Racial Inequality among the Nephites

What Does the Book of Mormon Say About Inequality? Series

The Book of Mormon contains some surprising insights concerning economic inequality.  This series explores several topics addressed by the LDS scripture and its insights for today.

Skin Color and Racism in the Book of Mormon?

No conversation about the Book of Mormon and racial inequality can escape several controversial passages concerning skin color within the book - so we will address those here before moving on to what I feel is the real message the Book of Mormon history leaves us.

The Nephite civilization was begins with two families who travel to the Americas at the beginning of the book.  Once they arrive in the Americas there was a split between the righteous siblings led by Nephi, and the unrighteous members led by Laman - hence the Nephites and Lamanites.  The Lamanites were cursed, apparently to look different from the Nephites, 2 Nephi 5:21:

And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

The language in this verse and others is very offensive by today's standards, and I believe that if it were translated today this verse would be translated differently to reflect that.  I do not have the expertise and understanding to offer an extensive analysis of these verses here, but I will make two points which I think will help explain what is going on here.

1) I don't think that there was an actual skin color change between the Nephites and Lamanites - but that this change was spiritual and cultural.  With the possible exception of the fact that the Lamanites are culturally described as wild men wearing few clothes and may have actually been darker simply from sun exposure.

2) While the Nephites seem to discriminate against the culture of the Lamanites (for example Enos 1:20), there is no evidence that the Nephites discriminate based on skin color.  When the Lamanites join the church and economic system of the Nephites they are embraced whole-heartily - as in Alma 27, 53, 56; Helaman 6, 13-16; 3 Nephi 2; and 4 Nephi 1.  Thereafter, there does not seem to be any sort of lingering contention between people of Nephite and Lamanite heritage.

3) The implication in the language of some verses which seems to denote a positive value with light skin, and a negative value in dark skin, are not reflected in the history of the Nephites.  The wording is unfortunate, and I do not believe are an intended discussion on race.

Racial Inequality in the Book of Mormon

While the people in the Book of Mormon did not have racial inequalities and discrimination based on skin color, there are racial discriminations based on family line.  The type of racism that matters to ancient Israelites isn't based in the way someone looks, but their blood, and if they come through the correct family line.  Ancient Israel was divided between at least twelve different family lines derived from Jacob's twelve sons in Genesis.  The tribes squabbled and competed, and really only mainly agreed on their discrimination against non-Israelites.

The peoples of the Book of Mormon were comprised of Lehi's family, from the tribe of Manasseh, Ishmael's family from the tribe of Ephraim, the Mulekites - another family who traveled to the Americas - from the tribe of Judah, and leftover Jaredites and other peoples inhabiting the Americas who were non-Israelites.

The Book of Mormon authors make it sound like the Jaredites were completely destroyed, as in every last individual, but this is unlikely since Jaredite names show up among the Nephites long after their recorded destruction.  What the Book of Mormon likely records is the destruction of all the notable Jaredites.  To an ancient Israelite, the only notable non-Israelites are kings and generals, while the rest are not even worth mentioning in the Bible. 

So, if these non-Israelites are not even worth mentioning by presumably righteous prophet-historians, then how were they treated by the Nephites?  Did this affect their economic equality and opportunities?  Were Nephites required in their religion to give their resources to poor non-Israelites?  Did these inequities lead some non-Israelites to war against the Nephites, and is that why Lamanite generals often have Jaredite names?

These questions are difficult to answer without any record of discrimination or inequities along racial lines. However, I should note that if the Nephites strictly followed the Law of Moses, which in many instances says that they did, then non-israelites would not be a part of the economy of the society, and there would be no requirement to aid the poor or other economic requirements we discussed in the article on the Law of Moses.

Then there are racial attitudes between the Israelite tribes - of which there is more evidence for than above.

Back in Israel, the tribe of Judah contained the line of kings governing Israel, while Manasseh and Ephraim had no such benefits.  In the Americas, however, it is always a Nephite that ruled, even after the Mulekites and Nephites combine, with the Mulekites far outnumbering the Nephites.  Even after kings are abolished, the Chief Judges and religious High Priests again seem to be part of Nephi's descendents, and therefore probably part of the tribe of Manasseh, and not Judah.

The envy and malice that may have developed out of this inequity may be part of the envy, malice, and contention mentioned as consequences of inequality and pride cycles.  

It may also be part of the emotion that led to the many Nephite dissensions, especially Amalikiah and the King-men discussed in the post on Dissension and War.  These dissenters desired to have a king, and their leaders are described as "high birth" - which may mean they were from the tribe of Judah (Alma 51:8).  In the Kingdom of Judah, where the characters are from, the tribe of Judah had the right to rule over all of the other tribe members in the kingdom.

Racial inequities may have also played a role in the dissension of the Zoramites, who felt that they were more pure chosen people of God.  Could their feelings of purity have a racial component?  Did they use the racial attitudes to convince poor people to join them in their dissension and remain with them, even though these poor were exploited (Alma 31-35)?

The struggle between Judah and Ephraim/Manasseh may also be what is referred to in Giddianhi's letter to Lachoneus when he says that the conflict between the Gadianton Robbers and the Nephites is so that his people can "recover their rights and government, who have dissented away from you because of your wickedness in retaining from them their rights of government" (3 Nephi 3:10).  Were these dissenters from Judah and upset that they were not kings over the people?

To be sure, the central drive behind the dissensions of Amalikiah, the King-men, the Zoramites, and the Gadianton Robbers was so that a few could become rich by destroying the economically limiting laws of the Nephites - the Book of Mormon makes that clear.  However, I wonder if envy from racial inequities made it easier for a few wicked people to deceive many into dissenting, especially considering that the economic benefits from dissenting really only benefited the few.

In other words, I am saying that perhaps a few iniquitous people used racial feelings developed from some very real racial inequities and behaviors, probably as well as some imaginary or exaggerated ones, to deceive the people into supporting secret combinations, priestcrafts, and dissensions, in the end only make a few people rich, and not to actually resolve any racial issue.


What do you all think?


What Does the Book of Mormon Say About Inequality - Table of Contents