White people believe that they face the worst racism

…according to a study in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science.

The study, called ‘Whites see racism as a zero-sum game that they are now losing‘, by Michael Norton and Samuel Sommers, suggests that white Americans surveyed think that they are now more widely discriminated against than black people, and that this supposed ‘anti-white bias’ is a bigger societal problem than the real anti-black bias. (This is an American-based study, and I think the problem is probably more prominent there, but since I only know the UK, and I see a similar trend happening over here, I will be using UK-based examples.)

After all of the wrongdoings of the past, governments are now at least trying to make society more equal for everyone, but the damage that has been done has penetrated society too deeply to disappear overnight. Ideas that black people and indeed people of other ethnicities are in some way inferior are ingrained in the collective consciousness, to the extent that when their position in society begins to improve, white people have started to cry ‘racism!’ Are we really selfish and shortsighted enough to convince ourselves that all along, all they were complaining about was the fact that white people had a more privileged position in society? Is history no longer taught in schools?

Many of my black friends have talked to me about the racism they experience in daily life, whether it’s a remark they have overheard from someone in the street, or discrimination by the authorities. A large proportion of my black friends have been subject to at least one stop and search by the police. As far as I know, none of my white friends have. Figures published in 2010 indicated that black people were seven times more likely to be stopped than white people.

These stops and searches under Section 44 were last January ruled illegal by the European Court of Human Rights for their arbitrary and widespread usage, as well as their disproportionate targeting of blacks and Asians. Now are we going to label this as racism against white people? Of course not, because it is utterly transparent that this was a case of inequality. So how can the same principle of removing inequality apply in other situations and be called ‘anti-white bias’?

This is how I see it. Most white people don’t even know they are white until they are in a room full of black people. They don’t have to; society holds them in a more privileged position by default, and in the past it was a rare occasion that a white person would find themselves in such a situation. Now, however, it is becoming more common.

Having used this example already, I will continue with it. The stop and search issue can be held at arms length and viewed relatively objectively by white people as inequality that needs to be extinguished. Why? Because it just doesn’t happen to white people. But when the situation for non-Caucasians starts to improve in other, less subtle ways, why is the reaction turned on its head?

I have seen this time and time again in previous jobs; the anecdote of the poor white person who lost out on a job opportunity to the black person who ‘wasn’t even as good at the job’. ‘Political correctness gone mad’, they say. Whenever I hear this it makes me cringe. Yes, there are guidelines to say that workforces (dependent on who applies) need to be representative of the general population, but why do I find it hard to believe that a less skilled person would be favoured over a more skilled person? From a productivity point of view, it doesn’t make sense for a company to employ an inferior applicant. Surely it’s more likely to be the case that the two people are equally skilled, but the white person doesn’t know how to react because it’s an unfamiliar situation they find themselves in, but in the name of improving standards of equality it has to happen. I suspect that if the job was given to another white person, then sure, the other candidate would be annoyed, and would probably make some digs about capability, but as soon as preference is given to a black person, the problem becomes about skin colour. It’s an easy target.

To cite another article:

a co-author of the study called the results “surprising.” That’s putting it mildly. But maybe we’ve missed the way white Americans have been systemically deprived of access and opportunities. Maybe we’ve overlooked all the times whites have been targeted by implicit and explicit race-baiting attacks, whether they’re playing professional sports or seeking elected office. Maybe we didn’t get the memo on the way the legacy of discrimination against white Americans continues to manifest itself in worse outcomes in income, home ownership, health and employment for them, the way white people are told they’re “objectively” ugly, and the disgust so many Americans felt the last time a white person ran for president.

Now imagine all this actually happening to a white person. Quite simply; it would not happen. The privileged position we hold is so blinkered to reality that it’s only when someone uses analogy like that displayed above that we realise it’s really not so bad after all. Yet some people will continue to complain. Please open your eyes. Try shutting up, listening and learning something. Racism is still a part of the daily life of non-white people, manifesting itself in all aspects of their lives.

So if you are a white person and you have read all this and disagree: Think you know racism? Think again.

28 Responses to White people believe that they face the worst racism

  1. I am not disagreeing that there is racism in the world that needs to be obliterated, but you will never erase the inequality with more inequality.

    What the author fails to address is how those of us who are NOT racist are treated when we are the only odd one out in the room – no matter what race you are. I can speak from my own experiences, that the racism flows from those who claim to be the oppressed far more venomously – reaction or not, its still wrong.

    I got lucky, I was born looking mighty white – I realize that, appreciate it, and try my damnedest to make sure that no one feels excluded or discriminated against in the work place or in my personal life. Your unique skin tone, ethnic heritage and culture is in fact more fascinating to me than you probably will enjoy. (I have been called nosey more than once – and made foolish mistakes in my desire to be inclusive.)

    It might surprise you to know that I too – the white girl – have been the victim of racism and religious intolerance. It’s not fun, it’s not funny, and it’s not something I would tolerate in myself, my children or those I choose to associate with – even against those whose intolerance is lacking. It only adds fuel to their fire, as hate begets hate.

    If we all would just learn to accept that everyone is different – skin tone similarities or not, and that everyone (child, woman, man ) is deserving of respect, the world would be a better place.

    • Hello there, Eden.

      Firstly, as far as I’m aware, nowhere in the article is it claimed that inequality can be erased with more inequality or whatsoever, the point that has been made is that white people thinking they are discriminated against more than black people are is flawed. As far as I’m concerned the author has demonstrated that the supposed evils of affirmative action, as it were, do not constitute anything that offers any evidence to support the perception that has been reported as being prevalent in the original, peer-reviewed study as having any merit.
      That is all there is to it.

      There also is the fact that altering the status quo where there is inequality to even things up is NOT by itself inequality, per se.

      To sum up, the question is “White people who responded to a survey usually thought that they were facing more racism, is this perception justified by evidence?” The answer is no, so that is the end of that.

      Secondly, the author makes no claims about “reverse” racism not existing so I don’t know why you even brought it up, or think that it is relevant to the issue being discussed here. When there was a clear media example of reverse racism in action which involved a Channel programme called ‘The Event: How Racist Are You” which insinuated that all white people were racist, the author spoke out elsewhere against it and pointed out that Jane Elliot’s exercise, which was featured in the event did not lead to that conclusion logically, what you’ve written appropos this is a non-sequitur at best and an attempt at poisoning the well at worst.

      Thirdly, ironically speaking, your assertion that racism flows from people who claim to be oppressed would lead to an erroneous conclusion, in this case, it would insinuate that whites are generally venomously racist (which is manifestly rubbish) because they have claimed to be the oppressed when responding to the survey (again, please read the study if you can). Again you end up with a non-sequitur or something that renders what you just stated absurd.

      Next, coming to my unique skin tone et cetera, I just want to confirm that you aren’t getting confused about who is who here, since I didn’t write this article, firstly, and secondly, the author is one of four on this blog and thirdly, she is white. Sure, discrimination of any kind, driven by bigotry motivated by everything ranging from religion to race hurts, and I can sympathise with any discrimination or bigotry you might have been on the receiving end of, but again, none of this justifies the perception of the survey respondents that they somehow were facing racism that was worse than that faced by Black people in America, not one single bit.

      As far as I’m aware, the author was using her personal experiences to make a point; that people tend to perceive racism where diversity is involved even if there are no evidentially supported reasons to do so, which renders such perceptions irrational, which basically is in accordance with rigorous data from the study she has referenced. She was also making the point that people in her experience have been bringing up bigotry regarding things like race which are by no means likely to be defining criteria in the competition for jobs, and I think it is a very pertinent point.

      So, what was the fuss about, again?

      To sum all of that up; sure, racism need not always be in one direction, it doesn’t become less of a problem if it is one direction instead of the other, but at the end of the day, the perceptions that people had and offered in the study are immensely flawed and don’t stack up against empirical evidence, and that is the end of that.

      Finally, diversity shouldn’t be a cause for discrimination in an ideal world, I wholeheartedly agree with you on that. .

      Cheers.
      Ankur ‘Exploreable’ Chakravarthy.

    • Spot on, very utopian. . But unfortunately i think the whole equality thing is a long way off in this animal kingdom.

      • Well yes, it may be a long way off, but we’re basically left with just two options, either accept discrimination, which I find unacceptable, or keep striving for equality. There certainly is more equality today than there was in the past, and I hold efforts to keep pushing for more and more equality responsible.

  2. “Most white people don’t even know they are white until they are in a room full of black people.”

    I just mentioned this in a conversation this morning when trying to describe privilege to a friend. Thank you for the article—we need more like this.

  3. Great. Another person saying I am wrong.

  4. Pingback: Via Pharyngula “While we’re talking about advocating equality…” « The Eternal Bookshelf

  5. I think the key phrase in the findings of the study is “zero-sum game”. Seeing racial discrimination as zero-sum – unchanging in “size”, only changing in “distribution” – is a hugely flawed view, if one stops to think about it even for a moment. It’s like believing that friendship or civility only exist in this world in certain amounts, and if you get more, I get less. Yet both everyday observations and rigorous research confirm that friendly and cooperative communication patterns spread and grow stronger in human and other mammal groups (feed themselves, so to speak), just as unfriendly and aggressive communication patterns also can spread and strengthen. Very few – if any – psycho-socio-cultural phenomena are zero-sum. Human relationships, be they between individuals or groups, are emphatically not zero-sum.

    • Would you please offer a few links to said research, Ronja? I suspect that anybody who comes here with the idea that the flawed perception of racial equality being a zero-sum game is valid could be helped to reconsider their views after going through empirical evidence.

      Cheers.
      Exploreable.

  6. How is referring to white/Caucasian people as “normal” supposed to promote equallity??? (in the picture near the top)

    • As far as I can tell it was a humorous attempt at conveying the nature of hidden racism by the author, where people may pretend to treat all races as equal but still hold delusions of racial superiority. To answer your question for sure you need to wait for the author to do so, I’m not a mind reader, y’know.

      Cheers,
      Exploreable.

  7. Great blog. Not here to argue with the author nor any of the above comments, firstly, because Ankur’s intellect far outweighs my own, secondly, because I do not disagree with any of the above statements. However, I urge you all to look at South Africa as a case study, and then determine whether one ethnic group is/can/cannot be discriminated against more than black people are…

  8. To the author:

    You have 0 proof that reverse discrimination DOESN’T exist. I have proof that it does. You want proof? Come visit Rhode Island, where companies are hiring nothing but Hispanics. There are lots and lots of companies here that will not hire a white person. I know this first hand as a job seeker. Affirmative Action, quotas, bilingual favoritism, and tax breaks keep Hispanics working. Whites get the short end of the stick. It isn’t hard to see if you get out and travel some.

    I completely disagree with this article. It’s it’s baseless sympathizing.

    • Empirical rigour fail and reading comprehension fail much? It is always more than a tad irritating when people fail to read what has been written properly and then go spouting off tangentially at a strawman. The short of it being this; Nobody has claimed that reverse discrimination does not exist, and therefore the rest of your reply is against a strawman and is akin to pissing in the wind. Secondly, “proof” is only used as a term in formal axiomatic systems, insofar questions of verifiable hypotheses are concerned, the term used is evidential support.

      Oh, and next, the plural of anecdote is not data (and that means first-hand experience is useless insofar as discerning trends is concerned) have you got any empirical evidence that companies exclusively hire on the basis of race? Juliet’s already offered sound economic reasons for not hiring sub-par employees, regardless of race, and not only does your evidence have to account for that, you must also demonstrate conclusively that this applies to the whole of the USA and not just Rhode Island. Of course, I have no reason to take your word about Rhode Island companies at face value, since you have offered no evidence to indicate that they choose exclusively non-white employees for the reason that they are non-white. “Get out and travel some”, by the way is the most laughable thing you could’ve told the author, too, not least because it is i) an attempt at poisoning the well and a non-sequitur , ii) a glib ad-hominem, iii) AFAIK, the author has gotten out and traveled “some”, even a lot, actually.

      Finally, what part of the fact that the article talks about flawed perceptions of the amount of reverse racism in whites and does not,again, assert that there is no reverse discrimination at all do you not understand?

      And oh, your last comment is a non-sequitur, in rigorous discourse, claiming to disagree with something based on irrational arguments against a strawman automatically renders any conclusions reached on the basis thereof flawed, and the assertion thereof as the truth absurd. The only reason your utterly irrational bilge was even approved during moderation was to publicly demonstrate why exactly it is bilge.

      Next time, before you attempt to go against empirical evidence with dodgy reasoning and logical fallacies, I suggest you exercise due diligence to spare others the trouble of having to point out to you what exactly is wrong with your arguments.

  9. A few observations – while the original article was from the UK it was a survey given to 400 Americans – half white half black. The survey asked for opinions of those surveyed. It does not provide enough information – at least in the link I saw – to truly evaluate it. Was the survey taken in an area or industry that is heavily unionized? A union can force an employer to maintain quotas – thereby hiring the less qualified individual a position over a more qualified person.

    While I am not disputing that racism/discrimination exists – “minorities” are able to have more freedoms in some areas than “majorities” – we’ve heard of NOW (National Organization of Women), the NAACP, but is there a NOM or and NAAWP? Also, one could argue that the very use of the term Colored to refer to blacks is in itself racist – as white is in fact a color – as are all other naturally occurring skin tones. Every human being is a person of color – but that is an aside or tangent for another article.

  10. Hi Matt,

    The second paragraph you have written is pretty much exactly why I wrote this article, and has basically proven my point.

    Why do you think these groups have been formed? As a response to patriarchal society. What you see from your privileged perspective as a man is ‘minorities’ having more freedoms in some areas, when actually they are just merely asking for equal freedoms in a society that has traditionally deprived them of this.

    Also I didn’t refer to blacks as ‘colored’…so I don’t know if that was aimed at me.

    And you’re right, it was a small study which could have gone into more detail, but it definitely picks up on some important issues to do with privilege.

    Juliet

  11. Outstanding article not to mention very easy towards fully understand explanation. How do I just do receiving permission towards submit component of this page with my future news letter? Giving suitable consumer credit rating back to you typically the author not to mention link in the web site would not be considered trouble.

  12. Wow pretty broad brush your painting with there! You don’t know racism unless you live in the southern region of the states.

    • [1] The survey involved a population being drawn from across the country, with respondents being randomly selected from a set of 2 million; clearly, the perception that affirmative action is a zero sum game was prevalent among the white respondents surveyed.

      [2] The authors further note that both black and white respondents had similar perceptions of what constituted racism in the 1950s, but only white respondents said reduced anti-black racism meant increased anti-white racism.

      Therefore, regardless of whether the southern states are more racist than northern ones or not; there is clearly a perception, characterising a nationwide sample, that somehow affirmative action and other measures for racial equality are examples of anti-white racism, and that this is worse than the anti-black racism they are meant to remedy.

      See http://i917.photobucket.com/albums/ad11/AnkyChakravarthy/ScienceStuff/Graph1.jpg for the graph that illustrates this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s