Asian studies: regional cultures and contemporary issues

Racism Without Racists

There is a marked contradiction in the perceptions on racism in American society. In his book Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva investigates how such detailed system of inequity continues to exist, even as many Caucasians insist that society has progressed, to an extent that racism is no longer an issue. The author further investigates how Caucasians are able to both assert their social dominance, even as they create a facade highlighting their own supposed color-blindedness. The effect of this fake color-blindedness, says the author, is to actually dismiss.

Bonilla-Silva builds his study on two surveys, one with 627 college students from different areas of the country and the second with 400 Detroit area residents. Bonilla-Silva then conducted follow-up interviews with the survey participants. The respondents in Racism Without Racists are limited to Caucasians and African-Americans, a limitation that the author himself acknowledges. Perhaps the silver lining to this limitation, however, is that the reader is able to focus more readily on the animosity that many African-Americans harbor against whites. Conversely, white respondents to Bonilla-Silva's writings also show that many whites exhibit distance, misunderstanding and sometimes hostility against black people.

According to Racism Without Racists, white people are able to create such "color-blind racism" by re-articulating key values of traditional liberalism -- such as individualism, meritocracy and a strong work ethic. However, these values are employed towards goals that are far from liberal in nature. Bonilla-Silva asserts that it is useless to evaluate racism in American society based on the intents and affective disposition of the players. Instead, the author argues that a person's material interests should be the basis for understanding a person's attitudes towards race.

To shore up this argument, Bonilla-Silva points to survey results and interviews showing that the people located towards the bottom of the racial hierarchy -- meaning African-Americans -- tended to be the most opposed to racism. On the other hand, the people who benefit from the "wages of whiteness" are the ones who defend or simply passively accept that society is now colorblind, or that white people rightfully hold privilege. Furthermore, there is a schism in how people view racism's roots. For many white people, racism is an expression of an individual's racial hostility. Many minorities, however, view racism as being systemic or embedded in social institutions.

This dichotomy makes it even more difficult to come to an understanding regarding the roots of racism.

The author argues that color-blind racism is articulated through four interpretive frameworks. White people who employ the framework of abstract liberalism attempt to seem reasonable, only to turn around and argue against programs that are aimed at addressing the de facto racism that continues to pervade society. A person falling under this category, for example, could oppose bilingual education, on the grounds that children should learn to communicate in English. This argument ignores, however, that many children need language resources and additional tutorial in order to fully benefit from their public school education.

There is another camp that argues that racial inequality is natural, that it is the way things have always been. In combination with abstract liberalism, this framework forms the basis for arguments that American society is characterized by a meritocracy, that it is the most qualified members of the group who are able to rise to the top.

Again, this argument ignores sociological factors, such as how many jobs are obtained through access to social networks.

Finally, many Caucasians also employ the language of cultural racism as a method of minimizing the continuing effects of racism in American society. The role of institutional or systemic racism in addressing discrimination against African-Americans, for example, is minimized when white people charge that blacks exaggerate in attempt to cover up their own indolence or lack of intellectual prowess.

These frameworks are used as a basis for different styles of being racist, even while a person expresses pure color-blindedness. People employing an abstract liberal framework, for example, would see themselves as true, color-blind liberals. However, they are also likely to oppose programs such as affirmative action and similar programs designed to ameliorate the lives of those who struggle with the effects of racism. Bonilla-Silva focuses on black-white relationships, but such styles are also seen in the actions of groups like Asians Against Affirmative Action. Many members of this group profess sympathy for minorities like African-Americans and Hispanics, but their lawsuits against school admissions committees that look at race as a decision factor belie their claims of color-blindedness.

The naturalized style is evident in arguments of groups that look at supposed natural abilities and intelligence. People who argue that African-Americans are "naturally better" at music and athletics might not consider themselves racist, and see themselves as being descriptive. This is the same case with people who believe that Asians and Asian-Americans are whiz kids who are naturally better at math. Such language, however, masks how people are actually articulating racist ideals.

Cultural racism can be seen in the attitudes that many commentators have espoused towards Arabs and Arab-Americans, especially in the post-September 11 era. There were a flurry of allegations, that the Islamic religion itself is evil, that Arabs intrinsically hate the United States and "our" way of life. There is a great deal of polarizing as well in this formulation, since Arab-Americans were not seen as part of "us."

It is interesting to note how Bonilla-Silva depicts how people often downplay their own racism by shifting the blame to the supposed cultural inferiority of the minorities in question. Whites state that they feel "isolated" from black people, for example, and quickly point out that it is the fault of black people, who were supposed to constantly talk about race. Similarly, many of those who say that they are uncomfortable with Arabs or Arab-Americans point the finger at the minorities. They are seen as inferior, because of their religion or practices. Or they supposedly call attention to themselves, as seen in their ways of prayer and their method of dress. These statements are often heard from people who state that they strongly support civil liberties. Unfortunately, they do not show this support when faced with a situation that may undermine their privilege.

The racial storylines, reminds Bonilla-Silva, span both sides of the equation. Many white people excuse their culpability in de factor racism by asserting that they did not own any slaves. There is also a lot of blaming and scapegoating, as seen in white respondents who assert that "I did not get the promotion because of a black man." similar example often points to model minorities, such as Asian-Americans. If they could overcome racism and succeed, why can't the other groups? Often, as many sociologists have shown, such statements are based on stereotypes rather than facts.