Nation vs. Race

Apess's "An Indian's Looking-Glass for the White Man" is a religious essay about what Apess called color prejudice and what we call racism today. This may just be a matter of semantics, but I noticed that Apess never uses the word "race" in this essay. I don't know very much about the origins of the word "race," but according to this website, the word originated around 1500. Therefore, the word "race" was used in American writings in the 19th century, but it does not appear once in this essay.

Instead, Apess uses the word "nation" quite a bit, especially in the final paragraph on page 1054. He indirectly says that whites, not Indians, can be charged with "robbing a nation almost of their whole continent, and murder their women and children" and with robbing "another nation to till their grounds and welter out their days under the lash with hunger and fatigue under the scorching rays of a burning sun" (1055). The footnote makes clear that the second quote references "the 'nation' of Africa, many of whose people were brought to the United States as slaves."

Why does Apess refer to Indians and Africans as nations instead of as races? How does this relate back to Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities," and the idea that nations are socially constructed? Sociologists also argue that race is a social construct. Do you agree? Also, when I first read this essay, I thought that Apess's main argument is that people of color are equal to whites and should be regarded as such. However, in this paragraph, he says "Assemble all nations together in your imagination ... Now suppose these skins were put together, and each skin had its national crimes written upon it—which skin do you think would have the greatest?" (1054). Here, and in the quotations above, it seems to me that Apess is implying that other races are morally superior to whites. What do you make of this?

Totally Egregious and Unnecessary but Somewhat Timely Sports Post

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I'm not quite sure that ESPN's upcoming town hall meeting about race and athletes and MLK is historically accurate. Really, I don't remember the "I Have a Dream" speech reading thusly:

"I have a dream. A dream of contract extensions and no trade clauses. A dream of shoe deals and movie cameos. A dream in which black men can be perpetually portrayed as athletes and entertainers--and where they can be subject to extended analysis by snarky white commentators. Oh yes, I have a dream. A dream of a world where all black men have an equal opportunity to make the Top Ten Plays reel. A dream where black women will remain underrepresented in sports coverage of all kinds, and where the WNBA will receive less attention than hockey, which won't be covered at all."

Allow me to employ a sports metaphor to ask: Am I off base here?