The 2020 Race Uprisings and Archaeology’s Response 12

Right now, the United States is burning. This is not the first time. It is not the last.

In the wake of yet another social maelstrom caused by the Original Sin at the heart of U.S. history, I’ve been getting emails, text messages, and other requests to help archaeologists articulate a response to these recent events. Our overwhelmingly white industry is wondering what they can do to make a statement against coordinated anti-black violence in a culturally sensitive way. Most of these requests are coming from other university archaeologists and archaeology organizations but a few cultural resource management (CRM) archaeologists have reached out (NOTE: None of the CRMers who reached out to me are principal investigators or company owners. I wonder how CRM companies are not responding? Perhaps CRM PIs know how to adequately respond to coordinated anti-black violence rooted in systemic racism better than black archaeologists do). I don’t mind these requests, but I’ve been overwhelmed.

Archaeology has a race problem. Some of us know it and have been doing something about it.

It’s interesting how the few non-white archaeologists are consistently tapped to address racism in our industry. For years, we have been doing the work with a core group of white archaeologists. A committed group of individuals in the Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA) have been doing anti-racism training since 2015 for a good reason (http://www.succinctresearch.com/archaeology-structural-racism-and-the-seahawks-musings-on-sha2015/). This SHA advocacy came after years of vocal requests from several black archaeologists and I am proud to move this forward. The Society for American Archaeology (SAA) is thinking about thinking about organizing a committee where they can start thinking about ways to talk about racism without offending anyone. Based on their response to sexual harassment amongst their membership, I think it will be years before we se substantive change in the SAA. The Society of Black Archaeologists has joined the numerous tribal historic preservation offices (THPOs) in the United States to do heritage conservation archaeology for non-white sites. This work is inherently anti-racist and is one attempt to conserve non-white heritage for non-white people. We are not alone but we are outnumbered. We are also getting positive results.

Some of us only think about the role archaeology plays in maintaining racism in the United States when the suffering of non-white bodies becomes visible, when non-whites start criticizing their professional organizations, or when white archaeologists can trendjack our deaths and uprisings to increase their own prestige. Some archaeologists only write statements against racism when someone builds an oil pipeline across Indian lands AFTER archaeologists have done a cultural resource management (CRM) evaluation of those same lands without tribal collaboration. They speak out only AFTER Native people start getting arrested. Archaeologists write statements against anti-black violence AFTER black people keep getting killed and we rise up against it. Archaeologists only join forces to take down racist monuments AFTER anti-racism advocates start ripping them down. Some archaeologists think they’re down with the cause but do nothing to change things until somebody else starts doing something or its politically beneficial for them to do so.

Now that things are changing quickly, archaeologists are scrambling to try and figure out our place in the movement. This is when white archaeologists start reaching out to the few non-white ones of us in an attempt to find someone to help them make sense of things and help them feel comfortable that they are not part of the problem (HINT: Most archaeologists are part of the problem).

I thought I’d write down some of my feelings on racism, archaeology, cultural resource management, and the #blacklivesmatter movement so it can stand on the internet for years to come. This way I only have to say this once and you all can backlink to this blog post the next time archaeology tries to wake up to its role in supporting structural racism in the United States:

1. Structural racism is baked into American Archaeology

This has been covered extensively on this blog:

http://www.succinctresearch.com/are-archaeologists-racist-part-i/

http://www.succinctresearch.com/are-archaeologists-racist-part-i/

http://www.succinctresearch.com/does-crm-archaeology-mean-whiteness/

I’m not the only archaeologists who’s noticed this:

https://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2013/10/15/archaeologists-the-whitest-people-i-know/

There is also a wealth of Black Studies literature that adequately explains how institutions, academia, and professionalism support structural racism.

Here’s how American archaeology supports racism:

—>>The monoracial demographics in archaeology have created an uncomfortable space for non-white people that is not conducive to cultivating diversity. It also means Americans only see white people doing archaeology, which is a disincentive for many non-white youth as archaeology is portrayed as a “thing only white people do.” Additionally, archaeology doesn’t pay well and it takes at least 4 years of college to even qualify for an entry-level position. So, it’s hard to convince the few non-white students who make it to college to even think about becoming a professional archaeologist.

—>> When a non-white student does choose archaeology, they get to embody all diversity in their department. They also get to put up with insensitive, racist things from their classmates and professors who degenerate into fragility whenever this is called out. This will continue throughout their career as an archaeologist.

—>>  As professionals, non-white archaeologists will be asked to be all things racial for their company, department, and professional organizations. They will be asked to explain everything about America’s racist society to white archaeologists, who won’t listen anyway, and will be expected to make white people feel good about themselves when confronting issues about race when they arise. They will also have to put up with the fragile responses that inevitably happen when their white colleagues realize they are supporting racism. Archaeologists of color will put up with this because existing power differentials pretty much guarantee we will suffer sanctions if we don’t (for example, missed job opportunities, exclusion, cut networks, getting passed over, labeling [i.e. being that angry black guy], not getting promoted, not getting tenure, etc.).

—>> Non-white archaeologists will care about increasing diversity, so we aren’t so lonely. Fighting racism and increasing diversity will dominate our entire careers.

—>> Meanwhile, white archaeologists will be free to choose to become experts in whatever aspect of archaeology they like, even researching indigenous, ethnic, and non-white groups living in other countries.

—>> These white archaeologists will harden their privilege with degrees, journal articles, books, CRM contracts, grants, and doing more and more projects on their chosen specialty (“prehistory,” Native American, African American, Japanese American, Chinese American, etc.). Rather than cultural affiliation and real-life experience, white archaeologists will use these credentials as “proof” that they know more about non-white people than those people know about themselves. They will demand a seat at the table they created for themselves and will pass these traditions on to their students.

—>> These experts will create seminars, workshops, webinars, online videos, write articles, books, testify in court, and create social media posts about their expertise until they become the voice for a particular aspect of archaeology. All of this will be considered “proof” of expertise. Governments will look to them to be the experts for non-white people, silencing non-white elders. Non-white people will be dependent on white archaeologists to protect their heritage. There will be successes and failures. Rarely will white archaeologists be blamed for failure by other archaeologists.

—>> White archaeologists will also expect to be part of whatever heritage conservation groups non-white people create for themselves and will expect non-white people to recognize their expertise in something they can never experience themselves and barely even understand. They will expect us to give them our cultural knowledge so they can further their own careers but will tell us that it’s to help us save our own heritage. We might have free access to some of their articles and will get to watch them speak for us on TV.

—>> White archaeologists will get angry if anyone challenges them on this.

—>> White archaeologists know they made all of this up for themselves but will pretend that it can also serve non-white communities. Somehow, they will be surprised to learn that their entire life’s work hasn’t made much positive change for non-white people even though most of this work was never even told to anyone outside academia, the SHPO, or other archaeologists.

—>> At the same time, non-white archaeologists will only be expected to be experts on their own race or ethnicity. Their skills and knowledge will be questioned whenever they research subjects white archaeologists have anointed themselves experts. We non-white archaeos will put up with this because we care about our heritage and want to show black people that we can take control of our own heritage. We also want to rewrite what they’ve written. We will try and do this in our own words but will be forced to use their mediums so we can keep our jobs.

—>> We don’t owe white people anything and can do it all for ourselves in our own way, but this will go unnoticed unless we play by their rules. Doing things in ways that jives with our culture (i.e. through oral history, art, dance, and music) will not be considered equal to writing journal articles and technical reports that nobody reads. These forms of conservation are what our communities want but they will not be considered significant to archaeologists. They will not listen when we tell them we care more about them sponsoring a cultural festival or art installation than writing an academic book. They will not change their behaviors accordingly unless it helps solidify their privilege. The wheel of dharma will continue turning.

—>> Then, white and non-white archaeologists will try and recruit students of color into this environment even though many of us know it’s bad. None of us will be able to change this as long as it remains embedded in the existing structure. Non-white students will sense things are not well and black professors will be remiss to find comforting words. Few archaeologists of color will put up with this after our undergraduate years.

—>> Archaeology will continue to wonder why it’s hard to increase diversity but will keep using the same structures designed to maintain inequality because we lack the imagination to try something different. Government agencies and university administrations will not let us change the rules.

—>> Monoracial demographics in archaeology will continue to create an uncomfortable space for non-white people that is not conducive to cultivating diversity…”

Archaeology maintains structural racism because it was born of a racist structure (i.e. pseudoscience, academia, CRM) and we continue to perpetuate these roots. This is why we find it hard to increase diversity in archaeology.

2. Recognize archaeology is built on other peoples’ heritage:

Unless your work is 100% on European American sites that have no nexus with any other race, you are creating black history, Native history, Asian history, Hispanic history, LGBTQ history and all other non-white histories. By not acknowledging this, you are creating white history. Archaeology informs us of the past. Our findings disproportionately impact non-white communities who lack the power to advocate on their own behalves; therefore, it is paramount that white archaeologists always openly and readily recognize that the pasts they are researching are not theirs. It is also paramount that white archaeologists think about the impact their work has on non-white communities, especially CRM.

Thinking reflexively is where I’d like all archaeologists to begin before they embark on any archaeological project. We all need to start thinking about how our research will affect the communities in which we work. Sincerely respecting non-white heritage is the smallest action any of us can do.

3. Most archaeology is not done to benefit American communities, especially non-white ones:

If you read Section 1 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1969 (NHPA), you will get the feeling that this legislation was created to help preserve the threatened materiality of American heritage. It sounds like the goal is to help us remember the past so that we will not be doomed to repeat it. That serving the American public will be behind this “preservation” so future generations will have the places necessary to help them understand their identity in the present and the sources from whence these identities were created.

Somewhere along the line, archaeologists co-opted the preservation process, boiling it down into a professional service that can be contracted to clients for the right price. This is efficient and has led to an explosion of archaeology but has not yet helped conserve American heritage. The NHPA has become a rule book, like the instructions for putting together an IKEA “Billy” bookshelf, that helps clients get a useful “product” that they can use to achieve their development goals.

CRM companies increasingly push universities to teach students how to do CRM as opposed to whatever we’ve been teaching students, but they don’t want us to create an engaged, introspective archaeology oriented toward serving communities. CRM wants us to teach students how to better complete the checklists companies need to comply with laws. Like Mandalorians, CRM companies just want us to teach checklisting because “this is the way.”

The CRM industry doesn’t seem interested in creating CRMers who are community assets— essential professionals that help right the wrongs of the past and help preserve heritage properties. CRM ethics are boiled down to not violating the prime directive of CRM (i.e. don’t do something that could get the company sued) rather than serving the spirit of the NHPA. Companies just want to get a paycheck so they can live to dig another day.

Few companies are following the only financially sound pathway towards building a solvent, profitable, beneficial CRM organization—becoming a preservation-oriented non-profit organized along the lines of a real estate investment trust (REIT). The National Trust for Historic Preservation was launched based on the idea of using property ownership to save buildings, landscapes, and sites for future generations. Similar to English Heritage in the U.K. and the Stadsherstel in the Netherlands, the National Trust uses proceeds from their non-profit REIT, tax-deductible donations, and a special relationship to the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation to further the cause of historic preservation by acquiring new properties, providing trainings, grants, and collaborations. The Archaeological Conservancy uses a similar network of ownership, donations, development easements to protect archaeological sites. These organizations may not always be doing social justice for non-white communities and they have troubles with the narratives they create of the past, but they have shown a financially feasible system for doing the work elucidated in the NHPA. This is a proven model that CRM companies could use to get around the incentive to race to the bottom.

Companies could acquire property, leverage preservation tax benefits, help create preservation-minded zoning incentives, and use the income from their properties to fill the revenue gap that happens when you are between projects. CRM companies could also refuse to do work for the lowest possible cost because they have the $ to keep the company solvent until the right client comes along, or could focus on design, policy analysis, and real estate investment. These preservation-oriented companies could use archaeology to highlight the company’s commitment to communities, research, and preservation. They could also use a portion of revenues to lobby legislators to maintain, strengthen, and expand preservation regulations. Not only does this generate different sources of revenue it also unlocks a range of different tax deductions for CRM companies. There is nothing that prevents CRM companies from transitioning away from being “service providers” to being true heritage conservation organizations. There is also nothing that keeps non-white communities from doing this for themselves.

I only know one CRM company that is doing anything remotely related to this. If you know of any others, please write it in the comments below.

CRM disproportionately neglects non-white communities because the people living in those neighborhoods and communities are rarely the ones doing the historic property surveys and rarely get to comment on the ways these projects will adversely affect their communities. White neighborhoods can fight back with lawyers. The rest of us can’t afford this defense. Our heritage sites get bulldozed after a couple of excavation units are dug by white archaeologists who didn’t even hire anyone living in that community to help “mitigate” the site.

Sometimes, CRMers just hide behind technicalities to blow off non-white concerns. The DAPL, African Burial Ground, and Port Angeles Graving Dock projects are among the most vivid examples in recent memory but, each week, hundreds of non-white historic properties get written off or “mitigated” by white archaeologists. Unless you’re working in California or on a reservation with a THPO, non-white people are almost never paid to do the archaeology on their own sites or even asked to provide input. Native Americans present a unique case as CRM legally recognizes the fact that their heritage sites continue to be screwed by structural racism. A “special relationship” between the government and tribes (i.e. minimal recognition that they were robbed of their ancestor’s graves) means they get a cursory nod when it comes to their heritage properties. They are the only ethnic/racial group that consistently gets this “special” consideration, which is actually the tiniest step towards recognizing white supremacy. The rest of us have to fight it out in the courts without any durable legal nexus.

4. (Re)interpret existing sites for today’s people:

There is a movement advocating for removing monuments to America’s racist past. We should not do this.

Removing racist monuments only erases a piece of our history. It also makes it easier for white people to forget their origins, lets them show that they’ve “moved on” from the past, and can trigger white fragility when we remind them about these monuments. We don’t want to get over the past. We want to make a better future. This can’t happen if we forget what our ancestors did to build this world.

Rather than removing these monuments, we need to keep them in place and (re)interpret them. Let Native tribes handle the interpretation of Little Bighorn. Let black people interpret Confederate monuments. Let LGBTQ people commemorate Stonewall. How about we fund Japanese American’s interpretations of internment camps, Native Hawaiians commemoration of Russian fur trading sites, or Chinese Americans interpretations of what the Transcontinental Railroad means to them? In the case of the most racist monuments like Confederate statues, we should let the communities who descended from those harmed in the past execute the entire (re)interpretation of these sites however they wish. We tear down existing monuments as long as descendant communities get to build a new one in its place; new monuments to persistence, survivance, culture and America’s heritage.

We should let these (re)interpreted sites stand and invite criticism and wonderment over the accuracy, truth, appropriateness, or ethics of the new narratives non-white people spray paint over the top of white history. These criticisms from white experts will let us all know who is with us and who is not. It’s easier to keep from getting bit by a rattlesnake you can see than one that remains concealed in the grass. Let the new histories we tag all over these racist monuments help reveal the rattlesnakes hiding in the grass all round us.

We should also not approve any more CRM reports that do not include input from local elders, regardless of race, ethnicity, or culture. And, CRM budgets should always have money to pay elders for their cooperation regardless of ethnicity, race, religion, or deviation from the mainstream. No more “prehistoric” archaeology reports without tribal input. No more sharecropper sites written off without black elders making a contribution. No more “Overseas” Chinese mining sites evaluated without Chinese American elders telling us how their ancestors lived on those sites. No more Hispanic farmworker sites without those farmworkers’ children telling us what their parents went through. Better yet, allow all relevant local communities to contribute as most sites are multivalent and have overlapping claims.

No more CRM without community input. I know its going to cost more to do this but you should think about passing on the costs on to our clients like they pass the costs of living with their “development” to our children.

5. Heritage conservation not cultural resource management: CRM is predicated on the management of “historic properties,” which are bounded geographic locations with 3-dimensional attributes connected to narratives (i.e. interpretations of past events) that are considered significant by qualified professionals. There is little room in typical property assessments for intangible aspects of historical properties. Also, forces CRMers to confirm veracity of narratives which disproportionately rely on documents not created by non-white communities.

When evaluating non-white historic properties, CRMers could draw upon the guidelines established for for assessing traditional cultural properties (https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB38-Completeweb.pdf). TCPs are not a new type of historic property but rather a reorganization of the NRHP criteria in such a way that we can better take traditional knowledge into account. National Register Bulletin 38 provides a wider scope that features local knowledge in hopes of creating more holistic interpretations of historic properties. Thinking about non-white sites as being similar to TCPs provides space for vernacular interpretations and narratives. The key is to start thinking about non-white historic properties outside the “carved-in-stone” methodologies CRMers use most of the time. Conducting field visits with local elders, actually consulting with local folks, and reconciling vernacular and archaeological data are all things that will help CRM serve communities.

(I know. I know. I know, what you’re thinking, “CRM companies are not the ones who are supposed to be consulting with affected communities. That’s the lead agency’s job. We might get sued if we talk to folks on our own.” My response is: What good is cultural resource management if you aren’t helping communities preserve their heritage? Isn’t CRM rooted in the idea that the, “…historical and cultural foundations of the Nation should be preserved as a living part of our community life and development in order to give a sense of orientation to the American people”? And, “…the preservation of this irreplaceable heritage is in the public interest so that its vital legacy of cultural, educational, aesthetic, inspirational, economic, and energy benefits will be maintained and enriched for future generations of Americans”? If your contracts prevent you from reaching out to tribes or non-white communities while on the job, what’s keeping you from doing that when you are not under contract? Why can’t you fulfill your ethical obligations to American heritage by reaching out to non-white communities BEFORE you land a contract in their traditional use area? How come you all have to be paid before you’ll try and fulfill the spirit of the NHPA?)

UNESCO’s convention safeguarding intangible cultural heritage is another way CRMers could start looking at sites valued by people they don’t understand (https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention ). Going this deep into the ocean would require CRMers to think even more like anthropologists and would strain historic preservation regulations even further but is a possible framework for applying intangible attributes to TCP-style historic properties. The entirety of this Convention cannot be applied using the NHPA but the idea of saving spaces where traditional festivals, practices, and beliefs take place helps recognize the value intangible practices have to many local communities.

6. It is not up to archaeologists of color to help white archaeologists learn how to think about structural racism in archaeology: The few non-white archaeologists you know are probably getting worn down having to help all of archaeology adequately respond to the structural racism imbedded in our country. CRM and academic archaeology are products of this system. Archaeology is economically, structurally, paradigmatically, and legally dominated by white archaeologists. Therefore, it is not up to the 4–5% of non-white archaeologists to fix a system created by and for the other 95%.

I know several of us have been telling y’all what needs to change since before I became an archaeologist and things still haven’t dramatically changed. Now that a few of us started our own organizations and are getting recognition for doing good things for our own black, Native, and other non-white communities you all are sending cold call emails asking us to edit your public soliloquies on standing against racism just to make sure you aren’t offending any of us? Someone who is already doing anti-racism work shouldn’t need to cold call people in the directories of their professional organization to find a black friend. If you were doing the work, you’d already have black friends.

All it took was a nationwide race uprising for you to tell the world that you stand against racism? What were you doing for the rest of your career? The fact that you haven’t increased diversity in archaeology for a decade kinda tells us all we need to know about how you feel about inclusion, diversity, and racism. A race uprising is not the time to demonstrate you are not racist because by the time that happens, you’re too late. Your message has already been sent.

If you’re putting in work, you shouldn’t need to make a statement against racism because those who know you and your work already know where you stand. As soon as this started going down, every CEO, chancellor, university president, organization head, sleeping bag manufacturer, airline, and church started writing public declarations saying they were against racism, felt sorry for black people, and were committed to #blacklivesmatter. All of these statements are just ad campaigns unless we see some real change in these organizations.

White archaeologists: actions speak louder than words. Your online statement is just window dressing if you haven’t been doing the work. And, if you haven’t been doing the work we will see through your words.

Don’t be afraid to discover you are part of the problem. That knowledge can be a powerful motivation to help you move in a different direction. Don’t be afraid of making a statement that reveals how little you know about race and race relations. If we don’t like what you say, we will set you straight in a way that you will never forget. Think of it like having a trial by fire, you’ll get burned but fresh, green growth will come from the experience

What if you truly want to take a stand against racism?

There are a lot of problems in archaeology and you don’t have to feel like you need to help change them all. However, some problems are worse than others (for example, the lack of diversity, persistence of sexual harassment, stealing cultural knowledge for personal gain, using privilege to gain more privilege, economic precarity, inequality, and more). Those are the ones we need all hands on deck to handle if we want archaeology to be relevant to American society.

Addressing structural racism in archaeology is one of those problems. We can’t have bystanders because none of us are innocent.

If you know we have a problem and want to help, here are some suggestions:

—Acknowledge when you appropriate non-white cultural knowledge in your research. ALWAYS tell other people that you have been allowed to hear a portion of the knowledge of others and are simply doing your best to understand what they are telling you. This even goes for “prehistoric” sites because, most of the time, archaeologist interpret these sites without even asking the site’s creators’ descendants what it means to them. (FYI: Human understandings of time are relative and subjective. For millions of people, time is cyclical and happening on multiple plains of existence which means the past and future are happening in the present. There is no separation between prehistory, history, and the present. Native people are not gone. Slavery, Jim Crow, internment, and anti-LGBTQ violence is not over. This stuff started in the past and still exists in the present. The goal is not for us to get “over it.” Our sites have not been “abandoned;” we don’t need to own a property for it to be “our” heritage. These sites still have a role to play in the present so we can make a better future for ourselves. And, that role is not just to help provide a historical context for the NHPA or corroborate a carbon-14 date.)

—Actions speak louder than words. Embody anti-racism before you start talking about being an anti-racist. We are watching and we’ve been told you’re down with the cause many times. Then, we’ve watched you recruit more white students, keep hiring all white CRM crews, and write articles on our heritage without even acknowledging us. Do what is right.

—Listen to non-white communities before you speak. Without talking, just sit back and listen. If non-white folks are talking, you are lucky to hear what we have to say because we don’t tell you the truth very often. (Actually, we never tell you the real truth. The real truth is ours to know and we only share this with our friends, family, and other folks who know the struggle. You won’t hear real truth unless you are one of our friends and family. But, if you’re lucky we will let you hear a version of the truth that you can handle.)

It’s not a dialogue. It’s a lecture. We teach; you listen. Then, we hope you learn.

This goes for all of this newfound anti-racism floating around on the internet. Did someone in the non-white community ask you to write a statement of commitment to diversity? Did we ask you to speak on our behalf? Did you ask us if you should publish a YouTube video on our heritage? If not, your words are really only lip service for other white archaeologists. We are watching your actions not your words.

—Change your actions based on what non-white community members told you they need. If you’ve been listening, you probably know what we need: 1) jobs, 2) money, 3) political power, 3) connections to jobs, money, and/or political power, 4) space to make our own decisions, and, sometimes, 5) someone to have our back when we push for change. If you really want to help, think about how you can provide at least one of those things. We don’t need more talk, thoughts, advise, smiles, hugs, or hopes and prayers.

—Hire non-white archaeologists. It’s hard to increase diversity when you don’t hire anyone but white people to do archaeology. Most CRM projects do not require SOI-qualified field technicians. How hard would it be to hire black youth and teach them how to survey or dig shovel probes? You already complain that us professors don’t teach our students what they need to do CRM. If you’ve already got to teach them everything, why not start at ground zero with some non-white kids who are looking for a job? Don’t be afraid. Black people are just like everyone else. We think archaeology is cool but don’t know if it’s a viable career. Show black youth they can do CRM.

—Create a scholarship, grant, or fellowship for non-white archaeology students. Paying black people to do archaeology is one of the surest ways you can increase diversity. Non-white students have huge hurdles to overcome but they’re more likely to put up with the silent racism in anthro departments if they’re getting paid.

—Create a program to recruit and train archaeologists of color. Once a student gets their first taste of archaeology and is close to finishing an anthro degree, help them get their foot in the door. Then, create a feedback mechanism for them to tell you how “woke” you and your company really is. Most importantly, don’t get all fragile if the response is not what you expected.

—Pay non-white people for their time and efforts when we help you build a historical context for your CRM assessment. No more interviewing elders at the black history museum and adding that to your historical context for free. Next time, bring cash.

—Go out of your way to hire non-white businesses. Make an effort to hire backhoe operators, GIS specialists, insurance agents, payroll companies, landscapers, editors, illustrators, publishers, researchers, etc. the next time you have a project. If you cannot find these individuals, that tells you a lot about the economic environment where your offices operate.

—Open your next CRM office in a non-white neighborhood. We know offices in the tech parks shield you from discomfort, but redlining is the reason why there aren’t any jobs in black neighborhoods and on reservations. Get out of your comfort zone. Get out of the suburbs. Go off campus.

—Offer assistances to tribes and non-white communities pro bono. And, don’t be sad if they turn you down. Archaeology has not been kind to non-white people. Not everyone is going to be your friend or forget past slights. Don’t let that keep you from trying.

—Know that credentials, qualifications, and education limit diversity. These structures were designed to bolster inequality in the United States. Either change the system or change your hiring/recruitment systems.

—Know that increasing non-white archaeologists is just one step. Just because you have black friends does not mean you are no longer racist. Anti-racism is a lifelong process just like racialization is lifelong. This will take generations to break down just like it took generations to build.

—Know that racism hurts white people too. Black people are the ones disproportionately being killed by the police, but white people are also harmed in a different way by the racist society in which we live. Please, research how racism is hurting you too.

Basically, listen first, think reflexively, then put your money where your mouth is.

My rebuttal to your rebuttals to my recommendations

–Rather than accusing me of reverse discrimination, think about what you’re doing to fight structural racism in archaeology. If you are just reading blog posts, do something to fight structural racism.

–Rather than saying “We hire the most qualified applicants and comply with equal opportunity laws,” understand those laws and qualifications are at the heart of structural racism as they support the status quo and reduce the likelihood that you will hire archaeologists of color. Change your hiring systems and do something to fight structural racism.

–Rather than saying, “It’s hard enough to get into archaeology. Why should we privilege students of color?,” look at yourself in the mirror and think, “Would I be saying that if I weren’t white?” If the answer is “no,” don’t say it anymore and do something to fight structural racism.

–Rather than saying, “I’ve got too many things on my plate to do something about this,” watch the video of George Floyd’s execution again. If that sparks any sort of sympathetic response, do something to fight structural racism. (If it doesn’t, you should find a psychiatrist.)

–If you think I am asking too much and still believe you are not racist, you should think again. Then, do something to fight structural racism.

Deep in my heart, I do believe…

Archaeology can be part of the immersion therapy the United States needs to address the terrible way we all came into being. Breeding black people for labor. Committing genocide against Native Americans. Exploiting European immigrants, Hawaiians, Chinese, and Hispanics for generations. Putting Japanese Americans in concentration camps. Beating women with clubs just because they wanted to vote. Killing gay people because their existence upsets the way you think the world should be. We are the descendants of all those people. They are our relatives. They are our ancestors. Their deeds echo in the present.

American archaeology is one institution that lays all of this bare for us to stare at with naked eyes and swelling hearts. Those who support white supremacy are the ones who are afraid to face this reality. They don’t want to know how they got power. They don’t want to think that their house is built upon a thousand broken backs. They don’t want to think about how their ancestors lied, cheated, stole, and killed so they can do the same things to black and brown bodies. They don’t want to think about the fact that they are still doing that today. Most importantly: They don’t want to give up their privilege. It is very clear that they will burn down their own country rather than live as equals alongside their non-white neighbors. We’ve been telling you this for centuries.

As a nation, we must recognize where we came from if we are ever to stamp out the inequality, racism, and sexism in the future. We have to grieve over these pasts and start thinking about how all of this has twisted and perverted the way we see ourselves and the world. We cannot move towards justice as long as we keep lying to ourselves and avoiding the pain. After the grief and the tears comes the emotional release and healing that lies in the knowledge that we are not them. We are better than they were. Together, we can make a better world for our children.

Now that you’ve read this far, you need to know that white archaeologists can be allies to non-white archaeologists. Our situation is not hopeless, but we will not eliminate structural racism in archaeology without white archaeologists.

I have to give a shout out to all the white archaeologists who helped me along the way. Since I didn’t have a black archaeologist as a mentor or professor until I was almost done with graduate school, I wouldn’t have gotten where I am today without the sincere, dedicated help, advice, and mentorship of white archaeologists. The white archaeologists out there who helped me were fighting racism and helping make archaeology more diverse. Some of these folks helped me because they were committed to diversity in archaeology. Others helped me because they had to. A bad CRM archaeologist on your crew is like a lead weight that can sink a project. Some white folks helped me so I wouldn’t hurt their project. Either way, my career has been furthered from the concerted efforts of white archaeologists for nearly 20 years. I’m not going to name any names but those who helped me have shown their commitment to fighting racism and increasing diversity in archaeology. I am here to help you further this commitment.

However, the actions of our universities, professional organizations, government agencies, and CRM companies show me most archaeologists do not care about diversity. They do not want to break down systemic racism. This blog post is uncomfortable for them to read because talking about race and interacting with non-white people makes them feel uncomfortable. It makes them remember. It makes them think. White fragility makes these archaeologists avoid discomfort. But they don’t want us to think they are racist or complicit in structural racism so they will use online statements, forums, conference presentations, webinars, and other truthiness to make it look like they are against structural racism. They say the lack of diversity in archaeology is a bad thing but don’t really want it to change because the presence of non-white bodies in archaeology threatens their privilege and expert status. I see this every day through their (in)actions and words.

Regardless of how many solidarity statements we are writing these days, I truly doubt most of the archaeologists writing them will change their behavior enough to make archaeology a truly anti-racist enterprise. If they did, things already would be different today.

Rather than saying #blacklivesmatter on the internet, change your behavior to show black people that our lives matter. Change your behavior and show us that non-white heritage matters to archaeologists.

This blog post reflects the experiences, thoughts, and feelings of the author alone. It does not reflect the sentiments and/or actions of the University of California, Berkeley, the Society of Black Archaeologists, the Archaeology Podcast Network, any other archaeology organization of which the author is a member, or all non-white archaeologists in general.

Write a comment below or send me an email if you have anything to say. Otherwise, start fighting structural racism.

Having trouble finding work in cultural resource management archaeology? Still blindly mailing out resumes and waiting for a response? Has your archaeology career plateaued and you don’t know what to do about it? Download a copy of the new book “Becoming an Archaeologist: Crafting a Career in Cultural Resource Management” Click here to learn more.

Check out Succinct Research’s contribution to Blogging Archaeology. Full of amazing information about how blogging is revolutionizing archaeology publishing. For a limited time you can GRAB A COPY FOR FREE!!!! Click Here

“Resume-Writing for Archaeologists” is now available on Amazon.com. Click Here and get detailed instructions on how you can land a job in CRM archaeology today!

Small Archaeology Project Management is now on the Kindle Store. Over 300 copies were sold in the first month! Click Here and see what the buzz is all about.

Join the Succinct Research email list and receive additional information on the CRM and heritage conservation field.

Get killer information about the CRM archaeology industry and historic preservation.