one could hardly be nicer to the non-Occidentals] are not respectively equal, in the material sense of the word, to those who are strong, clear-sighted, whole, healthy, intelligent, cultured, or rich. — Aimé Césaire, Discourse on Colonialism, 236

Categorization

• QUESTION: Worth chasing: how this equality-in-law versus equality-in-fact distinction recurs in contemporary anti-Muslim discourse and liberal tolerance debates.
• XREF: Anticipates the biopolitics/necropolitics readings — the classification of peoples by biological or historical ‘level’ as a precondition for differential treatment. — connects to: Imperialism as expansion differs fundamentally from empire building as rule of law; Polygenism justified colonial intermarriage bans and mixed-race discrimination; European continent substituted formal legal equality for real equality of condition (+14 more)
• DEFINE: Names and exhibits the colonialist’s core rhetorical move: separating formal legal equality from factual inequality to preserve the right to rank peoples.

Related

• European continent substituted formal legal equality for real equality of condition (similarity 0.85)
• Colonial misreading of reciprocity stemmed from assuming its own norms universal (similarity 0.82)
• Imperialism as expansion differs fundamentally from empire building as rule of law (similarity 0.82)
• Colonial officials used language hierarchy to justify claims of Indigenous mental inferiority (similarity 0.79)
• Colonial administrators misread their own invented rule as natural racial superiority (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Colonial officials used language hierarchy to justify claims of Indigenous mental inferiority #exemplifies (0.85)
• Colonial racism generalized aristocratic superiority to justify empire and shore up domestic class rule #exemplifies (0.85) — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 571
• Colonial dominion was justified as the natural right of those capable of ruling #expands (0.85)
• European participation in the rebellion collapsed the colonial legal distinction #contradicts (0.82) — Frantz Fanon, A Dying Colonialism, 207
• Colonial racism welded dynastic legitimacy to national community by universalizing inherited superiority #expands (0.80)
• Colonial reformers’ ethical indignation coexisted with colonial privilege #qualifies (0.80)
• Equal-lives rhetoric masks a new hierarchy between nationals and foreigners #qualifies (0.78)
• Colonial race was judged by conduct and affiliation rather than appearance #expands (0.75)
• Colonial misreading of reciprocity stemmed from assuming its own norms universal #exemplifies (0.75)
• Equality must govern politics even though it is technically a fiction #qualifies (0.70)