Abstract
In this chapter I offer an overview of some of the ways in which researchers have conceptualized what they call new forms of racism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Gaertner et al. use this analogy when they suggest that because racism has evolved into different forms (and has “mutated like a virus”) it is now more difficult not only to “recognize but also to combat” (2005, p. 385).
- 2.
As the wikipedia indicates, the Jim Crow laws were state and local laws enacted in the Southern and border states of the USA and enforced between 1876 and 1965 – that mandated “separate but equal” status for black Americans. But “in reality, this led to treatment and accommodations that were almost always inferior to those provided to white Americans” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws). The wikipedia continues:
After 1945, the Civil Rights movement gained momentum and used federal courts to attack Jim Crow. The Supreme Court declared … de jure public school segregation unconstitutional in 1954 [and] … the Civil Rights Act of 1964 … annulled Jim Crow laws that segregated restaurants, hotels and theaters.
Collins comments in this respect, though, that while racial integration is now the official policy of the United States, “large numbers of African Americans … remain confined to racially segregated, poor neighborhoods” (2005, p. 10).
- 3.
Although Sears states that evidence of the virtual disappearance of old-fashioned racism is “rarely disputed” (2005, p. 346), one could of course argue that respondents of questionnaires supposedly measuring the extent of such racism could be “faking” their responses. Harris-Lacewell, for instance, points to “disturbing racial views” that sometimes can be drawn out through ethnographic “face-to-face discussion” – while surveys seem less equipped to draw out such views (2003, p. 243).
- 4.
This reporting was based on these Whites agreeing with some descriptors such as “’complaining’, ‘violent’ or ‘irresponsible’” to characterize Blacks (Washington, 2008, p. 2). The question on this in the questionnaire (as outlined by Sheppard, 2008) was constructed by asking Whites: “How well does each of these words describe most blacks?: ‘Friendly, Determined to succeed, Law abiding, Hard-working, Intelligent at school, Smart at everyday things, Good neighbors, Dependable, Keep up their property, Violent, Boastful, Complaining, Lazy, Irresponsible’.” Sheppard avers that the questionnaire itself was biased because, for instance, only Whites were asked to describe Blacks (in relation to this question in the questionnaire) – thus not making an opening for racist feelings of Blacks in relation to Whites to come to the fore. However, one could counter argue that at least the questionnaire could be used to open up a public discussion on race, such as pleaded for by authors/journalists such as Washington (2008). Furthermore, some authors – such as, say, Bonilla-Silva (2006) – would suggest that there is good reason why this poll had some response options only for Whites to fill in, in view of what Bonilla-Silva sees as structures of White domination and the unlikelihood that Blacks could “develop a racialized social system in the United States with Blacks as the dominant group” (2006, p. 173). I explore in detail in Chapter 4 the issue of how questionnaires are constructed and used in social life.
- 5.
This observation is supported by Gazel (2007). She indicates that from her own experience consulting in both the private and public sectors on “race relations and diversity” she learned that “excavating inequalities will not be welcome in the discourse.” She indicates that comments to the effect that “I thought we were going to learn about different cultures” would be the kind of critique that she “would hear in seminar after seminar on ‘challenging the racial status quo’” (2007, p. 534). When she later joined a University campus, she also found that “tolerance of diversity” (on the part of students) often went hand in hand with not wishing to “raise unpleasant issues such as structural inequality” (2007, p. 534).
- 6.
In the November 24 2008 issue of Time magazine, reporter Capeheart suggests that in the light of Obama’s style of winning trust we can speak about the “Obama effect,” which she calls “that quality whereby the more you get to know a politician, the more you like or trust him or her.” She suggests that “in future elections, politicians will have to factor in the Obama effect” (Time, 24 November 2008, p. 6).
- 7.
See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/obama-race-speech-read-th_n_92077.html. Fox news also indicates that the speech has been billed as one on “race, politics and unifying America.” See http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2008/03/18/obama-condemns-wrights-rhetoric-but-defends-ongoing-relationship/.
- 8.
Clayton explains that some African Americans argued that Obama should not be referred to as “one of us” – because he did not “embody the experiences of most African Americans whose ancestors had endured slavery, segregation, and the quest for civil rights” (2007, p. 56). Clayton indicates that part of the promise of Obama’s campaign is that he tries to move beyond dividing America starkly into “White America” and “Black America.” He remarks that Obama seems to be arguing that we can become “something else together” (2007, p. 62). Walters for his part points to the difficulties of choosing which cultural markers should be used to define a person as Black. He suggests that to decide that someone is sufficiently Black “to share the experiences of [Black] community” is ultimately a matter of trust. As he states, “cultural fit” turns out to be an issue of political trust (2007, p. 13).
- 9.
See Bobo and Thompson (2006) for an account of their research into unfairness in this system.
- 10.
He points out here, though, that it is unfortunate that America became involved in a war [the one in Iraq] that “never should’ve been authorized and never should’ve been waged.”
- 11.
For example, the notion of integration as used in Europe can invoke the idea, questioned by, for instance, Jacobsen, of a “unified national society or culture” into which “others” must supposedly integrate (Jacobsen, 2008, p. 45). Entzinger and Biezeveld also consider this in the context of discussion around multiculturalism and attempts to measure, for example, the extent of “multicultural optimism” (2003, p. 37).
- 12.
Byng indicates that after 9/11 the meaning of religious minority identity for Muslims in America became redefined – and it is now difficult to consider as “benign” the markers of difference that designate this boundary, along with other group boundaries, in the USA. She indicates that “even though Muslim is a religious label and not a racial one, since 9/11 Muslim American identity has been restructured to reflect the systemic inequality that is readily associated with racial minorities” (2008, p. 662). She bases her account on news stories from newspapers published in the northeast region of the USA and The Washington Post (between May 2002 and 2003).
- 13.
The argument of Sniderman and others is that there is a “tautological content overlap” between the items measuring symbolic racism and items that measure conservative policy preferences (Tarman & Sears, 2005, p. 734).
- 14.
The contention around whether racism or conservatism is being tapped into by these kinds of questionnaires can also be seen in relation to the Associated Press–Yahoo News poll (September 2008) to which I referred in Section 2.2.1 (and in Footnote 24). See, for instance, Kuhn (2008) and Sheppard (2008), who locate different ways of interpreting the data from the poll.
- 15.
Themes (a) and (b) as outlined by Sears (2005) as referred to above match the first two italicized themes expressed by Tarman and Sears (2005), while (c) and (d) as outlined by Sears (2005) become in turn the fourth and third italicized themes of Tarman and Sears (2005).
- 16.
Respondents are given options here to: Strongly agree; Somewhat agree; Somewhat disagree; or Strongly Disagree (cf. http://condor.depaul.edu/~phenry1/SR2Kinstructions.htm).
- 17.
It is worth noting that the Associated Press–Yahoo Poll (September 2008) that I cited in Section 2.2.1 also contained the question: “How much discrimination against blacks do you feel there is in the United States today, limiting their chances to get ahead?”
- 18.
A similar question in the Associated Press–Yahoo Poll (September 2008) that I cited in Section 2.2.1 was phrased as: “Some people say that black leaders have been trying to push too fast. Others feel that they haven’t pushed fast enough. What do you think?”
- 19.
She cites here research examples of the pervasiveness of the term “citizen” or “American” when referring only to White citizens (2003, p. 230).
- 20.
Susan Weil, in providing me with feedback (by email) on an early draft of this chapter (August 2008), already considered that both McConahay’s and Sears’s manner of phrasing questions was itself polarizing – and she expressed concern that I had not sufficiently drawn this out in my original exposition of their approaches. She also pointed out – as what she calls my “critical friend” – that “there are issues of epistemology and power here that are not being stated.” She considered that in my account of their stances I had not (yet) made manifest the tension that I may feel around the particular questionnaire constructions or the way in which “academic science” can use its power to develop items that then become “administered” for “agree/disagree” responses on the part of Whites.
- 21.
Speer and Hutchby do not agree with posing the question of reactivity in this way – a way that they indicate invokes certain (realist-oriented) assumptions. They criticize the assumption of a “supposedly pristine world to which researchers wish to gain unmediated access” – unaffected by interactional and contextual features (2003a, p. 334). They prefer an approach that makes more provision for the interactional relations (between researchers/research instruments and participants) taking place in all research contexts. Their approach is in line with the constructivist argument that I forward in the rest of the book and is also in line with Harris-Lacewell’s suggestion regarding the importance of giving attention to the way in which the racial research context is experienced by people (2003, pp. 243–244).
- 22.
In his article considering the effects of race and racial attitudes in the context of simulated hiring decisions, he refers to the Modern Racism Scale as a “relatively nonreactive scale of racial attitudes” (1983, p. 551, my italics). In his 1986 article, he argues that “the Modern Racism Scale was developed to be as nonreactive as possible” (1986, p. 110). In both cases he uses a definition of reactivity fitting a realist definition of validity, where validity is defined as the extent of correspondence between reality and its conceptualization by researchers. (See also Footnote 41.)
- 23.
In the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling, the Supreme Court opened the door for school desegregation by declaring unconstitutional the “separate but equal” doctrine embraced by Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) (cf. Pfeifer & Bernstein, 2003).
- 24.
Sears for his part indicates that Myrdal first raised the question of Whites’ ambivalence in his book An American Dilemma (1944). Sears argues that symbolic racism as a belief system (see Section 2.3.1 above) is consistent with support for equal treatment in the abstract; it incorporates the principle of equality of opportunity as holding in an abstract sense. But “Whites’ responses to concrete public policies” are strongly influenced by symbolic racism. It is herein that the ambivalence lies (2005, p. 352). However, Harris-Lacewell is highly critical of Myrdal’s manner of approaching American racial politics in a way that marginalizes Black people. Referring to Myrdal’s calling the Negro “an American dilemma,” she expresses her concerns as follows:
This is also how Black people are treated in much of the work on race. But African Americans are not merely a problem or dilemma. Black people are political agents with attitudes and strategies that contribute to the politics of America, even when they are unobserved and unattended to by Whites. (2003, p. 228)
- 25.
In Chapter 3, Sections 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9, I discuss the attempted measurement of what are regarded as implicit prejudicial attitudes that are posited to be operative at a less-than-conscious level; and I point to arguments concerning the tenuous relationship between measures of implicit and explicit attitudes.
- 26.
Pillay and Collings point out that their use of these categories does not reflect their views regarding the meaningfulness of the classifications, “but rather the historical reality of an apartheid past which continues to have direct bearing on the notion of race in the contemporary South African context” (2004, p. 610). The Department of Education in South Africa also continues to employ these categories as a way of monitoring the involvement of different (groups of) students. For example, in a booklet produced by the Department entitled A Guide for Schools: Into Higher Education, it is stated that:
South African higher education institutions have thrown open the doors of learning since 1994. In 1993 only 40% of students were African; today 60% – over 400,000 students – are African. White students make up 27% of enrolments, colored students 6% and Indian students 7%. (2008, p. 21)
- 27.
This would tally with observations that were made by some participants in focus groups that I conducted in South Africa in 2007, where a number of Black participants stated that they were surprised/concerned at the way some of their middle-class Black friends/acquaintances treated Black people poorer than them. Examples were given of Black domestic workers being treated with little respect by the employers (the participants’ friends) – but the participants felt that they could not intervene by expressing their concern over this matter. Perhaps the students on the campus studied by Pillay and Collings, if probed, would have indicated a similar stance against “poor Blacks” – possibly learned from their parents who afford Whites a higher status, no matter what their class position. Veronica McKay, in response to her reading of this (draft) chapter (September 2008), likewise indicated to me the lower status that she sees as sometimes being assigned (including by Black people) to the Black poor (relative to those perceived as the White poor).
- 28.
While Hercules concentrates on making recommendations for learning processes in educational institutions, the Human Rights Commission report sees the media as an important locus for problematizing essentialist views on race and at the same time generating a dialogue around different forms of racism (as I noted in Chapter 1, Section 1.1).
- 29.
As mentioned in Footnote 33, Sniderman and Tetlock claim that this correlation is due to an overlap in the content of the scales measuring symbolic racism and political conservatism, a contention denied by Sears. See also Section 2.3.1.1.
- 30.
Those using the terms symbolic or modern racism (see Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2) likewise argue that institutional discrimination can operate unintentionally by people rationalizing their (prejudicial) decision-making – through invoking nonracial explanations (cf. Pfeifer & Bernstein, 2003; Pfeifer & Ogloff, 2003).
- 31.
Walters indicates that a CNN poll taken in 2005 revealed that 60% of Black people believed that race was implicated in the slow response of government to the devastation, while 63% believed that poverty was also a factor. Walters notes that Senator Barack Obama at the time chose to characterize the slow response as due to the fact that “the administration’s policies don’t take into account the plight of poor communities” – rather than that “the administration doesn’t care about Black people” (Obama, 2005, as cited in Walters, 2007, p. 18).
- 32.
- 33.
Here she suggests that any focus on culture should not be at the expense of a focus on structure. Entzinger and Biezeveld too suggest that a focus on issues of culture in the case of the European context (where their research is set) must include an exploration of structural discrimination, which they define as “imped[ing] the integration process of migrants in the labor force and keep[ing] them at a level of deprivation” (2003, p. 28).
- 34.
As indicated in Section 2.2.1 above, Asante states that if Obama is able to establish himself as an innovator in addressing the issues as outlined in his campaign, he may be able to leave a strong and positive (moral) legacy. But Asante indicates that he will have to navigate some “treacherous waters between his heritage and White racial domination and globalization strategies” (2007, p. 115).
- 35.
As noted in Footnote 32, Byng provides an analysis of the complex inequalities that became generated also in the USA in relation to the “religious minority identity of Muslim Americans following 9/11” (2008, p. 659).
- 36.
A similar analysis is offered by Fekete, who argues that “across Europe, the ‘war on terror’ is having a major impact on race relations policies. New legislation, policing and counter-terrorist measures are casting Muslims, whether settled or immigrant, as the ‘enemy within’” (2004, p. 3). She states that: “Islam is seen as a threat to Europe, which is responding not only with draconian attacks on civil rights but also with moves to roll back multiculturalism and promote monocultural homogeneity through assimilation” (2004, p. 3).
- 37.
Entzinger and Biezeveld indicate that “in the European literature” the United Kingdom is usually seen as providing a prototype for the multicultural model, where immigrants are defined “as full members of their new society, although primarily in terms of their ethnic or national origin.” In this approach (and insofar as the multicultural model is adopted), immigration is seen as having reinforced the multicultural character of society. They compare the multicultural model with, for instance, the “assimilation model, of which France is usually cited as a prototype.” They note that in this model, “immigrants are expected to assimilate to their hosts” (2003, p. 14). With reference to Germany, they indicate that Germany is sometimes considered prototypical of a guestworker model, where immigration is “largely determined by the (conjunctural) needs of the labor market, and the immigrants’ presence is seen as temporary. As a consequence, there is no need to reinforce their legal status, nor to reflect on the consequences of increased cultural diversity” (2003, p. 15).
- 38.
Douglas likewise points to the implications of the 1971 Act, which “removed all controls on the immigration of Commonwealth citizens who have at least one British-born grandparent.” She points out that:
When we examine this Act more closely and apply this new entry criterion to various groups of Commonwealth citizens, … the underlying racist ideology becomes visible. It is now clear that the concern was not to restrict the flow of immigrants into Britain per se, but rather to keep out those considered as being undesirable i.e. Black people. (1998, Chapter 4, p. 18)
- 39.
Rydgren argues that occasionally the cultural racist discourse can still invoke an implicit biological racism, as when RRP parties instruct people to take a look in the streets, in the schools, etc. to “verify” that there are too many immigrants (on the basis of physical features) (2003, p. 63). This tallies with Collins’s argument suggesting that a “dizzying array” of biological and cultural arguments can become invoked in racist argumentation (2005, p. 180). See also Section 2.2.1.
- 40.
Considering patterns of voting in 20 Western countries, Achterberg puts forward the argument that “the old politics of class have come to share the stage with new issues” – including “environmental and cultural issues” (2006, p. 254). Yet he does not believe that class issues should be considered as thereby having disappeared. He suggests rather that new issues (over and above class-related ones) have “increased in salience in most countries” (2006, p. 254). Nevertheless, he found (in similar fashion to Rydgren) that “traditional class-party alignments are weaker in contexts where new issues are of greater importance, and that in these contexts cultural and environmental motives affect voting more strongly” (2006, p. 254).
- 41.
Jacobsen, however, makes the point that since the 1990s multicultural politics have come under attack in Sweden (as in Norway). She indicates that the “ideological trend shifted from problematizing structural limitations [within the society] toward culturalizing social problems.” She points to “growing arguments” in public administration “for limiting cultural pluralism and down-playing the importance of racism” (2008, p. 34).
- 42.
Twentieth century History reports on similar developments in Austria, via the far-right Freedom Party coming into power (through a coalition with the conservative People’s Party) in 2000. As stated by twentieth Century History, the parties used explicit “anti-foreigner” and “anti-immigration” language in speaking about their policies.
- 43.
Leontidou suggests that it is important for researchers not to apply labels to “nations” in terms of “national averages” in regard to the measurement of native’s racism or xenophobia. She argues that the Eurobarometer (EUMC) survey (2001) – through its purportedly measuring “national averages” – is not an appropriate way to “approach this sensitive matter.” She proposes that it is more appropriate to try to explore “ambivalence and fluidity of perceptions of ‘the immigrant’” (as, e.g., can be drawn out in interviews) in order to try to shift people’s configurations. This is in line with the argument that I develop in the following chapters regarding the potential of research to draw out/develop differing understandings.
- 44.
In conversations I had with some people (September 2008) in which I probed this perception, they suggested that it is because foreigners have a practice of pooling all family resources in order to obtain the relevant finances for this. In any case, Gumede can be seen as raising for attention this feeling – as one of the bases for the xenophobia.
- 45.
As Veronica McKay (personal communication, August 2008) notes, “this becomes [or includes] a social class argument” – especially insofar as we recognize that it is in the poorer sections of South Africa where people are expected to bear the brunt of the strain on services, jobs, etc. Zegeye, in his discussion of Black youth culture (where he notes that there are “uneven levels of consciousness” about the identity of Blackness – 2004, p. 853), refers to the extremes of wealth and poverty in South Africa, rivaled only in Brazil (2004, p. 868). Zegeye sets his discussion in the context of considering how within global capitalism, the nation-state may lose its power, but not necessarily its influence to try to establish more social justice (2004, p. 869). Sitas also notes how, during his interviews with (Black) workers, they indicated that one cannot expect capitalists to solve their experienced problems (including when they are, or became, unemployed). But they could expect some solutions to be generated by government. Sitas thus reports on the “mounting pressure for job creation and state intervention” (2004, p. 845). All these comments are consistent with an attempt to review the issues so as to concentrate on worker vulnerabilities (including those of the unemployed) – while not forgetting the historical legacy of the racialization of poverty.
- 46.
They suggest that the izimbizo’s (public meetings) often seem to be carried out “to ensure certain performance criteria [of public officials] are met, rather than being used as a valuable opportunity to engage with the masses” (2009).
- 47.
My conversations were with a group of domestic workers and their friends, as well as with some taxi drivers and their friends. The conversations were organized along the lines of our considering what kinds of action might be undertaken and what alternative relations with those seen as foreigners could be created – for example, possibly asking these people to help them to learn skills (such as working with electricity and plumbing), and considering ways in which the government could practically contribute to the development of alternative relations.
- 48.
Gumede indicates that up till now, as far as government policy is concerned, the government does not appear to have decided whether to adopt “European-style fortress policies” in relation to immigrants or alternative ones (2008, p. 1).
- 49.
This story was told in the course of our discussions that we had at Sandringham Gardens, where my mother used to reside and be cared for, and where the care workers and I (with my mother making comments too) often had intense conversations – including Abimbola here cited and Sisinyane Makoena as part of the process of our developing a friendship.
- 50.
The term “kwerekwere” is a term reserved for Black foreigners – as pointed out to me through a story told by another friend. She indicated to me that she sometimes refers jokingly to her German boyfriend as being “kwerekwere” when (as White South African herself) she introduces him to Black colleagues and friends. They find this reference amusing, because they know that it is only Black foreigners who become treated in this way (no matter what their social status may be). She suggested to me that this story highlights some of the discrepancies between people’s treatment of those considered as White or Black “foreigners” in South Africa. She suggested that through the legacy of apartheid, racialized thinking is still here pervasive.
- 51.
Sir William Macpherson chaired the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry into the murder by white youths of Black teenager Stephen Lawrence. See my further discussion hereof in Section 2.3.6.
- 52.
Anthias argues, though, that Macpherson still did not adequately take into account the way in which Carmichael and Hamilton located racism in the wider social context of collective social power and domination (1999, Paragraph 2.5).
- 53.
Of course, the ways in which interventions can be created toward more social justice in what Collins calls the “global marketplace” is subject to much controversy – but Bobo’s point (and that of Collins) is that some responsibility needs to be taken for the (racialized) patterns of advantage and disadvantage.
- 54.
Omi and Winant point to the “black power” movement of the 1960s (and later the “brown power,” red power” and “yellow power” ones) and the associated conception of racism as a “product of centuries of systematic exclusion, exploitation, and disregard of racially defined minorities” (1994, p. 69).
- 55.
Omi and Winant clarify that they define essentialism by drawing on the book of Fuss entitled Essentially Speaking (1989). In this understanding, essentialism implies a “belief in real, true human essences, existing outside of or impervious to social and historical context” (Fuss, 1989, p. xi, as cited in Omi & Winant, 2002a, p. 140). They suggest that a consideration of the difference between racial awareness and racial essentialism is helpful as it allows us to understand that, for example, the former could involve an effort to “to attribute merits, allocate values or resources to, and/or represent individuals or groups on the basis of racial identity” – and should not as such be regarded as “racist.” As they state, such a project “may in fact be quite benign” (1994, p. 71) – as I explain in my related discussion in Chapter 1, Section 1.4.
- 56.
Murji (2007, p. 849) notes that Scarman (1981) specifically rejected the notion of invoking what he took to be “unseen factors” (as implied by the concept of institutional racism).
- 57.
He refers also to the work of Chesler (1976) in forwarding this perspective – whom he argues “developed the most succinct definition of racism produced by any author in this tradition: the prejudice plus power definition” (2001, p. 26). He states that this perspective “helped to move the discussion about race in academic and nonacademic circles from the realm of people’s attitudes to the realm of institutions and organizations” (2001, p. 26). But he argues that the problem with authors in this tradition is that they “do not identify the mechanisms whereby racism is produced and reproduced” (2001, p. 27).
- 58.
By pointing to the importance of defining “race” in this way, Bonilla-Silva remarks that his position bears similarity to that of Omi and Winant (1994) in terms of their conceptualizing race as “an organizing principle of social relationships that shapes the identity of individual actors at the micro level and shapes all spheres of life at the macro level” (1997, p. 466).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Romm, N. (2010). Conceptualizing New Racism in Relation to Old-Fashioned Racism: Concepts and Research Approaches. In: New Racism. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8728-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8728-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-8727-0
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-8728-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)