If you wish to gaze upon the depth and breadth of America’s racial divide–particularly the canyon-like gulf between white folks and black folks–you need look no further than the recent incident involving Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., Cambridge police officer James Crowley, and now, President Obama who weighed in on the matter a few nights ago, when asked for his reaction to Gates’s arrest on charges (since dismissed) of disorderly conduct. In this case, as with so many other news stories that have touched on race–the O.J. Simpson trial and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina as just two of the more obvious examples–whites and blacks, generally speaking, and with obvious exceptions on both sides, see the story and the racial component of the story in fundamentally different (often diametrically opposed) ways.
To hear most white folks tell it, Gates was to blame. Yes, he was only trying to enter his own home when a white woman saw him (as well as his driver), assumed they were burglars and then convinced another woman to call the cops on her behalf. And yes, he produced identification for the officer when asked, indicating that he was indeed the resident of the house to which the officer had come to investigate the initial call. But because he became belligerent to Sgt. Crowley, and because he unfairly called Crowley a racist, he is guilty of escalating the situation, and thus, is the bad guy in the scenario. Meanwhile Crowley, according to the dominant white narrative, spread by media far and wide, is a wonderful and thoughtful cop, who is hardly a racist–after all he teaches a diversity training class and once gave mouth-to-mouth-resuscitation to a dying black athlete–and who was inappropriately smeared: first by Gates who accused the officer of asking him for proof of residency only because he was black, and then by Obama, who said the police had acted “stupidly” in arresting the esteemed professor in his own home.
But to most black folks, their frame or lens is entirely different, and not because they are irrational or hypersensitive (which is what many whites assume, sadly) but because their experiences with law enforcement are, frankly, different than those typically enjoyed by whites. Far too many African Americans, and many other persons of color, have experienced mistreatment at the hands of police, no matter their behavior (1). For instance, they are, according to all available evidence, more likely to be stopped and searched for drugs, even though, when stopped, they are less likely to have drugs on them than whites (2). In other words, even when they have done nothing wrong, the suspicion that they are up to no good causes cops to disproportionately suspect them of wrongdoing and then treat them as criminals until proven otherwise. In addition, there have been numerous examples in recent years of black and brown folks–mostly men but some women as well–who have been killed by police, even though they posed no threat to the officers, and were unarmed. Although these tragedies have happened to white folks too, such occurrences are far less common.
So for African Americans, the possibility that racism was involved in the Gates incident is more than an idle suspicion. First, they wonder, understandably, whether or not the white woman who initially expressed alarm about the two men on Gates’s porch, and then got the second woman to call police would have done so had the two men she saw trying to enter Gates’s residence been white: one in a suit (the driver) and the other casually but well dressed, with gray hair, in his late 50s, as with Gates. There is no way to know for sure. But it’s not a crazy question, and given the evidence from years of research, suggesting that whites are more likely to perceive ambiguous behavior by blacks as criminal or aggressive, than we are for other whites, it is a question backed up by social science as well.
Because there has been almost no discussion of what the research literature says on this point, within the week-long media feeding frenzy on this story, perhaps now would be a good time to present it. First, because doing so will allow us to understand the way in which implicit racial bias operates, even without bigoted or prejudicial intent (and how this may have been in evidence that day in Cambridge); and secondly, so as to de-escalate the rhetoric surrounding the event on both sides. Thus, we can make the conversation less about whether “Crowley is a racist,” or “Was Gates belligerent?” and more about how a white officer may well have perceived Gates’s belligerence (accepting for now the officer’s account of Gates’s behavior), and how that perception may have been skewed by racial biases that, although not consciously held, still can prove influential to white cognition.
The good news for us, is that there is over thirty years of social science evidence to which we can turn in order to evaluate this matter.
For instance, one famous study showed white focus group members a video in which a black actor and a white actor engaged in an argument. On the tape shown to one group of whites, the black actor shoves the white actor out of the way at one point. On the tape shown to a second group, it is the white actor who does the shoving. In all other respects the tapes were the same (and the whites viewing the different films had been randomly selected so they too, functionally speaking, were no different). Afterward, the white respondents were asked a series of questions about what they had seen. Among them, was a question that asked whether they perceived the shove administered at the end of the argument as aggressive or violent. Three out of four whites who had seen the black actor do the shoving, answered yes. But only 17% of the whites who had seen the white actor administer the exact same kind of shove felt the act had been aggressive or violent (3).
Although this study was administered in the 1970s, there is little reason to believe that time alone would change the way white Americans, at a subconscious level, perceive aggression in blacks, as opposed to other whites. More importantly, additional studies since that time have found similar results: one found that even as children, whites view blacks as more aggressive than other whites engaged in the very same behavior (4).
More recently, “shoot or hold fire” studies have determined that when shown videos of blacks and whites engaged in various ambiguous activities, participants are quicker to shoot unarmed blacks, and to hold fire on whites, even when the latter are armed and dangerous (5). These tendencies, it should be noted, bear no relationship to the degree of overt racial bias expressed by participants in pre-interviews. Rather, they seem tied to implicit, even subconscious biases, which research shows can be easily triggered in situations where common stereotypes of racial groups are made salient.
Even more disturbing, studies have found that whites often fabricate memories of events in ways that fit common racial stereotypes. For instance, in one study, participants were given details of an assault case, as if they were in the role of jurors. Asked to remember the case details later, participants overwhelmingly misremembered aggressive conduct by blacks in the stories, even when such conduct did not occur, and they were far less likely to remember aggressive conduct by whites, even when, in the narratives given to them, it did occur (6).
In another case, participants were shown news stories involving crime, in which the color of the shown perpetrator was digitally manipulated. By large margins, respondents were more likely to remember the race of the perp when the perp shown was black, and often even misremembered the perp as black, when he was not (7). An additional study found that when shown perp mug shots of blacks, as opposed to whites, respondents were far more likely to presume guilt in the former case as opposed to the latter, even when the available facts in evidence were the same (8).
Other research, in which participants are hooked up to MRI machines, has found that even when shown a black face on a screen subliminally (i.e., for such a small fraction of time that the conscious mind is unable to process it, though the subconscious mind can), the part of the brain known as the amygdala (which is the part that processes fear responses and anxiety), lights up far more than when shown a subliminal image of a white face (9).
Here it is worth quoting Linda Hamilton Krieger and Susan Fiske, from their 2006 California Law Review article on implicit bias:
Krieger and Fiske explain:
“As social psychologists John Bargh and James Uleman, among others, have demonstrated, merely encountering a member of a stereotyped group primes the trait constructs associated with, and in a sense, constituting the stereotype. Once activated, these constructs can function as implicit expectancies, spontaneously shaping the perceiver’s perception, characterization, memory and judgment of the stereotyped target” (10)
So, in terms of the event that brought Gates to the attention of the police in the first place, it seems eminently reasonable to ask whether the criminality of Gates and his driver were more likely assumed because of their color than would have been the case had the professor been white. And it is this question–made reasonable by the very social science research about which Gates is surely aware–that no doubt would lead him to express anger at the thought of being presumed anything but the resident of his own home.
All of which means that when Sgt. Crowley arrived, he found himself in the middle of a sociological and psychological drama not of his own making, but from which he could hardly extricate himself neatly. Angered by the potential implication of the witness’s suspicions, Gates became enraged and let the officer know it. The officer, despite his supposed depth of knowledge on matters of race and diversity, failed to appreciate the background narrative that was surely running, with good reason, through Gates’s mind, and instead took the anger personally: something that is unprofessional for a diversity trainer, and doubly so for a cop. That Crowley is a diversity trainer, but apparently unfamiliar with the sometimes caustic but ultimately harmless exercise known as “the dozens” which Gates proceeded to run on him, by saying “I’ll see your mama on the porch,” is especially interesting.
In any event, at this point folks of color logically wonder if Crowley would have arrested a white man who exhibited the same “belligerence” as is claimed for Dr. Gates. Again, we can’t know for sure, but just as was true for the discussion of the witness’s perceptions, the question is not an irrational or unfair one. Especially when the charge for which Gates was arrested was such an inherently subjective one. Disorderly conduct after all, unlike say, armed robbery, or drug possession, has no clear-cut, objective definition. It is the epitome of vagueness, in fact, such that individual police judgments are intrinsically in play in situations involving such charges. And given the above-mentioned research, which finds that whites are quicker to view blacks as disruptive, aggressive, even violent, than we are to view whites this way–even when the behaviors being exhibited are functionally no different–it is perfectly reasonable to wonder whether Crowley may have overreacted to Gates’s behavior, however inappropriate he may have found it to be, in a way that escalated the situation from mere obnoxiousness (which is not illegal) to disorderly conduct, which is.
Bottom line: this incident demonstrates in painful relief the obliviousness to the black experience, which we as whites are allowed to indulge, and in which we are allowed to wallow. We cannot understand what it feels like to be thought of as a criminal solely because of our race. We have no comparable social context that would allow us to process the depth of the psychological injury that flows from such a thing. And even if race is not the reason for such suspicion in a given case, the mere possibility that it could be (based on the history of these kinds of things) is enough to generate anxiety, stress and even real somatic pain for those seen through this lens.
Indeed, research on the health effects of racism has actually found that it is precisely in these kinds of cases, in which the racial motivation is less clear, where the negative impact on blacks is greatest. The “attributional ambiguity” of such cases (fancy language for, “what the hell was that about?”) is what causes blacks, for instance, to expend valuable emotional and cognitive resources trying to analyze each situation anew. The stress from such a response heightens what is known as the allostatic load for those experiencing it, through the release of stress hormones (such as cortisol). This in turn is directly related to hypertension, which is then directly linked to the excess mortality rate of African Americans relative to whites.
In order to move the racial dialogue forward, and to ultimately dismantle systems of racial domination and subordination, the way in which folks of color experience white-dominated institutions will have to be understood and appreciated, by the very whites who have for so long, remained in profound denial about this matter. It will require that we strive to understand, at a deep and personal level, that incidents can be experienced as racist assaults even if those doing the assaulting do not intend to be racist. Because inbetween the actor and the acted upon, there is a vast territory known as history, and within that territory lay the memories of a thousand terrors, fears, insecurities and remembrances. That few whites have ever taken a trip to that place hardly acquits us from the need to understand it and recognize it as a real place, to which our brothers and sisters of color have been long consigned.
NOTES:
(1) Nelson, Jill. ed. Police Brutality: An Anthology. (2000) New York: W.W. Norton.
(2) Durose, Matthew, et al., Contacts Between Police and the Public: Findings From the 2002 National Survey. (April 2005). U.S. Department of Justice: Bureau of Justice Statistics; Harris, David, Profiles in Injustice: Why Racial Profiling Can’t Work. (2002). New York: The New Press, 216-17.
(3) Duncan, Birt L. “Differential Social Perception and Attributes of Intergroup Violence: Testing the Lower LImits of Stereotyping of Blacks,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (1976).
(4) Sager, H. Andrew and Janet Wind Schofield, “Racial and Behavioral Cues in Black and White Children’s Perceptions of Ambiguously Aggressive Acts,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (1980).
(5) Correll, Joshua, et al., “The Police Officer’s Dilemma: Using Ethnicity to Disambiguate Potentially Threatening Individuals,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83:6 (2002); Payne, B. Keith, “Prejudice and Perception: The Role of Automatic and Controlled Processes in Misperceiving a Weapon,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2001); Eberhardt, Jennifer L. et al., “Seeing Black: Race, Crime and Visual Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2004).
(6) Levinson, Justin D. “Forgotten Racial Equality: Implicit Bias, Decision-Making and Misremembering,” 57 DUKE L. JOUR. November, 2007.
(7) Gilliam, Franklin D. Jr. and Shanto Iyangar, “Prime Suspects: The Influence of Local Television News on the Viewing Public,” 44 American Journal of Political Science (2000).
(8) Peffley, Mark, et al., “The Intersection of Race and Crime in Television News Stories: An Experimental Study,” 13 Political Communication (1996).
(9) Cunningham, William A. et al., “Separable Neural Components in the Processing of Black and White Faces,” 15:12 Psychological Science (2004); Phelps, Elizabeth et al., “Performance on Indirect Measures of Race Evaluation Predicts Amygdala Activation,” 12:5 Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2000).
(10) Krieger, Linda Hamilton and Susan T. Fiske, “Behavioral Realism in Employment Discrimination Law: Implicit Bias and Disparate Treatment,” 94 CAL. L. REV. 997 (2006).
Tim Wise is the author of four books on race. His most recent is Between Barack and a Hard Place: Racism and White Denial in the Age of Obama. City Lights Books, 2009.
(This post is a re-blog of an essay posted at TheRedRoom and on Facebook.)
This is why, for me at least, 99% of white Americans are complicit in, of not guilty of, racism.
~
I hope Pres Obama is able to cultivate a teachable moment out of this. Or, at least Oprah. Or, maybe CNN can go through the sociological studies and not just individual stories. It just doesn’t help when you have a congressman from Michigan taking the opportunity to grandstand and submit a resolution to force Obama to apologize. (This? From the same group of people who bulk in righteous indignation at the mere hint of investigating the Bush adminstiration?)
~
It must sure be 72 and sunny every day in Whitamerica.
Great post. @No1KState I’m with you about cnn and the rest of the news media; their “black in America” series is quite disappointing…sad it’s all there is among those cable news channels. It was beginning to make me sick at how Chris Matthews was pouring over the “facts” of the case, while Sanchez over on cnn was using the “police report” as OBJECTIVE evidence that Gates was at fault for what happened (i.e., the report written by Crowley himself!). There’s a total disconnect to reality in white America, an amnesia necessary to get through moments like these once whiteness & white supremacy could be threatened.
@JDF – Oh, good! I haven’t watched more than 15secs of Black in America. With all the talk, I was afraid I was missing something!
~
I was disappointed in Matthews. He’s definitely better than some other anchors, but his whole thing with the “facts”? Not his best. Though, I’ll hand it to him, he did admit that had the facts been the exact same except the cop being black and the homeowner been white, his immediate response would be that the cop over-reacted. I’m not sure anyone else would make that personal admission. Maybe Maddow, but I’m not as sure about Olbermann as before. ~ Sanchez acting like the police report was objective was nauseating. As though the police never lie, and no one ever contests what’s written in a report. It’s especially ironic since now, it seems like Crowley did falsify a number of things in his report. I think Lawrence O’Donnell did a fantastic job in the 4th segment filling in for Olbermann last night. I’m going to post the video along with his Time article on my blog in a couple of hours or so.
~
And since we are in a bit of a dialogue, JDF, is it just me, or does being calmed down by another person drive anyone else crazy? You know, kinda like when you’re laughing and someone tries to shush you, and makes the situation that much funnier? That’s kinda how I am if I’m upset and someone tries to calm me down. Am I alone? I always try, at least, to discipline myself and maintain my composure; but if I were Gates, that little hand gesture Crowley’s making in the arrest picture would’ve been what really sent me over the edge.
~
And just a general comment to anyone ~ Knowing that Gates is not an activist in any since of the word, I kinda wonder what happened to him during his trip that race would’ve come to his mind that quickly.
http://www.ginandtacos.com/2009/07/28/gary-aldrich-the-end-of-racism-and-the-fjm-treatment/
Tim, I appreciate the relative even-handedness of you post. I also concede your point that it must be infuriating to Blacks, especially Black men, to be perceived as more likely to be criminals. We all go through an analogous phase as teenagers, when we are naturally more suspect due simply the our demographic. It’s a relief to come out of that, so I’m sure it’s doubly infuriating for Black men who don’t.
.
I have some questions about your analysis.
.
How do you know Blacks’ perceptions are not skewed by racism? After all, there’s been far more historical mistreatment of Blacks by Whites in America than vice versa. Maybe Blacks are the ones holding a grudge, who are subconsciously racist.
.
In order to demonstrate that this is not the case, you refer to several “implicit bias” studies, which suggest that Whites have some sort of predisposition against Blacks. We are invited to infer that this drives Whites like Officer Crowley to overreact when confronted by an (understandably) agitated Black man.
.
What about the other side, though? Where is the study investigating whether Blacks are predisposed against Whites? Is that question not relevant? And what about studies investigating whether Blacks actually ARE more aggressive than Whites — in other words, whether the prejudice might be accurate. Does that matter?
.
In fact, let’s stipulate for the sake of argument that the prejudice is accurate; how would that affect your interpretation of disparate impact in general and Crowley’s behavior in particular? (Not a rhetorical question — it’s hard to get the tone right!)
.
Finally, I wonder whether you have considered the possibility that the racially-aware environment Officer Crowley is operating in actually made him LESS likely to arrest Gates than a White guy who acted the same way. After all, I doubt he’s enjoying his 15 minutes of fame. Maybe he was wrong to make the arrest, but not as wrong as he would have been if Gates had been White.
.
My point isn’t that these hypotheses are true. I’m just making the point (again) that science looks at all the possible explanations, it bends over backwards to consider contrary interpretations, to be MORE than fair to the other side.
.
My point is also not that Professor Gates should have been arrested. He probably should not have been.
.
I am shocked at the conventional wisdom that the woman who called 911 is somehow a bad guy in this story. Can’t you guys give even her the benefit of the doubt? Is there some history of trouble between her and Gates to suggest she wanted to do him harm? Furthermore, Gates’s house WAS recently broken into — I’d think he might be the teensiest bit grateful to a neighbor who bothered to do anything at all. After all, I bet the neighbor is Professor Gates’s kind of people. I bet she, unlike Officer Crowley and anybody else with a bit of self-respect, would gladly partake of the re-education and self-criticism session Gates offered. (I base this only on the neighborhood she lives in.)
Darin – taking your points/questions one at a time:
as for blacks holding a grudge: frankly, i don’t know, but there is no reason the think that such a “grudge:” would make them not realize their own reality, and surely not less accurately than whites would know black reality…bottom line, in every generation survey data has indicated, along with anecdote and published reports, that whites NEVER thought racism was a problem, and blacks always thought it was. Who was correct in all those previous generations? Not whites. So unless you can show that the “grudge” has somehow gotten so much greater in 2009 than it was in, say, 1989, or 79, or 69, when black folks were saying the same thing, such that NOW their judgment is faulty, there is no point to your query. And given the polling and survey data suggesting considerably less anger against whites than otherwise might be expected, given the history, I’d say the question is moot.
As for IAT: it has been administered to 17,000 blacks and counting…it has NOT found bias against whites as the norm. In fact, black responses are pretty well split between, pro-black implicit bias, no visible bias, and pro-white bias. Black folks are actually the ONLY group to not have a dramatic anti-black and pro white bias, but even then, there is NO evidence of implicit anti-white bias as a norm for blacks, the way there is copious evidence of that on the part of whites towards blacks. Of course the real issue is, even if there WAS such bias against whites, it would be largely impotent. Black folks do not have the institutional authority in very many cases to actually oppress whites, no matter how much they may dislike us. They are not able to get away with profiling whites, denying loans to whites, etc. because of the relative power imbalances that exist. This is pretty basic
There is no evidence that indicates blacks are more aggressive than whites, which passes scientific muster. None, and no geneticist or biologist worth their salt believes otherwise. History also pretty well mitigates against the conclusion. After all, hundreds of years of European colonialism, genocide, etc pretty well rule out the possibility that whites are less aggressive than anyone…So the prejudice is not accurate. And the point in my essay, which you ignore, is that when the behavior is IDENTICAL between whites and blacks, whites perceive more aggression on the part of the black person. So even when there is NO evidence of greater aggression, whites see it anyway.
No, I do not think there is any evidence that he was less likely to arrest Gates because he was black. It is not my burden to disprove that he would have. It is your burden, given the history of policing, which has never, because of PC concerns, led to underarresting blacks, to show that somehow this time it was different…not likely
The woman who called is not the point: she called for another woman,, who is Gates’s neighbor and didn’t even recognize him for God’s sakes…how she could not recognize her neighbor is beyond me. But it is not the point. I am merely asking, is it possible that she reacted to them because they were black in a way she wouldn’t have had they been white? I don’t know, but given the implicit bias research, it is a reasonable question. That is all I said…
Black “grudge” has been a boogie man for white America since Freedom Come. I can’t think of any time after the Civil War when freedmen and women or their descendents went about terrorizing white America for the sake of revenge. Even during slavery, even after Haiti won independence, the only time a group of African(s) Americans conspired to killed whites was in the hopes of attaining freedom. Ie, Nat Turner’s rebellion is the only thing that comes to mind. This whole “grudge” thing is just one of many historical reasons for either enforcing racism, or recently, dismissing claims of racism. It has never been true. All freedmen and women and their children ever wanted was equality.
~
Just a question/thought – If Jews have managed to create and expand their own state surrounded by the Great Sea and enemies, what’s keeping African Americans from doing the same? :sigh: It’s a nice thought. But, be that as it may, one of the reasons there’s never been a movement large enough to achieve this wonderful black-topia is our belief, and Lord knows why, in the American ideals and the possibility of achieving equality and overcoming racism. Again, I don’t know what evidence we have for this. I can only say US slavery, neo-slavery, and current suppression has worked a number on the African American mind.
~
As Tim pointed out, black folks don’t have an anti-white bias. What we have is an anti-racist bias. If you ever discover that for some reason, black people have a bias against you, it’s not because you’re white.
~
@ Darin – I don’t know if anyone else has become impatient with your schtick, but I certainly have. Black people grow up under the same cultural influences as anyone else. In school, we study the same white-washed history. We watch the same local news that talks about black crime at a higher rate than it occurs (Overemphasizing black crime is also a historical tool of racism. In the aftermath of the Civil War, Southern whites blamed the increase crime rate on freedmen and women, even though close to 100% of crime was committed by white people and especially white veterans. It continued into the 20th century with local papers informing readers of crimes committed by African Americans even if the nearest black crime was a few counties over.) It is not our instinct to blame our problems on racism. And the science to prove black inferiority has been done, disproven, and discredited. In fact, when blacks do experience racism, and it is certain what happened was racism, they often have to have friends confirm that what happened was indeed racism. So, disabuse yourself and your family and friends of the notion that black people blame innocent whites of being racist as a way of avenging a long-held grudge. All we want is equality and justice.
Thanks Tim, good read.
“In order to move the racial dialogue forward, and to ultimately dismantle systems of racial domination and subordination, the way in which folks of color experience white-dominated institutions will have to be understood and appreciated, by the very whites who have for so long, remained in profound denial about this matter…”
Any ideas on how to accomplish this? I mean, if all whites are subject to white-dominant ideologies throughout childhood/adulthood, in school, in the media, etc., how is it that a small number of whites are able to ‘snap out of it’, for lack of a better term? How can we increase this small number? What is the common thread (if there is one) among white non-racists?
Intelligent essay Mr. Wise. Thanks very much for placing the arrest of Mr. Gates and the resulting national conversation in a solid social science context.
Tim, there’s a recurring theme in the discussions I’ve been a part of here. Often, when I raise a substantive point about some analysis or correlation somebody is claiming to have found, the response is simply to dismiss it as something “everybody knows” or “no scholar would endorse” or whatever. That problem with this kind of response should be obvious. It may play well for the audience here, but it’s a dead end for anyone who doesn’t already share your perspective. Since (I assume) the point of making this public is to convince the unconvinced, you should be worried about the strength of your case — whether it can be make coherently, respectfully, and persuasively to an outsider. Me, for example.
.
Your tone is not dismissive, which I appreciate, but the content of your response is dismissive.
.
Let me try to address the points you did bring up in response.
.
When you refer to “17,000 and counting” are you talking about the website with the black and white faces juxtaposed with the positive and negative adjectives? Interesting, maybe, but not very scientific. Maybe you meant something else. Besides, we’re not really talking about split-second judgments, in this case. Crowley had minutes, and Gates has had days, to consider his actions. Does that matter?
.
I’m trying to get at is what I think is an obvious point: racism (in the sense of being predisposed against someone because of his race) is a two-way street. The issue isn’t whether there’s more or less anger than you’d expect, or whether it’s justified or not. The issue is whether that anger (assuming it exists) explains something about the interactions between Blacks and Whites.
.
Let’s talk about power imbalances, since you brought it up. This case is actually a really interesting example because the power started out on Crowley’s side, but it’s clearly shifted to Gates’s since then (famous, articulate Harvard prof, for whom the President has spoken up). I’d be interested to hear your assessment of their behavior both in and out of power in this case. I submit that they’ve both abused their power when they had the chance. I’m not saying that makes it a wash or anything, I’m just pointing it out for your comment.
.
You say there’s no evidence that Blacks are more aggressive than Whites. Really? I’ll just pick the most obvious statistic: Blacks commit homicide at seven times the rate Whites do. That doesn’t prove my point, but it disproves your response.
.
Finally, you say that it’s not your burden to prove Crowley was less likely to arrest Gates because he’s Black. With all due respect, it should be. Remember that what you’re really asserting is that Crowley is a racist and that’s why he arrested Gates. You’re the prosecution, the burden of proof is on you. Now, I’m not expecting magic, but I think you should consider whether the political climate (the fact that Crowley taught some kind of racial profiling course, for example) might work against your hypothesis.
.
I’m perfectly content to drop the neighbor — it’s a silly point, frankly. Shall we drop it?
Darin – here we go again.
The IATs have been validated multiple times by social scientists. Yes, they are the split second judgment tests, but there is a wealth of evidence that they are scientific and valid. The point is, they test for implicit and subconscious bias, which is what I was suggesting MAY have been at work here, more than overt bigotry, which I do not really think was operating. The fact is, once implicit biases are primed, they can lead to (and the research says they do) to actions that are biased…you ignore the other studies I reference in the essay, and present no studies of your own to suggest widespread, equivalent bias on the part of blacks towards whites. You simply have no evidence to present at all
Racism, at the level of attitudes can indeed be a two way street, I agree. But 1) you present nothing to suggest that Gates (of all people) is anti-white, or that blacks who complain of racism are making it up, or only doing it because of such bias, so why is this relevant here? It isn’t. 2) things like racial profiling can’t be explained as a result of black bias against whites; so too housing discrimination, job discrimination, etc…have you read any of my books, or Joe Feagin’s books, or anything that documents, in painstaking detail the extent of discrimination against blacks and other folks of color in this country? That is the bottom line. There is NO comparable evidence about blacks doing that to whites, because of the power imbalance you seek to deny. Are you really suggesting that whites do not hold considerably greater power in this country than people of color? If so, there is no way to talk with you
As for the power imbalance in this situation, the cop had the gun. How is Gates’s status capable of altering that? And look at what has happened…the black guy with the PhD and the Harvard gig is being made to look like the bad guy by whites nationwide, who don’t give two shits about his education. They assume HE is lying, not the cop. HE is the one with the attitude, not the cop…so where is the evidence of Gates’s power, even relative to this cop? And Obama has had to frickin apologize! Because if he doesn’t, white folks turn on him…in other words, this is evidence of just how little power Obama has to even make a simple and true comment: it WAS stupid to arrest Gates for disorderly conduct, given that he did not violate the terms of that statute (have you even read it?)
As for the homicide data: first off, the fact of higher crime rates does not prove inherently greater aggression. Once you study criminology you will undersatand this I suppose. The studies on this subject have found that once you control, for instance, for a range of socioeconomic factors that are highly correlated with violence, there is no difference in homicide rates (or other violence rates) between whites and blacks. So there is nothing about “Blackness” that is causing the homicide rate. That is the point. Secondly, you can’t look only at official crime rates as evidence of aggression. We know whites are just as aggressive because of other behaviors, which sadly are not looked at as crimes: genocidal land grabs, colonialism, the middle passage, the Holocaust, Stalin’s purges, etc., not to mention corporate corner-cutting that results in hundreds of thousands of workplace injuries and several thousand deaths a year. That is aggressive behavior too, and in some ways more pathological than street violence, since it is often far more calculated and planned. Of course, once again, you ignore the point I was making: even when there is NO difference in the behavior of whites and blacks, or even when whites are the ones engaging in the aggression, white folks SEE blacks as more aggressive, and misremember the aggression they JUST witnessed as having been done by a black person…please stick to the point and stop trying to hijack threads for your white nationalist silliness, which I hear you are quite fond of spreading around here…
As for the burden of proof. I was merely saying, given the evidence on uneven policing, there is NO reason to think Crowley was reluctant to arrest Gates because of race. First off, he DID arrest him, and did so the very SECOND Gates stepped outside and raised his voice, thereby giving him a reason to do so (although even that doesn’t really meet the legal standard, but it was the first time any of gates’s behavior could even theoretically be seen as illegal). So he didn’t hesitate long, that’s for sure. Secondly, if concerns about political correctness are such a hindrance to busting black people, why is it that black folks are getting busted so often on subjective charges, or for drugs (when whites actually use drugs as much or more than blacks?). I mean, where is the evidence that cops are afraid to arrest black people? It is your burden to show that, given the mountain of evidence to suggest they are not shy about this at all. I never said I knew for sure that Crowley was a racist. Can you even read? I said given the evidence on implicit bias, and white perceptions of black behavior, these are good and reasonable questions to ask, and for us all to think about.
Great post, Tim Wise!
I sometimes find Racism Review myopic and irrelevant to me (because it focuses on individual instances of racism that are obvious), but this post connects the individual instance to systemic racism (what is happening when you zoom out and look at society) and implicit bias (what is happening when you zoom in and look at the mind/brain). I thought this was such a quality article before seeing the author’s name, and then I looked up and saw “Tim Wise”.
(My two favourite communicators are you and Richard Feynman, people who take “complex” topics and explain them with clarity. (Because most of these topics aren’t inherently complex; it’s just that most people are poor writers.))
However, your title on Racism Review, “Racism and Implicit Bias in Cambridge” is much better than the one at RedRoom. I think it’s better to get straight to the point. People read from left to right, so the first words of your title are the most important.
Tim: I have not studied Criminology and am therefore unfamiliar with this suggestion: [” The studies on this subject have found that once you control, for instance, for a range of socioeconomic factors that are highly correlated with violence, there is no difference in homicide rates (or other violence rates) between whites and blacks.”] What part do socioeconomic factors play in the occurrence of violence? In a loose example, are you saying that being raised in a violent atmosphere will predispose you to engage in violence? That may seem like a rhetorical question but it is asked with all sincerity.
–
While I didn’t agree with some of your talking points on BIA, you certainly are convicted, which is extremely respectable.
Tim,
Good posts. I have been a fan of your work for years! KEEP IT UP!
siss – the correlations between poverty and crime are complex. Basically, it is not poverty, per se, or unemployment, per se, that is correlated with violent crime. Rather the research suggests it is the conditions associated with concentrated poverty: crowding, dilapidated housing, battered urban landscapes, high lead content in paint and pollutants, the stresses associated with all of these, etc: these conditions make conflicts more likely (the crowding alone, amid poverty can do that), and has all kinds of impact on stress levels, trust of others, impulse control, conflict resolution strategies (so, for instance, feeling as though their conflicts will not be resolved by the larger justice system, some folks engage in what they consider street justice against those who have harmed them in some way), and there are several other levels at which these corelations operate as well…and the operate around the world in dozens of countries, with or without black folks around in large numbers, for instance. When we look at whites and blacks in similar environments, there is a negligible difference in crime rates, especially for violent crime…
Fantastic article, Tim, thanks for the time and effort it took to put it together. (Your gig on CNN was great too — hope it leads to more of them! Having your voice as a regular part of the corporate mediascape would be a big help.)
.
I especially appreciate this part, which seems key (and totally ignored by other observers):
.
The officer, despite his supposed depth of knowledge on matters of race and diversity, failed to appreciate the background narrative that was surely running, with good reason, through Gates’s mind, and instead took the anger personally: something that is unprofessional for a diversity trainer, and doubly so for a cop. That Crowley is a diversity trainer, but apparently unfamiliar with the sometimes caustic but ultimately harmless exercise known as “the dozens” which Gates proceeded to run on him, by saying “I’ll see your mama on the porch,” is especially interesting.
.
I’ve read other credible observers (both black and white) who doubt that the wealthy, refined, PhD-and-honor-laden Gates would say such a thing, and that Crowley clearly made up a stereotypical line for his report. Without hearing it on a recording, I have no idea, and both seem plausible (has Gates acknowledged that he said that?). But aside from that, yes, Crowley clearly should have had more understanding than he did of how this whole scene probably looked and felt from Gates’ perspective. As a racial-profiling trainer, and simply as a cop.
Another twist — it seems that Gates and Crowley are related to each other.
@ Restructure – I agree that racismreview does often discuss individual acts, but commenters do connect them to the big picture. Also, part of the “big picture” racism is the denial of individual acts of racism. So while agree on the observation of most posts here, I disagree with the characterization of myopic. Racism must be attacked from every conceivable direction. Case in point, Tim’s responses to Darin.
|
The first thread Darin commented on was about the Sotomayor hearings. He said then that he didn’t care about her race, just her seeming emphasis on race. And that’s one of the things I find curious about white privilege and superiority. Most white Americans don’t deny the right to equality in the abstract. But ultimately, they’re only offering the right to be “white,” meaning we’re only as acceptable to whites as we are assimilated and similar to whites. That’s not equality. That’s not justice. That’s a joke.
>But ultimately, they’re only offering the right to be “white,” meaning we’re only as acceptable to whites as we are assimilated and similar to whites. That’s not equality. That’s not justice. That’s a joke.
.
I agree, only, it’s not just a ‘joke’ but a drama for humanity.
@No1KState – Commenters who connect individual acts to the big picture already understand systemic racism. People who “don’t get it” don’t see the big picture, and hence, they can explain it away by saying that it was a coincidence and not part of a pattern.
There’s nothing wrong with discussing individual acts, of course. I just find such posts about individual acts of racism happening in the news boring.
The drama continues…
http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/cop_suspended_for_racial_slur_in_Gates_email_072809
@ jwbe – Ditto.
~
@ Restructure! – If you find it boring, fair enough. That’s no big deal. I just question the use of “myopic” in a negative connotation. If just feel like it doesn’t have to be either-or, or even, better-best. You know? Both approaches have equal value. It’s easy to dismiss individual acts of racism outside the context of the big picture; it’s easy to dismiss the big picture outside of recognizing these many individual acts.
~
As for other commenters – Darin is unusual. Most deniers don’t stick around this long; but, he hasn’t commented on the example of white-washing history. He hasn’t explained how that wasn’t a decision made out of racism or how it wouldn’t have the impact of encouraging notions of white supremacy. So, we do have drive-by apologies. But I double-dog dare (We used to say that playing driveway basketball.) anyone to stay one week and over the course of that week, explain away each and every incidence of racism. You know?
Darin,
First I want to say that your writing is excellent. However, I have to disagree with you about “blacks” in general when you said that “blacks” are responsible for more murders then “whites”. I do believe that there are more “white” serial killers then there are “black”..Second, if that is true then would you please advise me where you pulled that data from..And, if it’s true then I am sure we are getting into “social economic class”. True there are more “black” people that suffer from poverty today then whites, which would indicate that they don’t have, or were not exposed to the privileges of most “whites kids”..So, you can’t really get accurate data about one race without doing a study about where those children are from… I wonder if you did a study where all children with the same social class and different race would indicate that the black children would be the ones responsible for more murders..I don’t think that statistic would support what you are saying…Thanks Mom
@ Mom – well, there really is no disputing the higher murder rate among blacks. All data (FBI and Justice Dept, and all studies make this clear) .Please understand what this means. About half of all murders are committed by blacks, which is disproportionate because blacks are 13 percent of the population. That is why the murder “rate” among blacks is 7 times higher than for whites. It is based on murders relative to population size. The serial killing thing is irrelevant. Serial killing is one small sub-set of murders, representing a miniscule percentage of the whole. Yes, whites commit most of them, and even a slightly disproportionate percentage of serial murders, which I do find interesting, and I think it’s worth exploring why, but that doesn’t change the overall truth: the murder rate (and general violent crime rate) among blacks is much higher than for whites. Now, that said, you are totally correct that the reasons for this are not race per se. I said as much, if you read the thread carefully. I make the point, for instance, that socioeconomic conditions explain the difference. I was merely agreeing with darin that there is a higher black murder rate, but then said to him that this wasn’t about “black aggression” so much as economic conditions associated with concentrated poverty. You are right: when whites and blacks experience the same socioeconomic conditions (which is rare) there is no substantial difference in crime rates. I said as much above. But that doesn’t change the fact that the black crime rate–because of socioeconomic conditions–is much higher. Also, of course, I tried to make the point that much of the aggressive behavior of whites is never considered criminal: genocide, land conquest, cutting corners on safety and environmental standards in corporate america, etc…so that certainly should be considered too!
Apologizes, I didn’t read the whole tread, but thank you for pointing that out to me because I went back and read through..LOL..Also, I appreciate the effort that you made in explaining it again…Mom:)
Mom, the data come from federal statistics. Honestly, I don’t think there’s much dispute about the raw numbers — the rate of violent crime. Of course, there’s all kinds of dispute about what the causes and implications are, which is what Tim is getting at.
.
Tim, whether higher rates of black crime are caused by heredity or environment is completely beside the point of whether blacks are more violent. You asked if it was reasonable for a person to think blacks are more aggressive than whites, and the disproportionate rate of violent crime seems like a pretty good reason.
.
Now, depending on what you think the cause is, you might have very different responses to that fact — especially at a policy level.
.
No evidence of bias by blacks toward whites? What? Are you serious? You can’t be — I’ll assume I’ve misunderstood something you said. Can you try saying it a different way?
.
I read an interesting discussion about why blacks commit more violent crimes generally, but fewer outrageous, serial-killer-type crimes than whites. One possible explanation is that a trait or collection of traits called “criminality” varies such that blacks have a higher mean, but whites have a wider distribution. What that means is that, although the average white level of “criminality” may be lower, it’s higher than blacks’ at the extreme high end. (http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/serial.htm) Remains to be proven, of course, but I find it intriguing. Bear in mind that this “trait” of criminality could conceivably have both hereditary and environmental causes.
.
This goes to your points about whites also being aggressive. One might think that whites are less likely to be a little aggressive, but more likely to be very, very aggressive — way out at the most extreme. That would fit with the theory. Of course, a cop dealing with an aggrieved homeowner is hardly an extreme circumstance. Based on hypothesis above, you’d probably be more worried about a black guy than a white one, all things being equal, if you were a cop. (This would be in addition to any racist effects that may or may not be at work.)
.
I’m not sure I explained my point about the shift in power between Gates and Crowley properly. No one is disputing that Crowley had the upper hand at Gates’s house. That’s why I’m inclined to agree with you that he should NOT have arrested Gates — since he had the authority, he had the responsibility not to abuse it. However, it is equally clear that Gates has the upper hand now — in the public debate arena. Gates has been willing to exercise his discretionary power just as abusively as Crowley did, in my view. Do you dispute this? I don’t deny that there’s been criticism of Gates and Obama, but my perception is that the weight of the coverage has been pretty heavily in Gates’s favor. I mean, Crowley is being dragged to the White House for a re-education session with Gates! How pathetic is that!
.
That doesn’t let Crowley off the hook, but it does mean that Gates doesn’t come off looking so good either.
.
So IAT is the online thing I was describing? I don’t know whether it’s been “validated” or not — I’m not even sure I know what that means, to be honest. But there’s a long chain between establishing that people associate negative words with black faces and that this somehow explains any differences in real-world outcomes. One basic question is Is this a cause or an effect? Has the “validation” answered that question? If so, how?
.
No1KState, my objective is not to explain away every instance of racism, I’m not denying that it exists — in fact I’m on record as suggesting that there’s probably a biological basis for racism. My point is that racism is not as powerful an explainer as is assumed on this website. Like most conspiracy theories, this one doesn’t hold up very well. Why do I care? Well, for two reasons, one of which I’m sure you’ll believe and the second you may not.
.
First the easy one. I’m sick to death of being accused of racism at every turn. I’m tired of racism being used as an explanation for every discrepancy in outcome. In my own industry at least, I know exactly what it takes to succeed, and the fact is that being black would have been a benefit to me at most stages of my education and career — all else being equal.
.
Second, I think this mindset is terrible for blacks. Even if the racist conspiracy existed, it’s not at all clear to me that you do blacks any favors by producing a ready-made explanation for failure. That’s not to say you should quietly tolerate racism and be glad for whatever you get. But is there NO personal responsibility?
>In my own industry at least, I know exactly what it takes to succeed, and the fact is that being black would have been a benefit to me at most stages of my education and career
.
oh, the white victim card.
But it’s truly odd that white Americans, the most privileged people on earth, feel discriminated against. Imagine that.
Darin – you are not paying attention to my arguments at all. I am going to go thru this one more time and then I am done with you, unless you actually address what I am saying
You said:
“…whether higher rates of black crime are caused by heredity or environment is completely beside the point of whether blacks are more violent. You asked if it was reasonable for a person to think blacks are more aggressive than whites, and the disproportionate rate of violent crime seems like a pretty good reason.”
No Darin:
The issue about white perceptions of black aggression are not abstract but are based on research where whites are exposed to the VERY SAME BEHAVIOR by whites and blacks, or even MORE aggression by whites, and yet perceive the blacks as more aggressive. That has nothing to do with black crime rates, general aggressiveness, or anything else. It has to do with perceptions even when the behavior is NOT aggressive by blacks.
.
You said:
“No evidence of bias by blacks toward whites? What? Are you serious? You can’t be — I’ll assume I’ve misunderstood something you said. Can you try saying it a different way?”
You didn’t read carefully. I was responding to the implicit bias test stuff, and noting that when blacks have taken the test they do NOT indicate bias towards whites, the way whites do towards blacks. As for bias generally, every survey you can find, and every psychological experiment that has been devised to uncover bias, which might remain hidden in a survey, has indicated far lower rates of anti-white bias on the part of blacks than anti-black bias on the part of whites. That is what I was saying. YOu can provide no counterevidence, or if you can, you have been remarkably unwilling to do so up to now
You said:
“I read an interesting discussion about why blacks commit more violent crimes generally, but fewer outrageous, serial-killer-type crimes than whites. One possible explanation is that a trait or collection of traits called “criminality” varies such that blacks have a higher mean, but whites have a wider distribution. What that means is that, although the average white level of “criminality” may be lower, it’s higher than blacks’ at the extreme high end. (http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/serial.htm) Remains to be proven, of course, but I find it intriguing. Bear in mind that this “trait” of criminality could conceivably have both hereditary and environmental causes.”
I don’t know anything about this theory. But the point is, there are other reasons too, possibly. Over the top kinds of crimes (serial killing, sexual sadism, etc) are crimes rooted in a desire for control and domination (sort of like genocide, conquest and colonialism for that matter)…so it may be that whites, as a more privileged group, used to having control, are more likely to display control pathologies when they feel their “control” (over their own lives or others) threatened in some way, or slipping, etc (thus, the dispro rates of white workplace killers, etc)…Just a theory, but interesting to explore. As for blacks generally being more violent, you just can’t make that claim from crime data: first off, many forms of white violence, like corporate corner cutting, illegal warmaking, etc., are not criminalized,. even though they do more harm than street thugs. Secondly, even if we accept the data as the final word, fact is, such a small percentage of blacks commit a violent crime in a given year (3% or fewer) that to claim any kind of group trait, whether biological or environmental is a bit of a stretch. What we do know is that once the full range of socioeconomic factors are controlled for there is literally no significant crime difference based on race. Anyone who therefore says that blacks, because of blackness, are more dangerous is a liar or a racist or both.
You said:
“I’m not sure I explained my point about the shift in power between Gates and Crowley properly. No one is disputing that Crowley had the upper hand at Gates’s house. That’s why I’m inclined to agree with you that he should NOT have arrested Gates — since he had the authority, he had the responsibility not to abuse it. However, it is equally clear that Gates has the upper hand now — in the public debate arena. Gates has been willing to exercise his discretionary power just as abusively as Crowley did, in my view. Do you dispute this? I don’t deny that there’s been criticism of Gates and Obama, but my perception is that the weight of the coverage has been pretty heavily in Gates’s favor. I mean, Crowley is being dragged to the White House for a re-education session with Gates! How pathetic is that!”
This is crazy darin – he is not being brought for re-education. He is being brought for a beer. If you think Obama is about ideological haranguing and re-education you don’t know him very well, and probably also believe he was born in Kenya, is a Muslim, etc. And you don;t know Gates very well either. The public perception is heavily against Gates. He is being attacked in all quarters: in print, on television, etc regularly by talk radio, etc., and the cop has been portrayed as a great guy because he once gave mouth to mouth to a dying athlete! The power is hardly with gates. Indeed, that the President had to apologize suggests how little power he really has. If he offends too many white people, he’s through politically…which means that even the friggin Boston police union has more juice right now than Obama…
You said:
“So IAT is the online thing I was describing? I don’t know whether it’s been “validated” or not — I’m not even sure I know what that means, to be honest. But there’s a long chain between establishing that people associate negative words with black faces and that this somehow explains any differences in real-world outcomes. One basic question is Is this a cause or an effect? Has the “validation” answered that question? If so, how?”
The test is not about associating negative words with blacks. It is about reaction time. If it takes longer to associate positive words with blacks and negative words with whites, it means our minds are having a harder time processing that information when it appears contrary to our implicit biases. You should read the materials on the IAT and its social science validity: it is extensive and I haven’t the time to recount it all here…fact is, these implicit biases are clear in a lot of areas: gender, religion, race, body size, etc and always indicate bias in exactly the direction you’d think. If the results were merely random, there would be no reason for the results to always run in the direction they do, and no reason at all for blacks to display no implicit biases, while whites do…i.e., if racism was “natural” or biological” as you suggest, it would play out equally for everyone, and it doesn’t.
.
You said:
“I’m on record as suggesting that there’s probably a biological basis for racism”
Evidence please? If this were true, tell me: why was there so little “racism” among the Greeks when they came in contact with Africans, for whom they had substantial respect, and about whom they drew no color-based conclusions? Why was it necessary to impose segregation and anti-miscegenation laws? If racism were natural, people would have avoided each other naturally, without such state laws…and finally, why was there so much cross-color affinity and collaboration in the colonies of what would become the U.S.? That is, until the elite decided to use color as the dividing tool to split working class coalitions?
This isn’t a conspiracy theory. It is what happened, historically.
You said:
“I’m sick to death of being accused of racism at every turn”
Not sure who did this to you, but if you believe blacks are inherently inferior in any way, you are a racist by definition. Sorry but that’s the friggin definition.
You said:
“I’m tired of racism being used as an explanation for every discrepancy in outcome.”
Not sure who did that either, but I’m equally tired of white people acting like massive group discrepancies are NOT because of racism, hardly at all, even though the only alternative explanation IS that blacks are just inferior–I mean, it’s pretty much one or the other. There is no reason to believe in major group distinctions in achievement barring either inferiority/superiority or unequal opportunity. If you believe the first you are a racist and I don’t much care if you like it. Individual inequities are one thing: group-clustered ones make no sense as “natural” barring theories of inferiority/superiority
You said:
” In my own industry at least, I know exactly what it takes to succeed, and the fact is that being black would have been a benefit to me at most stages of my education and career — all else being equal.”
This is laughable. What industry is that Darin? Tell me a few things. What industry is there where blacks are running things and doing better than whites? name one…How old are you? What part of the country do you live in? Where did you go to school and when? What did your family do before you? I need to know these things in order to fully explore this bizarre claim of yours.
“Second, I think this mindset is terrible for blacks. Even if the racist conspiracy existed, it’s not at all clear to me that you do blacks any favors by producing a ready-made explanation for failure. That’s not to say you should quietly tolerate racism and be glad for whatever you get. But is there NO personal responsibility?”
personal responsiblity is great, and not inconsistent with collectively taking responsibility for injustice. Surveys show blacks believe in hard work as the key to success, even more than whites, but that doesn’t mean they don’t also believe we need to fight racism. Why are these exclusive in your mind?> More to the point: why do you think personal responsibility is only something for blacks to take? By the logic that blacks as a group should take personal responsibility for their lives and communities (which they do, frankly, and unless you have spent a lot of time in such communities, as I have, you won’t know this), shouldn’t whites also have to take personal responsibility for OUR part of the equation? The biases we have, the discrimination that takes place and then benefits us? The advantages we have had historically and from which we still benefit today? If you say not to this then you are a hypocrite. Here is something I wrote on this subject several years ago and which sums up my position on personal responsibility:
http://www.lipmagazine.org/~timwise/PersonalResponsibility.html
@ Darin – Wow. You noticed me.
~
You clearly are trying to explain away racism. Otherwise, you’d actually read the studies and stop making assumptions based on your limited experience with racism, and that from the giving end. If you don’t wanna be racist, or accused of racism, stop presuming the worst when it comes to minorities. No one suggests that personal responsibility isn’t important, but it’s moot. In general, blacks are as much and sometimes more personally responsible than whites; and all the data points to racism. It’s not some crazy, paranoid, schizaphrenic conspiracy theory. It’s reality, demonstrated by the fact that you think, or are willing to accept, that 30mill+ African Americans have some sort of mental defect causing us to incorrectly interpret our own experiences. If a person thinks, or is willing to accept the notion, that all the disparities is caused by lack pf personal responsibility; criminality; lower IQ, etc and so, that person is RACIST. Period. End of story. I mean really. White people love to fantasize about all the benefits they would have if they were black, but you are wrong to assume that if you were black, everything in your life would be the same except the color of your skin. If you were black, you’d have to prove your intelligence, your harmlessness, your competency, your niceness, etc and so on. Even now, instead of excepting the facts of a study on its on basis – that the black actors and white actors portrayed the same level of aggressiveness – you excuse the misremembering of the white viewers by saying it’s “rational” to think that blacks are more aggressive. You don’t even realize with that statement, you prove the point! Which is that white Americans have negative prejudices and biases of African Americans that have nothing to do with what actually occurs in front of them. That is RACISM!
~
And if you can except the appropriateness of whites assuming blacks are more aggressive, then you should understand how that plays out in criminal justice: cops profile; witnesses misremember; juries presume guilt; judges give harsher penalties. See, you can’t say that it’s okay, or expected, that whites would have all these negative ideas about blacks, regardless of the facts in front of them; and at the same time, ignore the implications that 250mill+ white people having these prejudices will result in a disparity of outcome for people of color.
~
The white pathology/mental defect to blithely reject evidence indicating racism is evident in the public response to the Gates case. Now we know, it is a fact that Crowley lied in his report about the “two big black men with backpacks.” The report is false. If it wasn’t Crowley who dreamed up the two big black guys – here it should be noted that when “big” precedes “black guys/men,” it is a code word for “scary, subjects possibly armed and dangerous.” – somebody dreamed up these two big black guys; and therefore, Gates was right in his assertion that what was happening to him was due to race. Another problem with Crowley’s story is that he says he asked Gates to come outside because the burglars could’ve been in Gates’s home without his being aware; but I haven’t heard that any of the cops actually went inside and looked for these alleged burglars. So despite all the evidence that Crowley was wrong and/or Gates was right, there is still this outrage against Gates and a resolution in the House to force Pres. Obama to apologize for his statements. A resolution brought by a Republican from Michigan and with at least 7 co-signers. The Mich representative told Chris Matthews that as a co-equal branch of the govt, it was Congress’s duty to speak out against Pres. Obama’s “over-reaching” his executive roles. This from a group of people who balk at the mere suggestion that we investigate torture and illegal wiretapping. And I don’t wanna say that even this resolution is an act of racism; but it’s awfully hard to imagine a white president being reprimanded this way for stating his opinion of a closed case.
~
Don’t misunderstand. I can sympathize with not wanting to be blamed for someone else’s “failures.” But, if the shoe fits . . . duck! Even the notion that “racism” is just used as an excuse for failure is racist as it assumes that: 1 – the person or group of people are lying; or, 2 – they just don’t measure up. The first assumption is disproven by studies and research detailing the unearned advantages that come with white skin. We know that applications filled out for jobs or apartments that are exactly the same except the race of the applicant or the “sound” of the name, gives the white applicant, or person with the white “sounding” name, a significantly better chance at employment or housing. So we’re not lying. And the second assumption is disproven by the accomplishments of people of color despite racism, and the demonstration of excellence when racial barriers are eliminated.
~
Just because we’re “paranoid” doesn’t mean we’re not being followed.
Know what, Tim, I think I’ve had enough of this discussion. You’re taking it very personally, which is not my intent.
.
I already know my views are not politically correct, and I don’t care, so informing me I’m a racist has pretty much no effect on me. I don’t accept your authority to make that judgment, and I reject the accusation. But it does make it pretty clear that we’re not going to have a reasonable, thoughtful discussion.
.
You know, for all your talk about bias and prejudice and racism, and for all your claiming the high ground, it still stands that YOU’RE the one judging ME — not the other way around. Ironic.
Jeebus Darin, Tim’s obviously not taking what you’re writing personally! He’s responding point by point to what you’ve written, something you are not willing to do with what he’s written (as Tim pointed out).
>
And to say that your words fit the definition of “racist” is not to judge you. It’s to say that your words fit the definition of racist. If you disagree, prove it, instead of weakly claiming that you’re being “judged.”
You’re a bloody coward, man, trying to walk away with a false sense of pride from the gun fight that you showed up at with nothing more than a knife.
@ Darin! You are hilarious! LOL!
–
X-D
–
I mean actually accusing someone else of not engaging in “reasonable, thoughtful discussion” when it’s you who won’t address the results and implications of these studies as well as the implications of your own stated beliefs about people of color and disparities? Wow. That takes some chutzpah!
It’s “Ironic”!
I’m sorry. Someone, besides Darin, please, explain this to me – In what world can you profess to have “politically incorrect” views and demonstrate that you, at best, find the notion of white superiority plausible, and not be a racist. Someone explain that to me. Wouldn’t that be like a man, who openly states he thinks women shouldn’t work outside the home, claiming that he’s not sexist? What, exactly, is the logic?
No1KState, I think you made a couple good points in your post, and I wanted to try to respond.
.
You said I’m trying to “explain away racism.” I’m not sure I know what that means. I have very clearly stated that I am sure it exists. You also accuse me of “making assumptions.” That’s backwards. I’m the one raising doubts — are you SURE Crowley is a racist? Are you SURE a racist conspiracy explains the differences in outcome you see? You guys are the ones making all the bold conclusions. Don’t you agree?
.
I didn’t state or imply that blacks are, in fact, less responsible than whites, contrary to your post. What I said was that giving blacks a prepackaged excuse for failure works against personal responsibility. Do you see the distinction I’m making?
.
I never said anything about mental defects, inferiority, white supremacy, or any of the other loaded terms that are being attributed to me. I hope you guys will at least consider, though, that it’s POSSIBLE there are differences between races that are more than skin deep. If you’re holding out for not just moral equality but complete equivalence as a basis for believing that racism is wrong, then you open the question of whether its okay to to treat races differently in moral terms to empiricism. By that logic, if somebody could prove that, say, Polynesians are less kind than other races, it would be okay to pass laws against Polynesians. I don’t think it is okay, whether they turn out to be kind or not.
.
It’s true that there’s a definition of “racism” that includes believing races are different. It’s a stupid definition because racism is such a heavily charged term. That definition is too broad to be useful — unless the use you have in mind is labeling as many people as possible as racists. Then it’s great.
.
You said, “White people love to fantasize about all the benefits they would have if they were black, but you are wrong to assume that if you were black, everything in your life would be the same except the color of your skin.” Yes, I agree. That’s why I stipulated “all things being equal.” That was the context of the comment. I recognize that all things are NOT equal, chief among them that I would have grown up among black peers who discourage the kind of behavior that is necessary to succeed as “acting white.” That’s a big burden.
.
Okay, now your most interesting point:
.
“And if you can except the appropriateness of whites assuming blacks are more aggressive, then you should understand how that plays out in criminal justice: cops profile; witnesses misremember; juries presume guilt; judges give harsher penalties. See, you can’t say that it’s okay, or expected, that whites would have all these negative ideas about blacks, regardless of the facts in front of them; and at the same time, ignore the implications that 250mill+ white people having these prejudices will result in a disparity of outcome for people of color.”
.
You’re right. This could be true. It could be that blacks as a whole commit more crimes, so any one black defendant is treated more harshly because he’s presumed guilty. (The technical term for this kind of assumption is “prior degree of belief.”) The problem we’ve got here is that if this kind of thing goes on, it could be entirely rational — in other words, a black judge or a black cop would act the same way. To weed it out, you’d have to ask the legal establishment to ignore something it knows to be true. That’s a lot harder than getting people to ignore something that isn’t true. For example, you can convince white people that blacks are human beings just like them, “endowed by their Creator…” and so on, because it’s true. You might not be able to convince them that a black defendant is just as likely to be innocent as a white one because it may NOT be true.
.
Leave aside for a second whether you believe I’ve got the facts right, and just let me know if you follow my argument — it’s complex, and I’m not too good at explaining it.
.
I think this kind of thing is the real heart of the problem. The train comes off the tracks when you stop talking about moral truths and obvious injustices (e.g., Jim Crow laws) and start talking about things that are (or might be) contrary to fact in exactly the same terms. Furthermore, if it is true, the fault lies as much in the black culture that makes those prior beliefs rational as it does anywhere else. In other words, if what I just described is actually happening, then the only way to fix it will be for blacks to stop committing violent crime at eight times the white rate.
.
I’m not saying this is fair. It isn’t. I’m not saying it’s good. I’m not saying it’s how it ought to be. I’m suggesting this may be how it is, and that it may be a lot harder to change than moral attitudes about race ever were.
.
Make sense?
Tim, I found your lectures on-line to be very interesting and helpful about what is going on with this site…I would like to ask you some questions..I will come back later because I want to be spesific. Also, I do have one question for you now. “Do you think that the southern states are more prone to be racist then the northern states”? And, is there any data other then observation to support your answer…Please be gentle it’s only a question.:)
@Darin-Look up Tim’s name on-line may help you understand what is being discussed..Thanks Mom:)
Darin, you keep asking the question about “are blacks as racist towards whites visa… The answer, it depends..Most of the “kids” from all cultures are a “pain”. However, most adults are not, or at least, this has been my experience with people in general, at work, and on the street.. I would hope that the older you get in any culture you would “mellow”..That’s why at work, I tend to stay with the older crowd from all different cultures. ..The young kids from all cultures are more aggressive because their frontal lobes are not fully devolved.. . I would think you really have to be a mean spirited person if you didn’t mellow with age…My Mother is experiencing some horrible problems were she lives, and it has nothing to do with black children, it has to do with young white little punks that keep verbally abusing her. And, if they keep it up you may read about a little old lady getting arrested..LOL 🙂
I love how I ask Darin to tell me his industry, aged and background, so I can process his claim that he’d have been better off as a black man, and then he accuses me of getting personal and walks away…you are funny Darin, really, a scream. And a liar. You can’t or won’t be specific about yourself because you know if you do we can show you up as a fool, so you slink away…
As for us considering the “possibility” of group differences, we’ve all considered it Darin, and looked at the evidence, and concluded that the argument is bullshit. These arguments have been around forever, and have been debunked. You can troll white nationalist websites all day, or whatever it is you do, and conclude otherwise; you can rely on the work of notorious crackpots like Phil Rushton or whatever, but if you would just do the homework that we on this board have done re: these issues you would realize the silliness of racial supremacy claims. As for “differences,” that was not the problem in your argument: but if you claim that blacks are perhaps inherently aggressive, or less intelligent, or less hard working, you are making a claim of value (superiority/inferiority) and you damn well know it. Not to mention, the burden is YOURS to prove those things are true. It is not our burden to disprove them. Read Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth, or The Race Myth by Joseph Graves, or Intelligence and How to Get It, by Richard Nisbett to see the full compliment of evidence totally eviscerating everything you seem to believe but are too gutless to own on this forum (so you hide behind statements like “is it possible?). Unless and until you can bring facts to this forum, rather than your mere opinions and loaded questions (to which experts have long provided conclusive answers, including many of us on this board, who are not just internet forum trolls but practitioners and scholars in this field), you are wasting everyone’s time…
Oh, one last question Darin: you say you are in an “industry” where being a black person would have helped you. I am curious, how can someone in ANY industry, have so much time to post on this board, especially in the daytime (which is when I’m told you do most of your posting historically) when most people in INDUSTRY are working? Is it possible that your problem at work is not being white, but perhaps that you are too busy on the internet to do your job? And even with your late night, early morning posts, might it be the case that you’re falling down on the job because you aren’t getting enough sleep? I mean, I’m just ASKING, “is it possible????” (Sound familiar?)
Darin, I don’t know what you do for a living, but I feel that you must be involved with the law…I don’t know what a internet troll means, but I do believe, that was directed at you…I also took the liberty to look up Tim, and found his lectures to be very interesting… I hope you do the same..Thanks MOM:)
Correction: the troll was directed at me sorry.
no no MOM, the troll comment was directed at him, trust me…
Tim, come on now. I said you’re taking it personally, not that you’re getting personal. Now that you mention it, though, you are doing your best to make it personal. We’ll add “liar” to the list of names you’ve directed at me — along with “racist,” and now “fool.” Nice debating technique, tough guy. Civilized. Very persuasive. I feel a wave of self-criticism coming on right now!
.
I’m sorry you think I’m ignoring your points. I’m not doing intentionally. It’s tough to juggle comments from multiple people, and I’m sure I haven’t addressed every point that you thought was important. That’s how life is. Believe me when I say it goes both ways, so it’s pretty exasperating to read you saying if I don’t respond to each and every point you’ve made you’re “done with me.” Well, I decided I’m done with you, instead.
@ Mom – No, I’m pretty sure it directed at Darin. A “troll” is someone who posts messages on comment threads for the specific purpose of causing discord. Sometimes they stick around, sometimes they’re one hit wonders. But they say things they know regular commentors will find objectionable and provide no evidence or proof of their statements.
~
@ Darin – I’m going to decline walking you through the errors of the points you make. Tim pretty much makes the case. You don’t seem to want to engage in honest conversation, so why waste my time and energy when both are precious to me? When you are ready to receive the truth, then a conversation will be warranted.
~
But. I can’t resist correcting a point of fact and offer another way to solve the problem of white perceptions of black agressiveness. I’m not all surprised you got this particular issue wrong; most people have been misinformed on the subject. And the second issue involves accepting facts, and so I probably shouldn’t engage you on that point, but it’s a fairly quick retort.
So.
1) The whole “acting white” trope is a myth. It only happens in very specific situations – schools that either have close to equal numbers of black and white students or school where one group is the majority and the other makes up at least 35%. Truth is, that’s situation is relatively uncommon. Most, if not all, high achieving black students don’t let the teasing stop them. Because US education in general is white-centric, a high achieving black student does have to act white to gain acceptance by the teachers, and part of this act is to pretend to accept that what you’re being told – that black English is lazy and backwards; the black people didn’t make but a handful of significant contributions to US history and literature – is true. If you do accept what’s being told as true, that likely means that you think your black classmates are inferior to you and certainly your white classmates. So the issue being communicated with accusations of and teasing that a child is “acting white” has to do with race politics. Do you, the high achieving black student, really believe blackness is inferior? In this struggle against white dominance, are you really siding with the enemy? Sure, the adolescent desire to belong is a play, but it’s being used to demand race pride and group fidelity in the face of opposition. That is to say that students manipulate the need to be accepted as a tool of anti-racism with the intention being to decifer what side of the issue the high achieving black student falls on. And it’s important to note that the power of this manipulation rests in the fact that high achieving black students aren’t accepted in their full humanity by white students and not the desire to be accepted by black peers. The threat isn’t just rejection by black, but thereby acceptance from white peers; the threat is that you won’t be accepted by anyone at all. ~ Of course, it’s a wrongheaded and crude way to fight racism. But it’s not pointless. There is the handful of students who don’t work as hard and achieve as much as they could because they want to demonstrate their pride and fidelity. But usually, everyone comes to understand what’s at stake and reconcile themselves to their limited options just in time for salvage their futures. ~ So in the end, the whole “acting white” phenomenon isn’t as widespread is mythologized. And it’s overall impact on test scores and college admissions is neglible.
~
Folks (any reader not just Darin) should understand the tightrope and unenviable position black students in these situations are put in. You, as a black person, really have to demonstrate to teachers your rejection of “(popular) black culture” just to get the proper education. And to some extent, it does entail snubbing your black peers, who are actual people with actual feelings which you don’t wanna hurt. I don’t think I suffered an irregular amount of grief. I actually thought I had walked this tightrope okay. I made a point of sitting off to myself at the beginning of school years; needing to show the teacher I wasn’t one of “them” but also hoping to show my black peers I wasn’t one of “them (white classmates and teachers),” either. It wasn’t until my junior year, when being the only black student in half of my classes left my know choice, that I actually befriended any of my white classmates. My presense in our local black church community and some friendships I made playing middle school basketball probably kept me from being teased. It was just around 6weeks ago that a friend from high school told me it seems as though I “didn’t care too much for the black kids.” Looking back, I can recall a few cold stares. But by the same token, it was hard not to go “angry black female” when I saw my black classmates being sent home for infractions that were hardly noticed when committed by a white kid. Not to put too fine a point on it. It’s not like black students have to be the MLK of their classes. But. Our present education system puts some minority kids in positions that should be reserved for adults, if they occur at all. Truth be told, as incredibly bright as I was – #7 in my class only because I didn’t take AP chem junior year – I’m not sure what my experience would’ve been like if my mother hadn’t taught at that school. (She came out two years before I entered high school). ~ And since I do wanna make sure I don’t sound like a matyr, I will confess: awards day was my favorite day in high school. Having to cross several classmates in order to get to the stage, I winked at one friend and whispered, “There’s some more money right there.” =) That feel real good!
~
2)
. Like Tim pointed out, that line has been used since the day after the Civil War. But. It can be fixed and this is how – remove the sociopolitical and economic barriers African Americans face such that the level of concentrated poverty, among other markers, is made equal to whites, and the crime rate will fall.
@ Mom – If you ask about #2, I will explain it to you. I just don’t wanna explain it to Darin for the sake of principle.
The reason I asked you that question about the southern states is because of the turbulent history, regarding, the KKK 1865. The KKK does not like a lot of people from different ethnic or religious beliefs.. In fact, I do believe they still rally in Raleigh, NC from time to time.
Jim Crow Laws 1876-1965 (which I had to look up because I thought we were talking about a “real person”).
Last lynching–1946
I know you have this information, but I have to tell you, that I lived in the South for over ten years…I didn’t understand why some southern people still have nooses hanging in their yards, but it’s all coming together now. It has been 63 years since the last lynching..I don’t understand why it took from 1865-1946 to put a stop to it..
1965-The Jim Crow laws regarding segregation were finally changed by the Civil Rights Moment..I think that we all are blessed to have someone like Martin Luther King to have walked among us in our lifetime..It’s only been 44 years, since the civil rights were enacted…
1920- Women were allowed to vote. I keep coming back to this because I was told about 2 months ago by a white male co-worker that since women in this country were allowed to vote that the whole country has gone to H@@, as he proceeded or tried to message my shoulders..YIKES!
I don’t know were I’m going with all this, but I’m a fact person because it’s just makes better scene too me, so that’s why I go back and look at the history…I will keep searching and looking at material, but I am glad, that as of “today” there has been “some” progress made. I just don’t understand why it took so long…Hopefully, I’ll be able to figure it out soon. Thanks, Mom
@ Mom – Jim Crow Laws 1876-1965 (which I had to look up because I thought we were talking about a “real person”).
Last lynching–1946
I know you have this information, but I have to tell you, that I lived in the South for over ten years…I didn’t understand why some southern people still have nooses hanging in their yards, but it’s all coming together now. It has been 63 years since the last lynching..I don’t understand why it took from 1865-1946 to put a stop to it..
1965-The Jim Crow laws regarding segregation were finally changed by the Civil Rights Moment..
If you think that’s bad, you don’t know the half of it! Read Douglas Blackmon’s SLAVERY BY ANOTHER NAME.
@ Mom – I do not believe that racism is more prevalent in the South, no. I think racism is equally prevalent all over the United States, but that it manifests differently depending on the region, for historical reasons among others. I think raw and visceral racism–and the kind that often is based in pseudo-religious beliefs–is more prevalent in the South. But whites in the North, midwest and west coast are just as likely, according to all evidence I have seen to hold negative and racist views about blacks, for instance. There is an old saying which I think may have some basis in sociological fact: it goes basically like this: In the South, whites don’t mind how close blacks are to them, so long as they don’t rise too high; and in the North, whites don’t mind how high blacks rise, so long as they don’t get too close. In other words, in the South, interracial contact is actually fairly common, as are friendships across racial lines, but the hierarchy is deeply seated. In the North, there will be less hierarchy perhaps (?) but also far less closeness, in terms of neighborhoods, etc…
@Tim-I never thought of it that way..However, I live in a neighborhood that has a “mixed” bag of people…This neighborhood is probably one of the nicest for this area..I not debating what you are suggesting, but I just find it interesting..I also noticed, when I lived in the South, all the confederate flags on houses etc..The people in the North would not get away with that kind of stuff, nor do we think about the Cival War, which I had been educated by the southern people who apparently still seem to be upset over..In fact, when I grew up we were all segregated by ethnic groups..Italians, Polish, Hungarians, Germans etc. That’s the kind of neighborhoods that we had in the city…However, we also had the projects, where I also lived, vacationed, and when I left, my grandmother stayed, so my brother and I went there to visit her for summers and almost every weekend..What I found out along the way, it does not matter where your house in located, but rather, what’s going on in the home.. I still have much research and reading to do, so just want to thank you for your paticence with me..Mom:)
@No1State–I think I have an understanding about what you were trying to get across to Darin..I also looked at another tread where you stated that “black people” have not had enough time to catch up..And, after looking back through the history, how could anyone disagree..However, this may sound a little weird to you, but please keep an open mind.. I’ve been thinking about the black or African Americans in general, and just by the little research that Ive done, I feel, that there has been an enormous amount of progress made..Now, by saying that does not mean that there still injustices being done everyday, but I admire all that has been accomplished in the short amount of time…I wonder if the reason why there has been so much oppression was the fact that maybe there is a certain amount of fear about what could be accomplished if given the chance..I feel, that if a certain group of people could come over here in the conditions that they had to endure, and survive those conditions, that those group of people would not be a force to be reckoned with..Maybe this why it has taken so long..Just a thought…One more thing, were do you get all your energy? LOL Thanks, Mom:)
@ Mom – I agree with you 100%. We have made enormous strides! It’s kinda like we were “ready from day one” to “hit the ground running.” So, yeah. To look at where we were in 1969 to now, we are an amazing group of people and I’m very proud. I am reminded that resilliance is a trait of humanity, that any other group would accomplish as much. But with all that’s said about African Americans in MSM, and the fact that in trying to disprove black inferiority, you inevitably end up discussing crime rates . . . it’s just awfully, awfully empowering, and just plain old nice, to remember the facts.
~
LOL! I have a disabling health condition that presents similar to chronic fatiuge. What you’re “reading” is more passion mixed with shots of adrenaline and lots of free time than sheer energy. The last time someone described me as having a lot of energy was around 5 years ago, so it’s very encouraging that you made that observation.
Darin posted: “How do you know Blacks’ perceptions are not skewed by racism? After all, there’s been far more historical mistreatment of Blacks by Whites in America than vice versa. Maybe Blacks are the ones holding a grudge, who are subconsciously racist.”
>
I want to highlight this because a post on another blog reminded me of this meme and the striking irony of it all. Clearly, by Darin’s own logic, White Racism/Whites is at fault for “skewed Black perspectives” and even Black anti-white racism, subconscious or otherwise, among Blacks/African-Americans.
>
I bright this up because it’s a perfect way to illustrate a point. A point that just happens to contradict another one of Darin’s postulates: that Black people (however many) blame all the problems in their community on racism/Whites.
>
While I’m sure there are plenty of Black people who would, more or less, agree with Darin that racism/WHITE SUPREMACY/White society has done a number on Black people (see internalized racism), African-Americans have long since assumed the responsibility of (re)constructing a healthy self-concept to deal with the problems caused by centuries of negative racial stereotypes and the racist mistreatment that comes from it.
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/black-is-beautiful/
Thank you so much for writing this. Pointing out the frame or the lens from which different people view this situation around racial lines is extremely helpful. And highlighting the assumptions that whites hold, while contrasting that with the experience of blacks, is powerful. The research is interesting, and terrifying in its implications in the criminal justice system (the Levinson study). It gives another layer to my understanding of what makes the criminal justice system is so racist.