"I'm Not a Racist But..." The Moral Quandary of Race

What is Racism?

Blum's book is an excellent guide to discussing race and racism. He writes clearly, is sensitive to the emotional reactions of the reader, and critically examines alternate points of view. While this would make any scholarly work "good," for this topic this especially important. Blum is in many ways "speaking the unspoken" when he writes of beliefs and opinions many are fearful to even raise for discussion and challenge.

Blum begins by noting that the word "racist" is overused, resulting in an all-or-none style of thinking in which someone is either guilty of racism or is totally free. In doing so, we miss subtleties that could be dealt with in other ways, including insensitivity, conflict, injustice, ignorance, and discomfort. He reserves the world "racism" for cases in which one or both of the following is present: 1) antipathy and 2) inferiorization.

Antipathy is based on hatred, scorn, and irrational dislike. There may be no logic behind it, but it is still a strongly held belief. Inferiorization entails disrespectful and demeaning attitudes or actions, which may or may not be based on a logical or detailed belief system. Blum cites cases of "paternalistic concern," not based on hatred, for a group based on beliefs either that they are inherently inferior or that one's own group is inherently superior. These separate concepts may be related, in that hatred may arise when "inferior" groups do not act in an inferior or deferring manner.

In limiting racism to these cases, he defines three kinds of racism -- Personal, Social, and Institutional.

Personal Racism

Personal Racism consists of racist attitudes and actions of individuals. Keeping the two requirements above in mind (antipathy and inferiorization) a number of other concepts can be distinguished from personal racism:

• Racial Prejudice is based on Allport's ideas of "faulty and inflexible generalizations." He offers that on the one hand, a negative belief about Nazis, a group defined by a core belief and behavior, is not prejudiced. On the other hand, a negative belief about a racial group is prejudiced, as a racial group is too diverse and too large to be defined by a core belief and behavior. Racial Prejudice may or may not be conscious. It might be seen with a sense of "disliking" a certain class of behaviors, regardless of the group showing them, but an association of these behaviors more strongly with a specific racial group. Thus, Racial Prejudice is a kind of antipathy, but a weak one, and so many choose not to call it "racist."
• Racial Motives are distinct from Racist Acts. One may tell a racist joke, and do so either from a motivation to demean a group in antipathy, or to "fit in" or feel accepted in a group. This distinction allows for a Racist Person to be defined as a person who acts in racist ways from racist motivations. Blum notes "bigotry, antipathy, and contempt must be embedded in the person's psychological makeup as traits of character."

Before going further, two points deserve mention. First, Blum makes the point several times that while the classification of some specific attitude or action as "racist" may be debatable, the moral objection on the basis of the harm it causes is not debatable. A second point is that Blum also spends two chapters discussing the history, meaning, and inappropriate use of the words "race" and "black." So, while he uses these words as they are commonly used, later in the book he defines them more clearly. Blum discusses, for example, how "race" as a concept results from grouping of obvious, but genetically arbitrary, groups of traits. Thus, as a truly scientifically derived concept, it does not exist.

Because of this distinction, some people can act in Racially Insensitive or objectionable way, without being racist. He gives examples of a Mike Royko cartoon depicting similarities between the statements of white supremacists and Louis Farrakhan while using the "N" word, a Washington official using the word "niggardly" in its dictionary-correct manner, and of displaying a Shamrock in some neighborhoods. While the Shamrock certainly symbolizes an Irish ethnic pride, for some it has come to take on a new meaning of "Exclusive White Neighborhood—No Blacks Allowed." The lawsuit against Southwest Airlines after a flight attendant announced, "Eanie meanie miney mo, Take a seat it's time to go" would similarly fit in this category. The flight attendant may not have meant the rhyme to be hurtful and may not have held any antipathy when she said it; however, it stems from a childhood racial rhyme which she may or may not have known about.

Blum also notes other ways people can behave in Racially Insensitive ways:

• Not recognizing distinct ethnic groups (i.e., Korean versus Chinese Americans)
• Not recognizing an individual's distinct ethnic identity (i.e., Haitian American as opposed to African American)
• Not recognizing internal group diversity (i.e., asking a black student to discuss "The Black Point of View")
• Not appreciating individuality (i.e., an individual knows a culturally supported opinion for his or her ethnic group but ignores it, rejects it, or seeks to strongly support it)
• Contributing to continued vulnerability of a group with any of the above

Blum later notes that some people engage in what others have called Aversive Racism. He cites a study in which the researcher had a confederate make phone calls to people at home, explain he was stranded because his car broke down, and that he dialed their number by mistake, thinking it was the number of a towing company. What varied in this study was the ethnicity of the caller. The study found that white participants were more likely to hang-up before hearing the confederate's story if the caller was black. The researchers argued that many of the white callers were gathered from a list of political liberals, and likely would not have consciously thought of themselves as racist. What they argued, and Blum agreed, was more likely was a "discomfort [and] uneasiness... which tend to motivate avoidance rather than intentionally destructive behaviors." He offers disgust and hostility could have also motivated the hang-ups, in which case this would likely represent antipathy and count as racism. However, where discomfort was the cause, this does not rise to the level of racism, and so Blum rejects this term for more of a concept of Race Avoidance.

Blum argues that even when more than discomfort underlies the belief, it is not necessarily racism. A person could deny holding a racist belief and even consciously reject the racist belief, but unconsciously still act in ways that show they still have the belief. Blum does not call this racism because the unconscious nature of the belief means it could still be amenable to change. He offers that applying the term racist "emotionally overloads a discussion of the validity or worthiness of the belief," in effect, interfering in calm and rational efforts to examine and challenge the belief.

The bottom line Blum conveys is that when some statement or act by a person makes individual members of a racial group uncomfortable, it is worth examining the potential for harm there and the historical issues around it. The discomfort, however, does not define something as racist.

Social Racism

Social Racism includes beliefs and stereotypes of a society expressed through policy, religion, entertainment, etc.... Blum does not discuss Social Racism in great detail on its own, but instead discusses specific examples of Institutional Racism, as noted below, or general "varieties of racial ills." However, some points of the book can be applied easily to this area in my opinion, and I have done so below.

First, Blum talks about Selective Racism, defining it as a kind of racially prejudiced belief that may be directed against a subgroup of a minority, or based on Unintentional Statistical Discrimination. He cites for an example of the former seeing young black males as inherently violent and dangerous, but showing no antipathy or inferiorization of all black people. While he presents this as a type of Personal Racism, if you think of some of the inferiorizing media stereotypes of young black men, single black mothers, black families receiving welfare... this can be seen more easily as a socially held and reinforced view. It can also lead to the latter case of Unintentional Statistical Discrimination.

Blum cites in example a cab driver that does not offer rides to black males appearing a certain age and in certain neighborhoods. If the police recently released a bulletin indicating a black male criminal of that age group was thought to be operating in that neighborhood, the cab driver would not be acting in a racist way if he was acting on the police bulletin alone. He offers, however, that the cab driver could also routinely deny rides to black males because he believes black males are more likely to commit crimes. The cab driver likely believes he is acting from a non-racist assumption, and is basing his actions on statistical facts about black males and crime. Blum questions the statistics about the role of black males in violent crime, but suggests that even if the reader accepts these statistics, they are still problematic. Looking further into the statistics would show that giving a ride to any given black male in that age group carries a less than a two percent chance of picking up a violent passenger. Thus, statistics can be misread or misunderstood in racially biased ways without conscious intention.

Again, while Blum discusses this in terms of Personal Racism, the reporting of such statistics and the weight assigned to them I think has implications at the Social Racism level. He does note that even if the risk of picking up a violent passenger were higher, there is a moral cost of denying blacks access to transportation to jobs and health care, and it impacts males and females, as well as maintains a stigmatizing stereotype.

A second set of issues related to Social Racism that Blum discusses include whether members of minority groups can be racist. While noting that a member of a minority group can espouse view of antipathy and inferiorization, he offers that more often, racially tinged comments and beliefs have more to do with social status and opportunity than real inferiorization. He also discusses the view held by many writers and activists that true racism requires both racist beliefs (prejudice), and the ability to act on them to oppress others (power). He rejects this unqualified idea, adding that in some settings, minorities do hold power and can enforce prejudiced beliefs. Further, relying on an external award of power to determine the moral or ethical distinction between prejudice and racist beliefs seems weak.

A third useful point I think that Blum makes is in his discussion of what "racism" is from the viewpoints of different people. While defining racial group views of racism is confusing and perhaps harmful in and of itself, Blum notes, he cites Blauner as offering, "Whites locate racism in color consciousness and its absence in color blindness." Thus, part of what often makes discussions about race and racism difficult is the cultural variations in definitions of "racism." Later in the book he discusses issues such as college admission and the role of race in admission practices. Recent Supreme Court rulings on this articulate some of Blum's ideas well. He, I think, would agree that simple skin tone is not an adequate selection criteria, but other goals of producing a diverse group of graduates willing and ready to deal with a diverse world is a valuable goal that does not produce appreciable harm to anyone.

Blum also talks about "new racism" theories, holding that anyone failing to support Affirmative Action policies is by definition, racist, and rejects these theories. Cultural views and personal experiences blend together to shape what we see as "personal responsibility," a "strong work ethic," and [a lack of] current and equal opportunities in life. At a later point in the book, Blum discusses "racial asymmetry" or "the asymmetry of moral concern." Blum does not tie this to Social Racism or cultural views of racism. My opinion would be, however, that it comes into play and makes sense in that the asymmetry inherent in some attitudes or beliefs is not equally apparent to all.

The Harm of Racism

Blum clearly says that all racism is harmful, but explains that all racist attitudes or acts are not all ethically or morally equal in their potential for harm. Blum offers four factors that come into play:

• Historical Legacy
  Blum discusses how some symbols, words, comments, etc... have a different meaning, a greater emotional value, and a context for understanding them based on this. He cites The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn as an example of a book that may have many redeeming qualities, but which is viewed quite differently by Blacks and Whites due to the portrayal of a black character, Jim, and the frequent use of the "N" word.
• Positional Inferiority
  Blum discusses how some comments, while racially biased or based on prejudice, can result in limited harm to others, and constitute only a level of insult. Other comments, however, can result in the same limited harm as an insult, and further in a shaming and more personally poignant harm. Thus, a black man who calls a white man a "cracker" has used what many call a racial slur, but the word itself does not carry the level of demoralization that the "N" word would. He also discusses the difference between Subordinate versus Vulnerable groups. While members of two different ethnic minorities might both use racial slurs against each other, some minorities enjoy a greater position of status and economic power. Thus, Blum offers that a Native American and Jewish American might both use racial slurs against each other, but the economic power most Jewish Americans hold in comparison to most Native Americans renders one slur more potent in its potential for shame and demoralization.
• Patterns and Prevalence
  Blum basically here points to "collective effects" of repeated racism. As such, some groups experience less racism, and thus an educational policy, for example, may have a harmful but less severe impact on them. Other groups, however, experience more racism, and the same policy may create an additional harm through an additive effect with some other racial policy.
• Contribution to Racial Injustice
  Blum offers as a final point that some attitudes and actions can do more to maintain current Social Racism or perpetuate Institutional Racism, and as such have a greater potential for harm. Thus, a news reporter might specifically note some detail about a case in a racially biased way. To the listener, one comment might not reinforce any currently held or popular racial views, while another comment might, and so these two comments would be seen as unequal in their potential for harm.

Blum notes that, "[I]t feels to many whites that the onus of racial problems is placed entirely on them, and that people of color are resolved from responsibility." I think that Blum would agree that difficulties seeing the asymmetry and its impact could prohibit meaningful discussion and action. I think this also comes into play in the confusion of many "majority" groups confusion over racism and racialism.

A fourth point that Blum discusses is the difference between racism and Racialism. Racialism is seen in conferring importance to ethnic identity, which may or may not include assigning too much importance to it. Thus, ethnic minority students who associate with other ethnic minority students may do so because they believe other groups are inferior or because they feel antipathy toward other groups. However, more often, common language, favored foods, culturally valued ways of expressing oneself, and similar family experiences might be all that underlie a group of, for example, Chinese American students who regularly eat lunch together in the cafeteria.

A fifth point related to Social issues that Blum discusses is the meaning of the words "race" and "black." He notes that neither have a scientific value, as there is no real evidence to indicate the presence of different "races" of human. However, for example, while this view prompted the inclusion of "race" on the government census form, the word and the reason for asking it has come to mean other things (e.g., covering compliance with anti-discrimination laws and civil rights). Similarly, the word "black" is based on inaccurate conceptions of skin color, and some seek to replace it with "African American" to highlight cultural variables in addition to skin color. However, it has taken on other meanings. While an African American and a Haitian American may share little in the way of family culture, both may be perceived as "black" by mainstream America, and as a result can have many similar experiences.

Finally, Blum also discusses the inaccurate use of "culture" as a synonym for race. Panethnic groupings such as "Asian Americans," "Hispanic People," "African Americans," and "of European Ancestry" mean little, as these groups have no common or very little common culture. The within-group differences are at least as large as the between-group differences. However, these groups can be "racialized, " a term he uses to refer to the additive effects of being treated as a race over time and socially constructing a meaning for it. It includes common and positive experiences that build community, prejudice and shame experiences, as well as history of interaction with mainstream America.

Institutional Racism

Institutional Racism is a subset of Social Racism in the case of a specific company or group. Blum begins a discussion of "White Privilege" by noting that it may also be an unconscious matter as well, and not rise to the level of "racist." He cites some companies' practice of giving seniority privileges, and of recruiting for open positions internally or by "word of mouth" before making written announcements. In both cases, these actions can be designed to discriminate against minorities, but often are not. These policies have merit in that senior employees have given the most to their company and know the company better than newer employees, and so valuing them accordingly is not racist. Similarly, hiring people with such knowledge to fill vacant positions, and hiring people who come recommended by current employees is not inherently racist.

However, Blum explains how "real" (undebated) racism in unions, companies, educational institutions, and the like have limited minority access to jobs. Thus, the policy of laying off newer and less experienced employees in hard times differentially effects minorities, even if no antipathy or inferiorization is intended. Further points regarding White Privilege include that whites do not have to struggle with the additive worry about discrimination as much as people of color. Material benefits (e.g., access to better jobs, home loans, insurance...) as well as nonmaterial benefits (e.g., access to better education, local politicians, return from local taxes...) can be cumulative as well. Another way to look at it is by distinguishing between reward goods and equity goods. Reward goods come from hard work, for example, while equity goods are those to which everyone is entitled. Failure of society or an institution to fairly distribute reward goods may not be racism or a moral fault, while a similar failure to distribute equity goods is an injustice.

Blum does note that while some would argue otherwise, having White Privilege by itself is not an example of Personal Racism. Some fear that breaking this possible connection will end discussion of White Privilege, however, and so they maintain this link. Other differences between ethnic groups can come from simple numbers, as one white person said, "I can be reasonably sure that if I ask to talk to the 'person in charge,' I will be facing someone of my race." Another person offered a Jew or Muslim can expect to be exposed to numerous Christmas lights during the Christmas holidays, which may be objectionable to them. While such inequalities warrant examination, some differences may be unfortunate but not unjust. Further, many people said to have White Privilege suffer from the same lack of availability of jobs, adequate housing, child care, etc... and do not seem privileged in this sense.

White Privilege again can make some whites feel that the onus of righting social and institutional wrongs, wrongs that are impossible to correct once and for all, falls to them alone. Some, I think, feeling they face an impossible task and are guilty of racism through no fault of their own, would rather avoid contemplation, discussion, and action on the topic altogether. This leads to Color Blindness. Blum discusses three kinds:

• Race neutrality, or the idea that race should not be considered in policies and decisions. Blum notes that often people object to race as a criteria, but are willing to consider effectively the same criteria in other ways. He cites a proposed quota-driven affirmative action policy to increase the number of minorities in Texas colleges, which was rejected. However, a similar proposal to set admission quotas for high schools in the college catchment area was accepted. The issue is that the high schools in these areas contained large numbers of minorities, and so adoption of the second policy would have much the same effect as the first. Similarly, seeing minority workers as "immigrants" rather than as "minorities" in some studies has reduced prejudice.
• Racial egalitarianism or effort to make the races equal in light of past wrongs. Racial egalitarianism has race neutrality as its ultimate goal, or the idea that race would not be important, although it realizes such neutrality can not exist until other factors have changed.
• Racial harmony, or the idea that everyone would have their own cultural and ethnic group, and this would be very important, but all could live harmoniously without racial tension.

Closing Ideas

Blum wraps up the book with a chapter entitled, "Should We Try to Give Up Race?" He offers useful points about how becoming truly blind to "race," and the concepts that go with it, would make it difficult to recognize and talk about differential experiences, biased effects of history, and moral dilemmas we continue to face today. Further, racialized experiences are complex, and while "race" is not the best word to describe self-defined groupings of people, removing this word and concept from our lives would leave us without a way to understand and conceptualize these issues.