Racial inequality in the United States refers to social advantages and disparities that affect different races within the United States.
These inequities may be manifested in the distribution of wealth,
power, and life opportunities afforded to people based on their race or
ethnicity, both historic and modern. These can also be seen as a result
of historic oppression, inequality of inheritance, or overall prejudice, especially against minority groups.
Definitions
In
social science, racial inequality is typically analyzed as "imbalances
in the distribution of power, economic resources, and opportunities."
Racial inequalities have manifested in American society in ways ranging
from racial disparities in wealth, poverty rates, housing patterns,
educational opportunities, unemployment rates, and incarceration rates.
Some claim that current racial inequalities in the U.S. have their
roots in over 300 years of cultural, economic, physical, legal, and
political discrimination based on race.
Manifestations of racial inequality
There are vast differences in wealth across racial groups in the United States. The wealth gap
between white and African-American families nearly tripled from $85,000
in 1984 to $236,500 in 2009. There are many causes, including years of
home ownership, household income, unemployment, and education, but
inheritance might be the most important.
Health disparities
Racial wealth gap
A study by the Brandeis University
Institute on Assets and Social Policy which followed the same sets of
families for 25 years found that there are vast differences in wealth
across racial groups in the United States. The wealth gap between
Caucasian and African-American families studied nearly tripled, from
$85,000 in 1984 to $236,500 in 2009. The study concluded that factors
contributing to the inequality included years of home ownership (27%),
household income (20%), education (5%), and familial financial support
and/or inheritance (5%).
Wealth
can be defined as "the total value of things families own minus their
debts." In contrast, income can be defined as, "earnings from work,
interest and dividends, pensions, and transfer payments."
Wealth is an important factor in determining the quality of both
individual and family life chances because it can be used as a tool to
secure a desired quality of life or class status and enables individuals
who possess it to pass their class status to their children. Family
inheritance, which is passed down from generation to generation, helps
with wealth accumulation. Wealth can also serve as a safety net against fluctuations in income and poverty.
There is a large gap between the wealth of minority households
and White households within the United States. The Pew Research Center's
analysis of 2009 government data says the median wealth of white
households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of
Hispanic households.
In 2009 the typical black household had $5,677 in wealth, the typical
Hispanic had $6,325, and the typical White household had $113,149.
Furthermore, 35% of African American and 31% of Hispanic households had
zero or negative net worth in 2009 compared to 15% of White households.
While in 2005 median Asian household wealth was greater than White
households at $168,103, by 2009 that changed when their net worth fell
54% to $78,066, partially due to the arrival of new Asian immigrants
since 2004; not including newly arrived immigrants, Asian net wealth
only dropped 31%. As shown on "Eurweb - Electronic Urban Report"
According to the Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances, of the 14
million black households, only 5% have more than $350,000 in net worth
while nearly 30% of white families have more than this amount. Less than
1% of black families have over a million in net assets. while nearly
10% of white households, totaling over 8 million families have more than
1.3 million in net worth.
Lusardi states that African Americans and Hispanics are more
likely to face means-tested programs that discourage asset possession
due to higher poverty rates.
One-fourth of African Americans and Hispanics approach retirement with
less than $1,000 net worth (without considering pensions and Social
Security). Lower financial literacy is correlated with poor savings and
adjustment behavior. Education is a strong predictor for wealth.
One-fourth of African Americans and Hispanics that have less than a
high school education have no wealth, but even with increased education,
large differences in wealth remain.
Conley believes that the cause of Black-White wealth inequality
may be related to economic circumstances and poverty because the
economic disadvantages of African Americans can be effective in harming
efforts to accumulate wealth.
However, there is a five times greater chance of downward mobility from
the top quartile to the bottom quartile for African Americans than
there is for White Americans; correspondingly, African Americans rise to
the top quartile from the bottom quartile at half the rate of White
Americans. Bowles and Gintis conclude from this information that
successful African Americans do not transfer the factors for their
success as effectively as White Americans do.
Other factors to consider in the recent widening of the minority wealth gap are the mortgage crisis and credit crunch that began in 2007-2008. The Pew Research Center found that plummeting house values
were the main cause of the wealth change from 2005 to 2009. Hispanics
were hit the hardest by the housing market meltdown possibly because a
disproportionate share of Hispanics live in California, Florida, Nevada,
and Arizona, which are among the states with the steepest declines in
housing values.
From 2005 to 2009 Hispanic homeowners' home equity declined by Half,
from $99,983 to $49,145, with homeownership rate decreasing by 4% to
47%. A 2015 Measure of America study commissioned by the ACLU on the long-term consequences of discriminatory lending practices found that the financial crisis will likely widen the black-white wealth gap for the next generation.
History
Africans were first brought to the United States as slaves. While free African-Americans owned around $50 million by 1860, farm tenancy and sharecropping replaced slavery after the American Civil War
because newly freed African American farmers did not own land or
supplies and had to depend on the White Americans who rented the land
and supplies out to them. At the same time, southern Blacks were trapped
in debt and denied banking services while White citizens were given low
interest loans to set up farms in the Midwest and Western United
States. White homesteaders were able to go West and obtain unclaimed
land through government grants, while the land grants and rights of
African Americans were rarely enforced.
After the Civil War the Freedman's Bank
helped to foster wealth accumulation for African Americans. However, it
failed in 1874, partially because of suspicious high-risk loans to
White banks and the Panic of 1873.
This lowered the support African Americans had to open businesses and
acquire wealth. In addition, after the bank failed, taking the assets of
many African Americans with it, many African Americans did not trust
banks. There was also the threat of lynching to any African American who
achieved success.
In addition, when Social Security was first created during the Great Depression,
it exempted agricultural and domestic workers, which disproportionately
affected African Americans and Hispanics. Consequently, the savings of
retired or disabled African Americans was spent during old age instead
of handed down and households had to support poor elderly family
members. The Homeowner's Loan Corporation that helped homeowners during
the Great Depression gave African American neighborhoods the lowest
rating, ensuring that they defaulted at greater rates than White
Americans. The Federal Housing Authority (FHA) and Veteran's Administration (VA) shut out African Americans by giving loans to suburbs instead of central cities after they were first founded.
Inheritance and parental financial assistance
Bowman
states that "in the United States, the most significant aspect of
multigenerational wealth distribution comes in the forms of gifts and
inheritances." However, the multigenerational absence of wealth and
asset attainment for African Americans makes it almost impossible for
them to make significant contributions of wealth to the next generation.
Data shows that financial inheritances could account for 10 to 20
percent of the difference between African American and White American
household wealth.
Using the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) of 1992 Avery and
Rendall estimated that only around one-tenth of African Americans
reported receiving inheritances or substantial inter vivo transfers
($5,000 or more) compared to one-third of White Americans. In addition,
the 1989 Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) reported that the mean and
median values of those money transfers were significantly higher for
White American households: the mean was $148,578 households compared to
$85,598 for African American households and the median was $58,839 to
$42,478. The large differences in wealth in the parent-generations were a
dominant factor in prediction the differences between African American
and White American prospective inheritances.
Avery and Rendall used 1989 SCF data to discover that the mean value in
2002 of White Americans' inheritances was 5.46 times that of African
Americans', compared to 3.65 that of current wealth. White Americans
received a mean of $28,177 that accounted for 20.7% of their mean wealth
while African Americans received a mean of $5,165 that accounted for
13.9% of their mean current wealth. Non-inherited wealth was more
equally distributed than inherited wealth.
Avery and Rendall found that family attributes favored White
Americans when it came to factor influencing the amount of inheritances.
African Americans were 7.3% less likely to have live parents, 24.5%
more likely to have three or more siblings, and 30.6% less likely to be
married or cohabiting (meaning there are two people who could gain
inheritances to contribute to the household)
Keister discovered that large family size has a negative effect on
wealth accumulation. These negative effects are worse for the poor and
African Americans and Hispanics are more likely to be poor and have
large families. More children also decrease the amount of gifts parents
can give and the inheritance they leave behind for the children.
Angel's research into inheritance showed that older Mexican
American parents may give less financial assistance to their children
than non-Hispanic White Americans because of their relatively high
fertility rate so children have to compete for the available money.
There are studies that indicate that elderly Hispanic parents of all
backgrounds live with their adult children due to poverty and would
choose to do otherwise, even if they had the resources to do so. African
American and Latino families are less likely to financially aid adult
children than non-Hispanic White families.
Income effects
The racial wealth gap is visible in terms of dollar for dollar wage
and wealth comparisons. For example, middle-class Blacks earn seventy
cents for every dollar earned by similar middle-class Whites. Race can be seen as the "strongest predictor" of one's wealth.
Even at similar education levels, minorities typically earn less
than whites. Education may boost earnings less for minorities than for
whites, although all groups typically see benefits from additional
education.
Krivo and Kaufman found that information supporting the fact that
increases in income does not affect wealth as much for minorities as it
does for White Americans. For example, a $10,000 increase in income for
White Americans increases their home equity $17,770 while the same
increase only increase the home equities for Asians by $9,500, Hispanics
by $15,150, and African Americans by $15,900.
Financial decisions
Investments
Conley
states that differences between African American and White American
wealth begin because people with higher asset levels can take advantage
of riskier investment instruments with higher rates of returns. Unstable
income flows may lead to "cashing in" of assets or accumulation of debt
over time, even if the time-averaged streams of income and savings are
the same. African Americans may be less likely to invest in the stock
market because they have a smaller parental head-start and safety net.
Chong, Phillips and Phillips state that African Americans,
Hispanics, and Asians invest less heavily in stocks than White
Americans.
Hispanics and in some ways African Americans accumulate wealth slower
than White Americans because of preference for near-term saving,
favoring liquidity and low investment risk at the expense of higher
yielding assets. These preferences may be due to low financial literacy
leading to a lack of demand for investment services.
According to Lusardi, even though the stock market increased in value
in the 1990s, only 6-7% of African Americans and Hispanics held stocks,
so they did not benefit as much from the value increase.
Use of financial services
The
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 2009 found that 7.7% of United
States households are "unbanked". Minorities are more likely than White
Americans to not have a banking account. 3.5% of Asians, 3.3% of White
Americans, 21.7% of African Americans and 19.3% of Hispanics and 15.6%
of remaining racial/ethnic categories do not have banking accounts.
Lusardi's research revealed that education increases one's
chances of having a banking account. A full high school education
increases the chance of having a checking account by 15% compared to
only an elementary education; having a parent with a high school
education rather than only an elementary education increases one's
chances of having a checking account by 2.8%. This difference in
education level may explain the large proportion of "unbanked"
Hispanics. The 2002 National Longitudinal Survey found that while only
3% of White Americans and 4% of African Americans had only an elementary
education, close to 20% of Hispanics did and 43% of Hispanics had less
than a high school education
Ibarra and Rodriguez believe that another factor that influences the
Hispanic use of banking accounts is credit. Latinos are also more likely
than White Americans or African Americans to have no or a thin credit
history: 22% of Latinos have no credit score in comparison to 4% of
White Americans and 3% of African Americans.
Not taking other variables into account, Chong, Phillips, and
Phillips survey of zip codes found that minority neighborhoods don't
have the same access to financial planning services as White
neighborhoods. There is also client segregation by investable assets.
More than 80% of financial advisors prefer that clients have at least
$100,000 in investable assets and more than 50% have a minimum asset
requirement of $500,000 or above. Because of this, financial planning is
possibly beyond the reach of those with low income, which comprises a
large portion of African-Americans and Hispanics.
Fear of discrimination is another possible factor. Minorities may be
distrustful of banks and lack of trust was commonly reported as why
minorities, people with low education, and the poor chose not to have
banking accounts.
Poverty
There are large differences in poverty rates
across racial groups. In 2009, the poverty rate was 9.9% for
non-Hispanic Whites, 12.1% for Asians, 26.6% for Hispanics, and 27.4%
for Blacks.
This data illustrates that Hispanics and Blacks experience
disproportionately high percentages of poverty in comparison to
non-Hispanics Whites and Asians. In discussing poverty, it is important
to distinguish between episodic poverty and chronic poverty.
Episodic poverty
The U.S. Census Bureau defines episodic poverty as living in poverty for less than 36 consecutive months.
From the period between 2004 and 2006 the episodic poverty rate was
22.6% for non-Hispanic Whites, 44.5% for Blacks, and 45.8% for
Hispanics. Blacks and Hispanics experience rates of episodic poverty that are nearly double the rates of non-Hispanic Whites.
Chronic poverty
The U.S. Census Bureau defines chronic poverty as living in poverty for 36 or more consecutive months.
From the period between 2004 and 2006 the chronic poverty rate was 1.4%
for non-Hispanic Whites, 4.5% for Hispanics, and 8.4% for Blacks. Hispanics and Blacks experience much higher rates of chronic poverty when compared to non-Hispanic Whites.
Length of poverty spell
The
U.S. Census Bureau defines length of poverty spell as the number of
months spent in poverty. The median length of poverty spells was 4
months for non-Hispanic Whites, 5.9 months for Blacks, and 6.2 months
for Hispanics.
The length of time spent in poverty varies by race. Non-Hispanic Whites
experience the shortest length of poverty spells when compared to
Blacks and Hispanics.
Housing
About 25% of African-Americans own a house in America.
Home ownership
Home ownership is a crucial means by which families can accumulate wealth. Over a period of time, homeowners accumulate home equity
in their homes. In turn, this equity can contribute substantially to
the wealth of homeowners. In summary, home ownership allows for the
accumulation of home equity, a source of wealth, and provides families
with insurance against poverty.
Ibarra and Rodriguez state that home equity is 61% of the net worth of
Hispanic homeowners, 38.5% of the net worth of White homeowners, and 63%
of the net worth of African-American homeowners.
Conley remarks that differences in rates of home ownership and housing
value accrual may lead to lower net worth in the parental generation,
which disadvantages the next.
There are large disparities in homeownership rates by race. In 2017, the home ownership rate was 72.5% for non-Hispanic Whites, 46.1% for Hispanics, and 42.0% for Blacks.
From this data, non-Hispanic Whites own homes at a much higher rate
that all other races, while Hispanics and Blacks own homes at much lower
rates. This means that a high percentage of Hispanic and Black
populations do not receive the benefits, such as wealth accumulation and
insurance against poverty, that owning a home provides.
Home equity
There
is a discrepancy in relation to race in terms of housing value. On
average, the economic value of Black-owned units is 35% less than
similar White-owned units. Thus, on average, Black-owned units sell for
35% less than similar White-owned units.
Krivo and Kaufman state that while median home value of White Americans
is at least $20,000 more than that of African Americans and Hispanics,
these differences are not a result of group differences in length of
residences because Asians have the most equity on their homes but have
lived in them for the shortest average period. African American and
Hispanic mortgage holders are 1.5 to 2.5 times more likely to pay 9% or
more on interest. Krivo and Kaufman calculate that the
African-American/White gap in mortgage interest rates is 0.39%, which
translates to a difference of $5,749 on the median home loan payment of a
30-year mortgage of a $53,882 home. The Hispanic/White gap (0.17%)
translates to Hispanics paying $3,441 more on a 30-year mortgage on the
median valued Hispanic home loan of $80,000. The authors conclude that
the extra money could have been reinvested into wealth accumulation.
Krivo and Kaufman also postulate that the types of mortgage loans
minorities obtain contributes to the differences in home equity. FHA
and VA loans make up one-third or more of primary loans for African
Americans and Hispanics, while only 18% for White Americans and 16% for
Asians. These loans require lower down payments and cost more than
conventional mortgages, which contributes to a slower accumulation of
equity. Asians and Hispanics have lower net equity on houses partly
because they are youngest on average, but age has only a small effect on
the Black-White gap in home equity. Previously owning a home can allow
the homeowner to use money from selling the previous home to invest and
increase the equity of later housing. Only 30% of African Americans in
comparison to 60% of White Americas had previously owned a home.
African-Americans, Asians, and Hispanics gain lower home equity returns
in comparison to White Americans with increases in income and education.
Residential segregation
Residential segregation can be defined as, "physical separation of the residential locations between two groups.
There are large discrepancies between races involving geographic
location of residence. In the United States, poverty and affluence have
become very geographically concentrated. Much residential segregation
has been a result of the discriminatory lending practice of Redlining, which delineated certain, primarily minority race neighborhoods, as risky for investment or lending.
The result has been neighborhoods with concentrated investment, and
others neighborhoods where banks are less inclined to invest. Most
notably, this geographic concentration of affluence and poverty can be
seen in the comparison between suburban and urban populations. The
suburbs have traditionally been primarily White populations, while the
majority of urban inner city populations have traditionally been composed of racial minorities.
Results from the last few censuses suggest that more and more
inner-ring suburbs around cities also are becoming home to racial
minorities as their populations grow. As of 2017, most residents of the
United States live in "radicalized and economically segregated
neighborhoods".
Education
In the United States, funding for public education relies greatly on
local property taxes. Local property tax revenues may vary between
different neighborhoods and school districts. This variance of property
tax revenues amongst neighborhoods and school districts leads to
inequality in education. This inequality manifests in the form of
available school financial resources which provide educational
opportunities, facilities, and programs to students.
Returning to the concept of residential segregation, it is known
that affluence and poverty have become both highly segregated and
concentrated in relation to race and location.
Residential segregation and poverty concentration is most markedly seen
in the comparison between urban and suburban populations in which
suburbs consist of majority White populations and inner-cities consist
of majority minority populations.
According to Barnhouse-Walters (2001), the concentration of poor
minority populations in inner-cities and the concentration of affluent
White populations in the suburbs, "is the main mechanism by which racial
inequality in educational resources is reproduced."
Unemployment rates
In
2016, the unemployment rate was 3.8% for Asians, 4.6% for non-Hispanic
Whites, 6.1% for Hispanics, and 9.0% for Blacks, all over the age of 16.
In terms of unemployment, it can be seen that there are two-tiers:
relatively low unemployment for Asians and Whites, relatively high
unemployment for Hispanics and Blacks.
Potential explanations
Several theories have been offered to explain the large racial gap in unemployment rates:
- Segregation and job decentralization
This theory argues that the effects of racial segregation pushed
Blacks and Hispanics into the central city during a time period in which
jobs and opportunities moved to the suburbs. This led to geographic
separation between minorities and job opportunities which was compounded
by struggles to commute to jobs in the suburbs due to lack of means of
transportation. This ultimately led to high unemployment rates among
minorities.
- White gains
This theory argues that the reason minority disadvantage exists is
because the majority group is able to benefit from it. For example, in
terms of the labor force, each job not taken by a Black person could be
job that gets occupied by a White person. This theory is based on the
view that the White population has the most to gain from the
discrimination of minority groups. In areas where there are large
minority groups, this view predicts high levels of discrimination to
occur for the reason that White populations stand to gain the most in
those situations.
- Job skill differentials
This theory argues that the unemployment disparity can be attributed
to lower rates of academic success among minority groups (especially
black Americans) leading to a lack of skills necessary for entering the
modern work force.
Crime rates and incarceration
In 2008, the prison population under federal and state correctional
jurisdiction was over 1,610,446 prisoners. Of these prisoners, 20% were
Hispanic (compared to 16.3% of the U.S. population that is Hispanic),
34% were White (compared to 63.7% of the U.S. population that is White),
and 38% were Black (compared to 12.6% of the U.S. population that is
Black). Additionally, Black males were imprisoned at a rate 6.5 times higher than that of their White male counterparts.
According to a 2012 study by the U.S. Census Bureau, "over half the
inmates incarcerated in our nation's jails is either black or Hispanic."
According to a report by the National Council of La Raza, research
obstacles undermine the census of Latinos in prison, and "Latinos in the
criminal justice system are seriously undercounted. The true extent of
the overrepresentation of Latinos in the system probably is
significantly greater than researchers have been able to document.
Consequences of a criminal record
After being released from prison, the consequences of having a criminal record
are immense. Over 40 percent who are released will return to prison
within the next few years. Those with criminal records who do not return
to prison face significant struggles to find quality employment and
income outcomes compared to those who do not have criminal records.
Potential causes
- Poverty
A potential cause of such disproportionately high incarceration rates
for Black Americans is that Black Americans are disproportionately
poor.
Conviction is a crucial part of the process that leads to either guilt
or innocence. There are two important factors that play a role in this
part of the process: the ability to make bail and the ability to access
high-quality legal counsel. Due to the fact that both of these important
factors cost money, it is unlikely that poor Black Americans are able
to afford them and benefit from them.
Sentencing is another crucial part of the process that determines how
long individuals will remain incarcerated. Several sociological studies
have found that poor offenders receive longer sentences for violent
crimes and crimes involving drug use, unemployed offenders are more
likely to be incarcerated than their employed counterparts, and then
even with similar crimes and criminal records minorities were imprisoned
more often than Whites.
- Racial profiling
Racial profiling is defined as,"any police-initiated action that
relies on the race, ethnicity, or national origin, rather than the
behavior of an individual or information that leads the police to a
particular individual who has been identified as being, or having been,
engaged in criminal activity." Another potential cause for the disproportionately high incarceration rates of Blacks and Hispanics
is that racial profiling occurs at higher rates for Blacks and
Hispanics. Eduardo Bonilla-Silva states that racial profiling can
perhaps explain the over representation of Blacks and Hispanics in U.S.
prisons. According to Michael L. Birzer, professor of criminal justice at Wichita State University
and director of its School of Community Affairs, "racial minorities,
particularly African Americans, have had a long and troubled history of
disparate treatment by United States Criminal Justice Authorities."
- Racial segregation
"Racial residential segregation is a fundamental cause of racial disparities in health".
Racial segregation can result in decreased opportunities for minority
groups in income, education, etc. While there are laws against racial
segregation, study conducted by D. R. Williams and C. Collins focuses
primarily on the impacts of racial segregation, which leads to
differences between races.
Police brutality
Significant racial discrepancies have been reported in the United
States involving police brutality. Police brutality in the United States
is defined as "the unwarranted or excessive and often illegal use of
force against civilians by U.S. police officers."
It can come in the form of murder, assault, mayhem, or torture, as well
as less physical means of violence including general harassment, verbal
abuse, and intimidation.
The origins of racial inequality by way of police brutality in America
date all the way back to colonial times. During this time when Africans
were enslaved by whites, enslavement became so widespread that slaves
began to outnumber whites in some colonies. Due to fear of rebellions,
insurrections, and slave riots, whites began to organize groups of
vigilantes who would use force to keep slaves from rebelling against
their owners. Men ages six to sixty were required to patrol slave
residences, searching for any slaves that needed to be kept under
control. When
the first American police department was established in 1838, African
Americans soon became the target of police brutality as they fled the
south. In 1929, the Illinois crime survey reported that although
African-Americans only made up five percent of Illinois's population,
they consisted of 30 percent of victims of police killings.
During the civil rights era, the existence of the racial
disparities surrounding police brutality only became more evident. As
protests against police brutality became more prevalent, police would
use tactics such as police dogs or fire hoses to control the protesters,
even if they were peacefully protesting. In 1991, video footage was
released of cab driver Rodney King
being hit over 50 times by multiple police with their batons. The
police were later acquitted for their actions. Allegations of police
brutality continue to plague American police. An alleged example includes Philando Castile,
a 32 year old black male who was pulled over for a broken taillight.
After being told by the police man, officer Yanez, to take out his
license and insurance, Castile let the officer know he had a firearm and
that he was reaching into his pocket to get his wallet. In a matter of
seconds the officer pulled out his gun and shot Castile 5 times, killing
him in front of his girlfriend and 4-year-old daughter. He claimed he
feared for his life because he believed Castile was pulling his own gun
from his pocket.
He was acquitted at trial, with one juror explaining that the decision
hinged on the specific wording of the law under which he was charged.
A study done by Joshua Correll at the University of Chicago shows what is called “The police officers dilemma,”
by setting up a video game in which police are given scenarios
involving both black and white men holding either a gun or
non-threatening objects such as cellphones. Their task is to only shoot
the men that are carrying guns. It was found in this experiment that
armed black men were shot more frequently than armed white men and were
also shot more quickly. The police would also often mistakenly shoot the
unarmed black targets, while neglecting to shoot the armed white
targets.
Cody T. Ross, a doctoral student studying anthropology concluded that
there is "evidence of a significant bias in the killing of unarmed black
Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the probability
of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49 times the
probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on average."
Color blind racism
It is hypothesized by some scholars, such as Michelle Alexander, that in the post-Civil Rights era, the United States has now switched to a new form of racism known as color blind racism. Color-blind racism refers to "contemporary racial inequality as the outcome of nonracial dynamics."
The types of practices that take place under color blind racism are "subtle, institutional, and apparently nonracial." These practices are not racially overt in nature such as racism under slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow laws.
Instead, color blind racism flourishes on the idea that race is no
longer an issue in this country and that there are non-racial
explanations for the state of inequality in the U.S. Eduardo
Bonilla-Silva writes that there are 4 frames of color-blind racism that
support this view:
- Abstract liberalism – Abstract liberalism uses ideas associated with political liberalism. This frame is based in liberal ideas such as equal opportunity, individualism, and choice. It uses these ideas as a basis to explain inequality.
- Naturalization – Naturalization explains racial inequality as a cause of natural occurrences. It claims that segregation is not the result of racial dynamics. Instead it is the result of the naturally occurring phenomena of individuals choosing likeness as their preference.
- Cultural racism – Cultural racism explains racial inequality through culture. Under this frame, racial inequalities are described as the result of stereotypical behavior of minorities. Stereotypical behavior includes qualities such as laziness and teenage pregnancy.
- Minimization of racism – Minimization of racism attempts to minimize the factor of race as a major influence in affecting the life chances of minorities. It writes off instances and situations that could be perceived as discrimination to be hypersensitivity to the topic of race.
Natural disasters
When
a disaster strikes--be it a hurricane, tornado, or fire--some people
are inherently more prepared than others. "While all members of
populations are affected by disasters, research findings show that
racial and ethnic minorities are less likely to evacuate and more
affected by disasters" than their Caucasian counterparts.
"During Hurricane Katrina, the large number of people seeking safety in
designated shelters were disproportionately black. In addition, the
mortality rate for blacks was 1.7 to 4 times higher than that of whites
for all people ≥ 18."
After Hurricane Katrina, many African Americans felt abandoned by the
United States Government. 66% of African Americans "said that 'the
government's response to [Katrina] would have been faster if most of the
victims had been white.'"
For a disproportionate share of the impoverished in New Orleans, many
had, and continue to have, a difficult time preparing for storms.
Factors such as "cultural ignorance, ethnic insensitivity, racial
isolation and racial bias in housing, information dissemination, and
relief assistance" all greatly contribute to the disparities in disaster
preparedness.