The prevailing racism is becoming even more malignant:
more distrust and envy, less disdain.

Discussions about racism or racial prejudice are still mainly focused on who can and who cannot be called ‘racist.’ The question of what actually constitutes racism is not asked as often and is instead dismissed with vague explanations, such as ‘viewing certain populations as lesser.’ Of course looking down on groups of people is abhorrent. But racism can also stem from envy, and that is almost never discussed. While envy has actually ensured that the prevailing racism has become increasingly virulent.
The same is true when we ask ourselves what actually motivates people when they express themselves in a racist way or act as such. In these discussions, primarily the words people use to justify their statements and actions are considered. But we must also ask ourselves what underlying feelings and thoughts are involved that they would rather keep to themselves. Understanding the mechanisms at work is a bitter necessity, if only to be able to resist racism in such a way that racist violence will never break out again.

Unraveling mechanisms

By unraveling these mechanisms, we can answer complicated questions. Questions such as: why are descendants of migrant workers and people from the former colonies disadvantaged in the labor market, often due to customs attributed to their ancestors’ countries of origin? Why does the proportional representation of people from minorities in the media still fall so short? Why are politicians from these groups

constantly tied to what is called ‘their community,’ even when they are working tirelessly on issues that affect society as a whole? Why are people of color who do important work in this society sometimes belittled and other times accused of pushing themselves to the forefront? What does islamophobia have to do with anti-semitism? Why is there such a furious reaction when people of color demand the abolition of a tradition that is painful for them, such as Black Pete? And why are people from minorities called ‘disloyal’ when they form their own party

Exploitation racism and competition racism

Racism or racial delusions occur in two forms: exploitation racism and competition racism. This distinction comes from my father, the sociologist of Southeast Asia Wim F. Wertheim (NOTE). In Europe, he had experienced firsthand what it was like to be discriminated against as a Jew during his childhood and youth. As an adult in the colonial Dutch East Indies, he was struck by two completely distinct phenomena. He observed how the Indonesian population was exploited using condescending stereotypes, while the Chinese trading minority faced a form of racism that closely resembled the anti-semitism he knew from his youth. He called the first form exploitation racism and the second one competition racism, and he described them at length in his scholarly work. I later elaborated on these differences and organized their characteristics into a framework (see illustration).
The two forms differ in the following respects: the populations they target, the prejudices involved, the motivations behind those prejudices, and the types of violence associated with them.

Different characteristics
Exploitation and competition racism target completely different groups of people, and there is a direct connection with their economic position and the work they do. Consequently, the kinds of prejudices circulated about them differ considerably: they are either seen as contemptible or frightening. The enslaved, the black population of South Africa, the original inhabitants of all colonized countries and the African-Americans in the U.S. were all said to have low IQs ‘by nature,’ and were considered lazy and childlike. Hard labor was supposedly all they were capable of and all they wanted. These derogatory prejudices are completely in line with what they are meant to justify: exploitation.

Being stupid and lazy was the very last thing that could be said about the industrious and successful Chinese trading minority in the Dutch East Indies. On the contrary, they were described as cunning and untrustworthy. Moreover, they were seen as henchmen of the ominous China, which was believed to be striving for world domination. This bore a striking similarity to anti-semitism in Europe, where Jews were also accused of being cunning, disloyal to the countries in which they lived, and seeking world power. As proof, a forged document from the past, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, was presented, in which mysterious gentlemen were said to have made such claims.

Such prejudices, of a more cultural nature, have also been projected onto Muslims in recent decades. To substantiate claims of untrustworthiness and disloyalty, suspicions are raised that they are influenced by the long arms of their countries of origin, referring to their dual passports. And if that is not enough, people selectively draw on their holy scriptures to accuse them of wanting to establish Sharia law worldwide. Again, the prejudices are perfectly in line with what they are meant to justify: in this case not exploitation, but exclusion.

Exclusion in steps
Exclusion begins with the spreading of prejudices about a certain minority, and this is easiest when these people are recognizable in public spaces. When a targeted minority is not easily identifiable, its members are forced to wear an identifying mark: Jews in WWII had to wear a Jewish star and Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina had to wear a white armband. The Chinese trading minority in the Dutch East Indies was recognizable by their appearance, and the same was true of the Indians and Pakistanis in Uganda, who controlled most of the trade during Idi Amin’s reign. The Dutch minority in the Dutch East Indies, with their white skin, were also easy targets for the Japanese occupation forces. Shortly after their invasion, the Japanese had taken over colonial administrative power by force of arms throughout the country. However, they were not yet in possession of the Dutch economic power, which still threatened their hegemony over the archipelago. To break that power, soon after their invasion they began to restrict the freedom of movement of the Dutch.
Being recognized as a category and being subjected to prejudices are often the precursors of actual exclusion from social life. The minority is imprisoned or expelled from the area where competition occurs, and in extreme cases, killed en masse. For example, pogroms occasionally took place against the Chinese in the Dutch East Indies, and Indians and Pakistanis were expelled from Uganda in 1972. The persecution of the Jews in the Netherlands followed a cunning trap mechanism – first they were forced to live in specific districts of Amsterdam, designated by Nazi Germany. Then they were imprisoned in camps like Westerbork, from which transports to the death camps in the East departed. For the Dutch under the Japanese occupation, exclusion also proceeded in stages. Initially, the Japanese internment camps were called ‘protected quarters’ that the internees were allowed to leave during the day, but soon they were hermetically sealed.

Which motivations behind racist prejudice do people prefer to keep to themselves?

When asked about their motives for their racist words and/or actions, are people’s responses really what drives them? Or do their words only reveal part of their motives, while they prefer to conceal the rest?
People who look down on another population group are unlikely to admit how wonderful it feels to be elevated above others, as it boosts their own group’s self-esteem. In cultures and religious communities where the norm is that all people are equal – which is true for the vast majority – you can expect such feelings of superiority to be accompanied by shame and/or guilt. Not respecting your fellow human beings is generally not something to be proud of.
One way to escape this is by looking for more ‘proof’ that those others are indeed ‘lesser.’ Alternatively, the conscience is appeased with the fallacy that feelings of superiority and racism also occur within the discriminated groups themselves.
Something similar might be at play when fearing the competitiveness of another population group. People are likely reluctant to reveal their envy, because envy is effectively taboo in capitalist societies like ours. There is an almost devout reverence for the phenomenon of competition; everyone is expected to fend for themselves, misfortune is seen as your own fault, and the rich owe their wealth to their own efforts. If you envy that, you are considered pitiful.
Moreover, it is better to keep secret the fact that you are jealous of the other group because they are doing so well. Admitting this might weaken your own group’s competitive position. Therefore, it is far more advantageous to proclaim with even greater emphasis that the other group is not to be trusted and poses a danger not only to yourself but to society as a whole.
Finally, designating a scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in a society is generally not something to be proud of either. People who do this are unlikely to acknowledge how they enjoy sharing the conviction with like-minded individuals that a particular group is guilty of all the misery. They are also more likely to go out of their way to find even more ‘evidence’ of that scapegoat group’s guilt. In my years of teaching, I observed how comforting it can be for classes – especially those struggling with internal conflicts – to finally experience a sense of unity when bullying a scapegoat together.

Different kinds of violence
The violence inherent in exploitation racism is entirely different from that in competition racism. Exploitation racism aims to keep the group as a whole healthy and employed, but also compliant and willing to endure the most wretched working conditions. When a few individuals rise up in revolt and threaten to motivate others to do the same, the authorities strive to suppress it by publicly punishing the rebels, making an example of them in full view of everyone else.
In competition racism, the violence is intended to eliminate the entire competing group, making it impossible for them to compete. The competitors must be physically removed, all of them. This can be done by imprisoning them, as happened to the Dutch in the Japanese-occupied Dutch East Indies, by driving the group out of the area, or by killing the members. The latter may start with the killing of a few members, but often escalates into mass killings, pogroms, and, in the case of the persecution of the Jews, total industrial destruction. History has shown that such mass violence can be sparked if frightening stereotypes about a group have circulated long and systematically enough. It is not surprising that the perpetrators of such violence always claim they acted in self-defense: if they had not killed, they would have been killed themselves. Wherever such outbreaks of violence occur, they are always preceded by a stronger emphasis on the outward recognizability of group members, accompanied by a sharper delineation of the group and allusions to their expulsion.
It is noteworthy, incidentally, that in the period immediately preceding the actual killing, contemptuous labels are added to the usual terryfying accusations, intended to dehumanize the prospective victims. This seems to make the killing of fellow human beings easier.

In general, then, the violence in exploitation racism targets rebellious individuals, but there are situations where there have been (and still are) mass deaths. Unlike the violence in competition racism, in these cases, there was no intent to kill the group. The deaths were the result of the ruthless carelessness of those in charge, which of course had everything to do with their contemptuous prejudice against the exploited group.
During the transports of enslaved people from Africa, large numbers often died in the holds of the ships. Rather than putting an end to this abuse, the perpetrators cynically ‘solved’ this problem by fetching more people from Africa. In the

Dutch East Indies, the colonizers were also ruthless with the lives of their exploited subjects. During the construction of the Great Post Road in Java in 1808, they replaced the thousands of ‘coolies’ who died of exhaustion and malaria with new recruits from the surrounding villages. A more recent example dates from 1942/1943, when thousands of Dutch prisoners of war were forced by the Japanese occupation forces to work on the Burma Railway, where thousands died. Even more recently, in 2022, Asian and African migrant workers suffered similar fates during the construction of stadiums for the World Cup in Qatar.

The proportions of exploitation and competition racism shift over time
In all likelihood, exploitation and competition racism occur in all societies. It seems plausible that they, side by side, exert their harmful effects on the minorities living there. But what about their proportions relative to each other? Is there more exploitation racism or more competition racism, and do those proportions change over time? I can only speak to the European situation: here, the proportion of exploitation racism is decreasing, while the proportion of competition racism is increasing.
I predicted this shift in the early 1990s, based on a study of racist thoughts and behaviors in four different adult education institutions in the eastern part of the country. My assignment applied to both students and their teachers, and involved teaching Dutch to Moroccan, Turkish, Kurdish, Tunisian, Libyan, Somali, Eritrean, Ethiopian, Nigerian, Indian, Iranian, Afghan, Sri Lankan, Malaysian, Filipino, Indonesian, Vietnamese, Chinese, Surinamese, Antillean, Yugoslav, Spanish and Australian immigrants, some of whom were refugees. Dutch lessons were also given to Dutch speakers who had not attended school, or who had hardly attended school.
The teachers who gave these lessons had requested this research themselves. They had indicated that they sometimes caught themselves having preconceived, negative thoughts about entire groups from a particular country and were afraid that these thoughts would creep into their teaching. They were also concerned about the annoyance they felt when conflicts arose with certain students and their tendency to hold all the people from that particular country responsible. They had come to this work precisely because they were concerned about the fate of immigrants who had to survive in our society, and the last thing they wanted was to slide into racist feelings and behavior.
During the lessons, I recorded my observations, noting not just spoken language but also facial expressions and gestures. I also conducted extensive interviews with the teachers, confronting them with each other’s statements and asking them to write down their thoughts about them. What struck me most was the teachers’ enormous commitment to their students and their ability to manage groups composed of people from such diverse cultures and languages. They not only seemed to know a great deal about those cultures, but also about the specific challenges the students’ languages of origin presented in learning Dutch. The teachers made an effort to put the students at ease, tried to persuade those in danger of giving up, especially women and illiterates, to keep going, and made home visits when necessary. Most of all, I was impressed by their willingness to reflect on and seek solutions to what they considered to be the pitfalls toward racist feelings and behaviors.

My expectations
When I began the study, I only expected to encounter biases associated with exploitation racism. The considerations provided in the research assignment led me to believe it was mainly a matter of underestimation and low expectations based on the general image people had of the countries of origin. And indeed I found such thoughts and feelings. Teachers indicated that they were discouraged by the slowness of some students. They said they increasingly found themselves blaming shortcomings on opposing forces within the families of origin, especially when the families were Muslim. They also revealed that they had observed quite a bit of condescension among the students themselves, mostly between Dutch-speaking students and what were then still called ‘immigrants.’ For instance, one Nigerian student had been called the n-word, followed by the comment that he was ‘nevertheless nice.’ Such signs of prejudice also occurred between ‘immigrant’ trainees, such as Vietnamese students being laughed at by people from other countries for their pronunciation of Dutch.
What I did not expect to find at all were signs pointing to the prejudices associated with competition racism, such as distrust, fear and envy. Looking back in retrospect, I have to admit that my own prejudices played tricks on me. I saw immigrants from all these different countries primarily as people who deserved compassion, because they were struggling to hold their own in a completely new situation. I expected feelings like distrust, fear and envy only toward groups that had been a minority in another country for centuries, such as the Jews in pre-war Europe, the ethnic Chinese in the colonial Dutch East Indies, or the Indian trading minority expelled from Uganda in 1972. Those minorities lived in countries where they faced the envy of those who moved in the same labor markets and therefore had an interest in discrediting them. But here we were in the Netherlands in the 1990s, and surely no one here could feel threatened by these immigrants, who had backlogs to catch up in every respect and did not even speak proper Dutch. Yet as I continued my research, I came across such signs; they were not many, but they were unmistakably there.

Unexpected signs
To begin with, such signs appeared among the students themselves. Teachers told me that they had expected trainees from various countries, who all shared the same fate, to show solidarity with one another. Instead, they frequently encountered intolerance. This intolerance was evident in taking the best seats during class, negotiating personal benefits when the class schedule shifted, or dividing into class groups. More remarkable were the examples of student behavior that bothered the teachers, not least because the teachers were concerned about their own feelings and thoughts. One teacher said, ‘Iranians provoke conflict and try to make you take sides; they are smart people, often highly educated and sometimes refugees.’ Other teachers who agreed with this statement said that, based on such experiences, they tended to lump all Iranians together or, when something unpleasant happened, they were quick to think, ‘it must be another Iranian.’ Similarly, Somalis were said to ‘pull rank,’ and regarding Eritreans and Ethiopians, teachers noted that you couldn’t just trust them to do their homework when they said they would – you really had to check.
These kinds of observations got me thinking, and I discussed them with my father. In this case, it wasn’t about looking down or underestimating the students, but rather the opposite. These teachers expressed feelings of distrust and perhaps a little fear. Their references to the high education levels of the students who troubled them might indicate a certain envy – after all, not all of these teachers had received a high education themselves. These were small clues and nothing was proven, but it seemed that I had encountered a mixture of prejudices. This pointed to the coexistence of exploitation racism and competition racism. But if in the 1990s some competition racism already coexisted with the long-standing exploitation racism of the colonial era, what would that mean for the future?

My prediction
It seemed most likely to me that by then the children and grandchildren of the migrant workers who had come here in the 1960s would have become educated and thus increasingly able to compete in the labor market with the ‘original’ population. This would lead to having to endure more and more competition racism. At the same time, there would be less and less reason for the ‘original’ population to look down on these descendants, and so the remnants of exploitation racism would gradually disappear. Thus there would be a shift from exploitation racism to competition racism. My father reasoned that was an interesting new thought, which encouraged me to make the following prediction in my research report Scouring Cultures (1993):

What we are currently witnessing and what is likely to continue into the future is that racism against immigrants is gradually shifting away from being primarily about exploitation and increasingly adopting characteristics typical of competition racism. Currently, it can be described as a ‘hybrid form’ of both types of racism. Given this situation, it is reasonable to fear that this trend will persist and that racism will become less mild and more overtly violent.’
Thirty years have since passed, and it appears that my prediction has come true. The biases characteristic of competition racism have grown stronger as more children and grandchildren of both migrant workers and people from former colonies have succeeded – after years of underestimation and opposition – in completing their educations and securing desirable positions in the labor market, public administration, and throughout society at large. Consequently, they have become competitors for the ‘original’ population, including those who are highly educated.
The 2023 report by the Social Cultural Planning Bureau, titled ‘Gevestigd, maar niet thuis’ (‘Settled, but not at home’), surprisingly notes that immigrant children experience more discrimination than their parents. This has been labeled an ‘integration paradox’ because one would expect that these children, who are rooted here, would face less discrimination than their parents, who originally arrived as migrant workers. The report offers interesting explanations for this, such as the second generation feeling more impacted by discrimination because they were born and raised here, consider themselves citizens of this country, and are integral members of society. However, the researchers seem to presume that the nature of racism itself has remained unchanged over the years. In response, I wrote a letter to the NRC arguing that the discrimination faced by the descendants of immigrants has not only changed in character but has also become more malignant:
‘The migrant workers experienced long-standing colonial exploitation racism, characterized by disdainful prejudices that labeled them as stupid and backward. However, their children and grandchildren pursued education and became formidable competitors to the ‘’original inhabitants’’. As these descendants increasingly resembled the ‘’original’’ population, they became more feared. The nature of the prejudices evolved: it became less common to hear them described as “backward.” Instead, accusations grew that they were taking jobs and housing through cunning means, could not be trusted, and practiced a dangerous religion. The second generation faced envy and fear, the driving forces of competition racism, and this is still keenly felt.’

The shift will continue
There is every reason to expect that this shift will continue. When I conducted my research, the long-standing colonial exploitation racism was far from over, and it still isn’t. People of color and descendants from regions perceived as less developed still face contemptuous prejudices. Just consider what is thrown and shouted at soccer players of color, bananas and jungle noises. Additionally, consider the persistent struggle that has been, and still is, necessary to recognize slavery and its consequences in public discourse.’
One might expect the campaign to abolish Zwarte Piet, the servant of Sinterklaas, to be part of this list. However, I believe there’s more to it. Those who fight against this figure were accused of attacking a Dutch tradition, mistakenly labeling it as racist. It was argued that Zwarte Piet was simply a humorous character meant to enhance the Sinterklaas festivities. This situation gave the impression that only exploitation racism was involved – the persistent desire to look down on people of color without remorse. However, the taunts faced by the activists against Black Pete also included accusations of them being aggressive disruptors of a peaceful children’s event. This kind of prejudice is alarming and suggests competition racism. Here, the competition isn’t for jobs or housing but for control over Dutch traditions and exclusive rights to them. The idea that a minority could have a say in these traditions provokes intense envy.
A similar dynamic may be seen in soccer. The jungle noises directed at players of color from the stands may appear to be simple derogation. However, another likely motive is to prevent talented players of color from replacing white players.

Racism takes on a more malignant character
Since the early 1990s, we have witnessed an increase in the prejudices associated with competition racism, such as distrust, fear, and envy. The targets of these prejudices are all groups that are now commonly referred to as ‘residents with a non-Western migration background.’ This includes migrant workers and their descendants, people from former colonies and their descendants, non-Western (labor) immigrants, asylum seekers, and those granted refugee status.’
As a category, these groups are consistently brought up in discussions about “security,” a topic that arises almost daily. Seldomly it won’t be mentioned that they are “over-represented” in crime statistics. However, what is systematically omitted is the fact that ethnic profiling is still widespread, and that these individuals typically have fewer financial resources to secure legal defense in court.
The discussions about migrant workers and their descendants increasingly portrayed them as untrustworthy, alleging that they secured jobs and housing through deceptive means, to the detriment of the ‘original’ population. They were also accused of being disloyal to the Dutch state, supposedly influenced by the ‘long arms’ from their countries of origin, as evidenced by their dual passports. Additionally, they were said to bring Islam in their cultural baggage, from which arose frightening prejudices, such as the accusation that they intended to introduce Sharia law both here and elsewhere. The frequency and intensity of these allegations escalated sharply after some of their co-religionists attacked the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001. Suddenly, they were collectively held responsible and constantly called to account. The prevailing islamophobia took on alarming forms.
Prejudices about Muslims were irrelevant against people from Suriname and the Dutch Antilles and their descendants, but the arsenal of competition racism still held plenty of other biases. For instance, it was claimed that they pushed themselves to the forefront and occupied more space in public life than they deserved. Instead of remaining inconspicuous, they were seen as flaunting their presence. They stand out in soccer, and when they respond to insults in the sport, they are accused of being unable to control their aggression. When they presented an important spokesperson, Sylvana Simons, a member of the Lower House for the Bij1 party, she was repeatedly criticized for being ‘too angry’ when simply explaining her position. Anti-Zwarte Piet activists were also viewed as dangerous for demanding a voice in the Dutch Sinterklaas tradition. Lastly, skepticism about their motives was directed at slavery activists now asserting that slavery deserves a rightful place in the Canon of Dutch History, with accusations that they should not adopt a victim mentality.
The latest to become frequent targets of competition racism are non-Western refugees. They too are accused of obtaining housing unfairly, stealing in supermarkets, and jeopardizing the safety of local residents. These accusations often include barely veiled allusions to their sexuality, which is portrayed as uncontrolled.
Now that prevailing racism has evolved and exhibits more characteristics of competition racism, it is crucial to consider the role of exemplary figures. Individuals ‘with a non-Western background’ who have succeeded in our society are often cited to argue that racism isn’t that severe, or they are highlighted as examples for those who are still striving to succeed. However, as envy has become a significant factor driving racist attitudes, we must not underestimate how praising these exemplary figures might actually stir up envy.
Likelihood of mass violence
A final danger to consider as racism becomes more malignant is the increased risk of mass violence. The violence associated with competition racism targets not just a few rebellious individuals among the exploited, who are made an example to their peers but aims to make it impossible for an entire category of people to compete – either by driving them out of the country or through lethal means, and it can start incrementally. This risk is particularly high for minorities who are visible in public spaces. The current treatment of asylum seekers, not only in this country but across Europe, and the reactions from a significant portion of the populations, raise serious concerns. Fortunately, in recent years, counter-movements have emerged where more people are recognizing these racist mechanisms and are working to prevent this fateful progression. In this effort, I advocate for highlighting not only the form of racism that humiliates groups of people but also the form that harms individuals out of envy.

NOTES: Wim F. Wertheim (1907-1998) was a scholar and activist. He served as a professor at the Batavia School of Law from 1936 to 1942 and as a professor of Sociology and History of Southeast Asia at the University of Amsterdam from 1947 to 1972. His notable works include ‘Evolution and Revolution, the Wave of Emancipation’ (1970) and ‘Third World, Whence and Whither, Protective State versus Aggressive Market’ (1997). From 1965 to 1998, he was a staunch opponent of General Suharto’s 32-year dictatorship in Indonesia, a regime that imprisoned thousands of intellectuals without trial for extended periods. Throughout these years, the Dutch governments did not intervene against Suharto’s rule.
In writing this piece, I benefited greatly from conversations with my granddaughter Lucien Sanchez Van Kammen.