Uncle Tom

Why is this regarded as a reprehensible racist term? Agreed it is a slur, but is it not usually directed at a small segment of the black population who are perceived to have abandoned the mainstream black political objectives in favour of assimilation into the population at large?

Does the term “oreo” qualify as a reprehensible racist term as well?

grienspace: Agreed it is a slur, but is it not usually directed at a small segment of the black population who are perceived to have abandoned the mainstream black political objectives in favour of assimilation into the population at large?

AFAICT, no. It isn’t about “assimilation” so much as “kissing up”. A black person who simply assimilates into the population at large, with little or no concern for “mainstream black political objectives” (whatever those are), wouldn’t be an “Uncle Tom”. On the other hand, a black person who deliberately plays up to white racism for his/her own political advantage, denigrating and shunning other black people in order to feel superior, is an “Uncle Tom”.

Sure, the term can be applied very loosely and inaccurately: there are some extremists who would automatically call, say, any black Republican an “Uncle Tom”. (Which is probably why the term is now often considered inherently racist and offensive.) But IMO, the original point of the epithet isn’t to reproach mere assimilation or apathy. It’s more about actual selfish betrayal of one’s own people.

(BTW, this usage is IMO actually kind of unfair to the original “Uncle Tom”, the eponymous hero of Harriet Beecher Stowe’s novel. The slave Tom was a dedicated Christian who preached love, resignation, and non-violence, even when dealing with brutal and evil oppressors. His love and sacrifice for some of his own white owners, who mostly didn’t treat him all that well in return, have provoked a lot of disgust in readers who see him as a weak, cowardly “good darky” trying to curry favor with whites. But actually, Tom was a very principled and even heroic person, who rebuked the cruelty of the evil Simon Legree and refused to betray runaway slaves to him, even though Legree ended up killing him for it. Tom’s clinging to mere “passive resistance” was understandably distasteful to the more militant feelings of the civil-rights era, but I think he got kind of a raw deal by having his name attached to self-loathing butt-kissers.)

As to “oreo”, ISTM that it’s pretty much synonymous with “Uncle Tom”, so yes, I would think that if the one epithet is considered offensive, the other would be too.

Uh, yeah. Offensive all around. Why wouldn’t it be?

The term also maligns the heroic title character in Harriet Beecher Stowe’s anti-slavery novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin who pays with his life when he refuses to betray the whereabouts of runaway slaves.

is it not usually directed at a small segment of the black population who are perceived to have abandoned the mainstream black political objectives in favour of assimilation into the population at large?

Do you have specific instances where a given black person used the term “Uncle Tom” in reference to another black person because that person favored assimilation into the population at large? I’ve never heard of such usage. I doubt that it’s ever happened.

Besides being vague and lacking support, the OP also makes some problematic assumptions:

That the political objectives of the majority of black Americans oppose assimilation into the population at large.

That the absence of assimilation by blacks into mainsteam US society is primarily the choice of blacks.

Both assumptions are patently false. The political objectives of the majority of black Americans are not significantly different from those of other Americans. Black Americans usually vote Democrat, but there’s nothing non mainstream about that. Black Americans usually support a substantial social saftey net, but then again, so do huge numbers of white voters, especially in states like Minnesota and Massachusets. No proof that black American political objectives are in opposition to mainstream US society. No proof at all.

If you had a few years worth of free time, you could make it part of the way through the mountain of studies documenting the persistence of discrimination in the job market, in housing, in the justice system. Black Americans typically want to assimilate into mainstream society (at least until they become embittered by the racism they encounter).

It’s white Americans, generally, who object to assimilation - that is, they are usually the ones who object to blacks moving into non black neighborhoods, going to non black schools, not to mention interracial marriage. The widespread opposition of whites to black assimilation is well documented in recent history. This opposition continues, though it no longer has the force of law behind it.

It’s rare for societies and cultures to change overnight. A nation that was adamantly white supremacist for three centuries, like the pre WWII US, is not likely to become race neutral in the space of a few decades.


The term “Uncle Tom” has generally been used for black Americans who seek to better their own individual circumstances by ingratiating themselves with powerful whites, at the expense of principle and the interests of the black community as a whole. In effect, it’s calling someone a traitor. Sometimes the term is apt, sometimes not.

Sometimes, ingratiating oneself to powerful whites has been a neccessary evil. It’s easy enough to show your pride and speak your mind if no one has a noose around your neck. With a gun to your head, it’s a different story. So black Americans of a younger generation will sometimes characterize black leaders of earlier generations as “Uncle Toms” because, by modern standards, they compromised too much with racist whites. It’s an issue that comes up in the history and literature of oppressed peoples. How much compromise is too much? Should you place a higher value on self respect or simple survival.

Because the term, “Uncle Tom,” is so emotionally loaded, it really has no place in political discourse. It’s an appeal to emotion rather than intellect.