Today's concept of fetish stems from two very different modes of analyses — one originally formulated by Marx, the economic or social; the other by Freud, the psychological or personal.
Reducing racial fetishism to the phallic drama runs the risk of flattening out the hierarchies of social difference, thereby relegating race and class to secondary status along a primarily sexual signifying chain".
Fetishism can take multiple forms and has branched off to incorporating different races.
However, Homi Bhabha points out the fact the Freud does not address race and skin in his theories of fetishism, elaborating racial fetishism as a version of racist stereotyping, which is woven into colonial discourse and based on multiple/contradictory and splitting beliefs, similar to the disavowal which Freud discusses.
Bhabha defines colonial discourse as that which activates the simultaneous "recognition and disavowal of racial/cultural/historical differences" and whose goal is to define the colonized as 'other,' but also as fixed and knowable stereotypes.
He is arguing how infrastructures affect the way people interact and view one another.