More handpicked essays just for you.
History of racial inequality in america
History of racial inequality in america
History of racial inequality in america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Colorblind racism utilizes non-racial mechanisms as explanatory frameworks for racial inequalities. Colorblind racism is derived of four central frames including: abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and minimization of racism (Bonilla-Silva, 2017). These frames are often utilized interchangeably to explain racial differences while denying the existence of racism. Taken together, these frames are mechanisms that perpetuate racism by active passivity. Abstract liberalism provides the framework for colorblind racism. Abstract liberalism utilizes political and economic liberalist ideas abstractly as an explanation for racial issues (Bonilla-Silva, 2017). Examples of concepts associated with abstract liberalism are individualism and the idea that all people should have equal opportunities, which sound idealistic and innocuous. However, abstract liberalism ignores the racial inequities and structural barriers that prevent equality in areas such as housing, employment, and education. An example of abstract liberalism lies in the “bootstrap mentality” that has been …show more content…
Naturalization perpetuates the belief system that we live in a post-racial society as it fails to acknowledge the historical and structural causes of racism, instead relying on the argument that group norms and preferences are the underlying cause of race related outcomes. Bonilla-Silva (2017) stated that Whites use naturalization as an explanation for neighborhood segregation. Per this logic, neighborhood segregation is a result of individuals and groups choosing to reside in racially homogenous neighborhoods because that is their natural preference, and certain races like to stick together. Naturalization normalizes occurrences that do, in fact, have racial roots. By claiming racial segregation is by preference, Whites can deny the structural and legislative causes for this
examines the effects of the colorblindness approach to achieving a post-racial society. Wingfield, a professor of sociology at Washington University in St. Louis and the author of numerous books and articles concerning racism in America, focuses her research around the effects of the colorblindness ideology on individual cultures and social issues. This article appears in The Atlantic, a left-leaning news source, along with a collection of Wingfield’s other articles, mostly covering issues concerning racism and segregation in America.
Despite the passing of the Civil Rights Act and Affirmative Action, racism evolved from the blatant discrimination of the 1960s like segregation, to the slightly more passive racism of the 1990s such as unfair arrests/jail time (Taylor). Curtis’ writes three decades after the aforementioned progress and yet, looking back on the 90s, there is an alarming amount of similarities between the two.
Even though slavery was abolished Jim Crow laws were made illegal years ago, racism is still not gone, and this is Bonilla-Silva’s central argument in his book, “Racism Without Racists.” While racist practices are not as overt nowadays, the covert, institutionalized ways of today’s new racism are just as discriminatory, he argues. One particular sentence that stood out that sums up the first part of his argument is “that the main problem nowadays is not the folks with hoods, but the folks dressed in suits.” Because of this switch to a more covert way of discriminating against people of color, white Americans have become color-blind to racism. In turn, the country is now home to “racism without racists,” which is the second part of the author’s argument. Because racism has become so internalized in our institutions, it can sometimes be hard to recognize, or at least admit to, the discrimination that is so prevalent in the U.S. Because whites either don’t recognize or admit to this racism, they claim that they don’t see color, and that any inequalities that are at play are due to the minorities not working hard enough in our meritocracy.
Color blind racism is an “ideology, which acquired cohesiveness and dominance in the late 1960s, explains contemporary racial inequality as the outcome of nonracial dynamics,” according to Bonilla-Silva (2). In order to analyze color blind racism, Bonilla-Silva relies “mostly on interview data (11)” through a 1997 Survey of Social Attitudes of College Students and a 1998 Detroit Area Study (DAS) (12). Bonilla-Silva then breaks down the analysis of color blind racism into four central themes to convey how whites explain a world without racial issues: abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and minimization.
Wilkins, Roger. “Racism.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 572 (2000): 159. Sage Publications, Inc. Web. 25 Mar. 2014
The four frames are abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and minimization of racism. The one that I would like to focus on is naturalization. “Naturalization is a frame that allows whites to explain away racial phenomenon by suggesting that they are natural occurrences. “ (Bonilla-Silva, p. 28) Bonilla-Silva goes on to explain that in this frame, people explain that segregation is a natural and conscious choice by everyone. He explains that we gravitate toward people of our own likeness, which is which we are attracted to people who more like us and all of it is backed by biology. The problem with this frame is race is not biological and it is not natural. This frame can reinforce structural racism such as segregation in neighborhoods by saying that segregation is a choice. The fact is, it is only a choice for those privileged enough to move. Those who do not have enough money to move are forced to stay where they are. Segregation is not inevitable. Finally, this frame can reinforce implicit interpersonal because this frame explains racism and segregation as “the way things are” and the way things always have been. Additionally, it’s the thoughts of “they don’t do it, so we don’t do it.” All of these contribute to implicit interpersonal racism because this way of thinking is why people are still surprised to see interracial couples in public. This frame allows for people to try and continue to live in segregated and racist societies that fear change because to them these things cannot change, because it is the way it has always
What has changed since the collapse of Jim Crow has less to do with the basic structure of our society than with the language we use to justify it. In the era of colorblindness, it is no longer socially permissible to use race, explicitly, as a justification for discrimination, exclusion, and social contempt. So we don’t. Rather than directly rely on race, we use the criminal justi...
Sociologists use assimilation theory to examine race and institutions. The perceived deficiencies of minority immigrant groups by white society has resulted in a generalized characterization of these different racial groups that is demeaning and reinforces the negative stereotypes towards minorities in the United States. Knowles and Prewitt argue that the cause behind the racial tension is the historical roots of institutional racism, which has prevented the minority from attaining equality. Following structured social inequality in the United States, institutions have consistently denied the minority groups through discrimination in education, employment, health care and medicine, and politics. Some ways that this has been done is through the use of Jim Crow Laws.
Many people in the United States society believe that people of all cultures, races, and ethnicities are now on an even playing field. People with this belief support their logic with the argument that since equal rights for people of color and women have been required by law for some time now, we are all inherently as equal as claimed in the Declaration of Independence. Many believe that race is no longer an issue, a viewpoint frequently referred to as color-blindness. National polling data indicated that a majority of whites now believe discrimination against racial minorities no longer exists. (Gallagher, 96) Color-blindness allows a white person to define himself or herself as politically and racially tolerant and then proclaim their adherence to a belief system that does not see or judge individuals by the “color of their skin.” (Gallagher, 98) Many Caucasians in particular are of the opinion that because they listen to hip-hop or cheer for their favorite black, professional sports player that they are not racist. Still others believe that because they have a black president, we see black people in the commercial of products we consume, or enjoy television shows with black people that they are actually acknowledging race. In order to examine and dismantle this series of misconceptions, we will turn to the work of various scholars of social justice and privilege, including Peggy McIntosh, Patricia Hinchey and Johnathon Kozol as well as the story of Patricia J Williams. Through a careful examination of these works with the support of some key statistics, it is the goal of this paper to demonstrate the existence of a privileged and unprivileged America, despite the color-blindness many may profess to have integrated into their p...
Racism (n): the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other race (Wordnet search, 1), a controversial topic in today’s society, a subject that many people try to sweep under the rug, but yet a detrimental problem that has been present in America since the colonial era. Will this dilemma come to a halt? Can all Americans see each other as equals despite their skin color and nationality; and what role has it played in past generations versus today’s generations and how will it affect our future? Has this on going way of thinking gotten better or worse? These are questions raised when many think about the subject; especially members of American ethnic groups and backgrounds, because most have dealt with racial discrimination in their life time.
Although discrimination against minorities, such as Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans exists, residential segregation is imposed on African-Americans at a highly sustained level, more than any other racial or ethnic group in American society. “Blacks continue to live apart from whites; of all minorities, blacks are most segregated from whites. ‘They are also more segregated from whites than any other ethnic group has ever been segregated. The most well-off blacks find themselves more segregated than even the poorest Hispanics’” (Swain 214). Thus, it is evident that segregation imposed upon African-Americans subsists at a level that is not comparable to that experience by other minorities.
Naturalization is defined as a racialized phenomena seen as natural occurrences and is usually referenced to nature. One example of how naturalization has shaped my personal experiences is in the way I chose my friends. I would always stick with people from my own race and I didn’t see anything odd in hanging with only people of my race because I would see that other races would do the same thing. I simply brushed it off as a natural thing that we as humans did because we felt accepted and comfortable in our own racial groups. Little did I know that this was an example of racial segregation without the explicit
The United States used racial formation and relied on segregation that was essentially applied to all of their social structures and culture. As we can see, race and the process of racial formation have important political and economic implications. Racial formation concept seeks to connect and give meaning to how race is shaped by social structure and how certain racial categories are given meaning our lives or what they say as “common sense” Omi and Winant seek to further explain their theory through racial
The Association of Black Psychologist (ABP) (2013) defines colorism as skin-color stratification. Colorism is described as “internalized racism” that is perceived to be a way of life for the group that it is accepted by (ABP 2013). Moreover, colorism is classified as a persistent problem within Black American. Colorism in the process of discriminatory privileges given to lighter-skinned individuals of color over their darker- skinned counterparts (Margret Hunter 2007). From a historical standpoint, colorism was a white constructed policy in order to create dissention among their slaves as to maintain order or obedience. Over the centuries, it seems that the original purpose of colorism remains. Why has this issue persisted? Blacks have been able to dismantle the barriers faced within the larger society of the United States. Yet, Blacks have failed to properly address the sins of the past within the ethnic group. As a consequence of this failure, colorism prevails. Through my research, I developed many questions: Is it right that this view remain? How does valuing an individual over another cause distribution to the mental health of the victims of colorism? More importantly, what are the solutions for colorism? Colorism, unfortunately, has had a persisted effect on the lives of Black Americans. It has become so internalized that one cannot differentiate between the view of ourselves that Black Americans adopted from slavery or a more personalized view developed from within the ethnicity. The consequences of this internalized view heightens the already exorbitant mental health concerns within the Black community, but the most unfortunate aspect of colorism is that there is contention on how the issue should be solved.
Racist and racism are provocative words in American society. To some, they become curse words. They are descriptive words of reality that cannot be denied. Some people believe that race is the primary determinant of human abilities and capacities and behave as if racial differences produce inherent superiorities. People of color are often injured by these judgements and actions whether they are directly or indirectly racist. Just as individuals can act in racist ways, so can institutions. Institutions can be overtly or inherently racist. Institutions can also injure people. The outcome is nonetheless racist, if not intentional (Randall).