Internal colonialism categories fail to capture contemporary reorganized racial structures

Evidence

All the specifically national aspects of the internal colonialism perspective (geography, culture, extraeconomic coercion, and external political rule), while remaining true ina general fashion, are contradictory and problematic when examined in detail. While segregation is still extensive, it varies widely by class and racial category; culture is racially hybridized to an unprecedented degree. As we have already noted, extraeconomic coercion, what David Harvey calls “accumulation by dispossession” (Harvey 2004) is a general feature of neoliberalism, and not only a matter of structural racism; and external political rule also operates fairly comprehensively under the presentday oligarchical regime of the United States. Racial oppression and white supremacy retain their power, but these patterns and social structures have been reorganized and rearticu- ously. — Michael Omi, Howard Winant, Racial Formation in the United States, 101

Categorization

• XREF: Corroborates and updates the era’s internal colonialism paradigm against which Omi and Winant build racial formation; echoes Harvey’s accumulation by dispossession.
• DEFINE: Explains why the four national aspects of internal colonialism theory no longer cleanly describe US racial rule.