“Antiracism” That Erases Black History

A white actor canceled for depicting black heroes

“ANTIRACISM” THAT ERASES BLACK HISTORY

A white actor canceled for depicting black heroes

Nafees Alam

As a contributor to Free Black Thought, an organization dedicated to amplifying the full spectrum of black intellectual diversity, I often find myself reflecting on how rigid ideologies can stifle the very stories that enrich our shared humanity. The recent short documentary The Storyteller’s Role (produced by the Pacific Legal Foundation) shines a poignant light on this issue through the experiences of Annette Hubbell, a white actress and storyteller whose one-woman play, Women Warriors (based on her book), was canceled by the San Diego County Library System.

What was her offense? Portraying black historical icons like Harriet Tubman and Mary McLeod Bethune alongside white figures such as Harriet Beecher Stowe. Critics accused her of “blackface,” but Hubbell’s account reveals a deeper battle over who gets to tell whose stories, and why such gatekeeping ultimately impoverishes us all.

The documentary, clocking in at just over 8 minutes, chronicles Hubbell’s journey with quiet intensity. She describes her passion for embodying “women of honor and courage, integrity,” drawing audiences into the lives of trailblazers who reshaped history. Hubbell’s approach is immersive: she dons period costumes, adopts accents, and channels the essence of her characters to make their triumphs feel immediate and universal. But when the library demanded she excise the black figures from her performance, citing potential offense, Hubbell refused. “You mean I can only portray women of honor and courage, integrity, if they’re white?” she asks in the documentary, exposing the absurdity of race-based censorship. Backed by the Pacific Legal Foundation, she sued for racial discrimination and breach of contract, eventually securing a settlement that allowed her show to proceed unaltered.

What makes Hubbell’s story particularly resonant is her recent diagnosis with a rare and aggressive form of cancer that she faces with unflinching resolve. Even amid personal hardship, her commitment to storytelling as a bridge across divides remains unshaken. Audience members in the film attest to its impact. This isn’t mere entertainment, it’s a reminder that narratives of resilience (like Tubman’s escape from slavery or Bethune’s advocacy for education) transcend the storyteller’s skin color.

From my vantage point as a brown thinker who values pluralism over purity tests, I see Hubbell’s ordeal as underscoring a troubling irony in contemporary discourse: the weaponization of “cultural appropriation” to police artistic expression, all in the name of fighting racism. Yet this approach often ends up limiting the portrayal of non-white voices and figures, effectively erasing the very heroes and history it claims to protect. Free Black Thought exists precisely to counter such monolithic enforcements, which assume that non-white experiences are so fragile or proprietary that only those with the “right” identity can handle them. But by restricting who can share these stories, we’re not dismantling racism—we’re reinforcing it through segregationist logic disguised as progress.

Consider the stark examples from consumer brands, where “antiracist” campaigns have targeted portrayals of non-white figures while leaving white ones untouched. The Land O’Lakes Native American maiden, Aunt Jemima, and Uncle Ben were all deemed “racist” stereotypes and scrubbed from packaging, ostensibly to honor marginalized communities. Meanwhile, Colonel Sanders and Mr. Clean remain icons without a whisper of controversy.

Is this not the epitome of the racism embedded within “antiracism”? It suggests that non-white representations are inherently problematic or unworthy of celebration, while white ones are neutral or acceptable by default. Such double standards don’t empower, they erase, implying that figures like Aunt Jemima (inspired by real black women who shaped culinary history) can’t be reimagined or honored without offense, but a white fried chicken magnate in a white suit faces no such scrutiny. This selective censorship mirrors the library’s decision to cancel Hubbell: it prioritizes performative allyship over genuine engagement, ultimately depriving society of diverse narratives.

But history’s giants like Tubman didn’t fight for freedom just to have their legacies siloed. As Pacific Legal Foundation’s Joshua P. Thompson aptly puts it in the documentary, “Race is an anachronistic criterion that should be relegated to the dustbin of history.... We are all humans, aren’t we? And we have a shared humanity.” This echoes the universalist ethos of thinkers like Frederick Douglass or Zora Neale Hurston, who celebrated storytelling as a tool for empathy, not exclusion.

Critics might argue that Hubbell’s portrayals risk insensitivity, evoking painful histories of minstrelsy. Fair enough: context matters, and “good intentions” aren’t a blanket excuse. Yet the documentary clarifies that her work is reverent, not caricatured. She immerses herself in her subjects to honor, not mock. The library’s knee-jerk cancelation, without even viewing the performance, smacks of preemptive virtue-signaling that prioritizes optics over substance. As such, it deprives audiences (potentially including children and families from diverse backgrounds) of encountering these heroes in a live, engaging format. Imagine a world where only black actors could play Othello, or only women could direct films about feminism. Creativity would wither under such constraints. And ironically, by limiting non-white portrayals to “approved” tellers, we’re perpetuating the very racial essentialism that antiracism purports to combat.

Broader implications ripple out. In an era of “DEI” mandates that sometimes veer into divisive essentialism, Hubbell’s legal victory is a win for viewpoint diversity. It affirms that art belongs to everyone willing to approach it with respect and authenticity. For voices like my own, this means rejecting the notion that our stories are off-limits to outsiders. Instead, we should encourage cross-cultural engagement to foster understanding. As someone who’s written on the dangers of ideological conformity, I see Hubbell’s defiance as a model: stand firm, sue if necessary, and keep telling the tales that unite us.

Pacific Legal Foundation deserves credit for spotlighting this case, framing it as a defense of constitutional rights against government overreach. Their work aligns with Free Black Thought’s mission to challenge abuses that silence dissenting perspectives, whether in libraries, schools, or public squares. If you’re moved by stories of quiet heroism, spend 8 minutes watching The Storyteller’s Role: it’s a testament to why we must protect the freedom to narrate our collective past, lest we lose the threads that bind us.

---

Dr. Nafees Alam is a professor of social work, holding a PhD from Yeshiva University, and licensed in multiple states. His scholarship focuses on viewpoint and political diversity in higher education and the greater society. His previous articles for the JFBT were “Neo-White Supremacy and the Assumption of Black/Brown Inferiority” and “From ‘Masculinity Can Be Toxic’ to ‘Masculinity Is Toxic’.” He was a guest on the FBT Podcast in September of 2025. Follow him on Twitter/X.