Month: February 2019
Racism in Emergency Response Systems
Introduction
It seems that police officers are always in the spotlight in the debate about racism in our first response organizations. For many, police brutality is a well known fact. For some, it's a myth — that first responders always have their constituents best interest at heart. Whats important is to determine the facts; is there some statistical data that can shed light on and ultimately end the debate about whether racism exists in our emergency response systems? Are firefighters and paramedics also participating in the same kind of systematic racism that police officers are accused of? Despite varying opinions, there is statistical data that supports the fact that racism is alive and well in our emergency response systems in the United States. Besides statistical analysis that can be done to determine these realities, one can also learn from the outcomes of natural disasters in poverty stricken areas that affect majority people of color populations. This paper will explain the ways that racism in emergency response systems can be quantified, and will include examples of the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, Hurricanes Katrina and Maria, The Dakota Access Pipeline, and the Chicago Police and Fire Departments.
Flint, Michigan Water Crisis
One sobering example of racism in emergency response systems is disaster relief and ineffective city planning. The United States “has an abysmal record when it comes to protecting people of color from environmental hazards stemming from dangerous industrial activity and harmful infrastructure” (Maxwell, Center for American Progress). We see this time and time again — it seems as though the areas that suffer the most from natural and industrial disasters are those inhabited primarily by people of color, and the data suggests that this is not a coincidence. Most people in the United States are aware of the water crisis in Flint, Michigan but easily forget about the sheer amount of people that are affected on a daily basis. Flint was once the thriving home of the nations largest General Motors plant. The city took a massive hit when General Motors began downsizing, since a large part of Flint’s residents were in some way employed by, and reliant on, the General Motors plant. Flint’s economic problems were so severe that “the state of Michigan took over Flint's finances after an audit projected a $25 million deficit” (CNN). In 2014, officials decided to divert “city water in an effort to save money but neglected to treat the water to prevent corrosion as it traveled through lead service lines” (Maxwell, Center for American Progress) this ultimately left more than 100,000 people in Flint exposed to toxic levels of lead in their water, making it essentially undrinkable. For months, “the state ignored the predominately black residents’ concerns and reassured them” that their drinking water was safe, despite “state employees receiving ‘coolers of purified water’” for their own consumption. Four years after the fact, many residents of Flint, Michigan have resorted to using bottled water for “drinking, bathing, and even flushing their toilets” with little effort from local or federal government to rectify the damage. While the water in Flint, Michigan is reportedly safe to drink, the trust between constituents and their government has corroded. Furthermore, the water crisis in Flint, Michigan serves as an extraordinary example of the ways in which people of color are essentially ignored in times of crisis; many people wonder if the situation in Flint would have carried on for so long without remedy if the population there were affluent white people (for clarity’s sake, the population of Flint, Michigan is an estimated 57 percent black, 37 percent white) — a lot of people would argue that no, Flint’s water crisis would have definitely been fixed under those circumstances. Others are resistant to this idea, as they refuse to come to terms with the United States’ deeply ingrained racism.
Hurricane Katrina
Hurricane Katrina is one of the most memorable and destructive events in recent United States History. Katrina was an incredibly strong hurricane that hit the Gulf Coast of the United States in August of 2005. The hurricane wrecked havoc on many southern states, from central Florida to eastern Texas. The straw that broke the camels back in the case of Hurricane Katrina was the faulty engineering in the flood protection system — this is what lead to the images America remembers of Hurricane Katrina. “There were over 50 breaches in surge protection levees surrounding the city of New Orleans were the cause of the majority of the death and destruction during Katrina; 80% of the city became flooded” (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education) At least 1,836 people died in the hurricane and the subsequent flooding, which made Hurricane Katrina the deadliest hurricane in the United States since 1928 (JBHE). The flooding and ocean water reached anywhere from six to twelve miles from the beach and the damages caused by the hurricane were estimated to be roughly $125 billion. It would be “five days before significant federal or state help arrived for the tens of thousands of blacks who were marooned in the city. A number of African-American political leaders charged that the response would have been far quicker had the victims been in the predominantly white cities of Palm Beach or Boca Raton” (JBHE). We also cannot forget that just a few short years before Hurricane Katrina, former “Klan leader and neo-Nazi” David Duke “carried the white vote in a [Louisiana] election for governor” (JBHE). Racism was still alive and well in Louisiana, and it became “most apparent when three days after the hurricane, armed police from the predominantly white blue-collar community of Gretna prevented a large group of black pedestrians” stranded in New Orleans from “crossing a bridge into their city” (JBHE). The Mayor of Gretna, Ronnie C. Harris, said that the city was “concerned about life and property” and that “it was quite evident that a criminal element was contained” in the group of people who were seeking asylum in Gretna. The flaws in the engineering of the flood protection system coupled with the inherent racism of the government and even surrounding cities makes evident the lack of sanctity of life when it comes to people of color.
Hurricane Maria
Hurricane Maria is on record as “the tenth most intense Atlantic hurricane” (CNN World). It came ashore Puerto Rico on “September 20 with sustained winds of 155 mph, knocking out power to the entire island” (CNN World). At its worst, the hurricane caused catastrophic damage and numerous fatalities across the northeastern Caribbean. Total losses from the hurricane are estimated at upwards of $92 billions dollars. As of “August 2018, 3,057 people were estimated to have been killed by the hurricane with an estimated 2,975 of those deaths in Puerto Rico” (Vick, Kudacki). The aftermath of Hurricane Maria was exasperated by the United States governments slow response to the hurricane. Puerto Rico’s power grid was effectively destroyed by the hurricane which left millions of Puerto Ricans without electricity. Suan Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz “relayed Puerto Ricans’ complaints that aid was not reaching them” to President Trump, who replied that “[Puerto Ricans have] thrown our budget a little out of whack … such poor leadership … they want everything to be done for them” (Vick, Kudacki). There was much debate about the extent to which Hurricane Maria was an American problem. This was particularly problematic of the United States government considering Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are all United States territories; Puerto Ricans are United States citizens with access to free travel throughout mainland U.S. However, even President Donald Trump was ignorant to the fact that he is the Chief of State of these territories, claiming that “[he] met with the President of the Virgin Islands” (Vick, Kudacki). Further, the aid that was sent to Puerto Rico was very poorly distributed by those providing aid. A hospital boat was sent to Puerto Rico, which had a capacity of 260 hospital beds. Over the 53-day period the hospital boat was docked, only 290 patients were serviced. This illustrates an incredibly poor use of resources. Once again, we must ask ourselves if the color of Puerto Ricans’ skin played a role in the way the United States handled addressing disaster Hurricane Maria. Since Puerto Ricans speak a different language and look different from most Americans, do we simply forget they are Americans? It seems even the President wasn’t so sure.
The Dakota Access Pipeline
Another jarring example of the treatment of people of color in the United States is the Dakota Access oil pipeline. President trump “signed an executive order reviving the Dakota Access oil pipeline, which jeopardizes the water resources of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe” (Maxwell). The events that occurred during the period of attempted protection of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and its water source were reported on relentlessly, and the brutality by the hands of the government and armed personnel was ruthless. The country watched in horror as peaceful protesters were brutalized; many people were near fatally injured. The governments position on the matter of the Dakota Access pipeline was clear: they didn’t care about anything but money. In freezing temperatures, protests and indigenous peoples alike were sprayed with ice-cold water. It was very clear that those exercising their first amendment right to protest were not welcome at the construction grounds of the pipeline, and that the powers that be would stop at almost nothing to regain the land. President Trump’s "blatant indifference to months of protests reemphasizes the administration’s position that Big Oil profits take precedence over the health of native people” (Maxwell). Furthermore, the incident at Standing Rock is just one of many of its kind. Standing Rock illustrates a failure to respond to problems that specifically face people of color.
The Chicago Police and Fire Departments
Despite having the same rights on paper, people of color in the United States have long been treated like second class citizens. In the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement (and the ensuing Blue Lives Matter movement) Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel appointed a task force whose job was to determine if police brutality against people of color is a reality. Unsurprisingly, that task force gave “validity to the widely held belief the police have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color,” the task force wrote. “Stopped without justification, verbally and physically abused, and in some instances arrested, and then detained without counsel — that is what we heard about over and over again” (Davey & Smith, The New York Times). The task force also found that “three out of every four people on whom Chicago police officers tried to use Taser guns between 2012 and 2015 were black. And black drivers made up 46 percent of police traffic stops in 2013” (Davey & Smith). The black population in Chicago being only around 32 percent makes the number of police traffic stops disproportionately large for the black community. Despite the accessibility of this information, and despite the multiple studies done that prove that racism exists within our emergency response systems, many people choose to believe otherwise. This is the birthplace of the Blue Lives Matter movement, which, intentionally or unintentionally, completely dismisses and diminishes what the Black Lives Matter movement stands for. “Racism has contributed to a long pattern of institutional failures by the Chicago Police Department in which officers have mistreated people, operated without sufficient oversight, and lost the trust of residents” the task force found (Davey & Smith).
My own experiences with the fire department have given me a small but poignant insight into the culture of emergency response systems in Chicago. My father and my brother are both employed by the Chicago Fire Department, the former is a Lieutenant and the latter is a Paramedic. I’ve essentially grown up in a firehouse; I was dropped off at the firehouse after school when I was little if no one was home to watch me, and I’ve even spent the night over at the firehouse on a few different occasions (I’m not sure if this is allowed or not). I always knew the firehouse was a crude environment, but the boys (emphasis on boys) tried their hardest to maintain a certain level of decorum around me. However, I’ve overheard many things that shine light on the engrained and systematic racism that exists in firehouses (and, one can then assume, police departments as well and as has been statistically proven by the City of Chicago Task Force aforementioned). My father worked at Engine 76 for ten years, a firehouse stationed roughly at North Ave and Pulaski, essentially in the heart of West Humboldt Park. Humboldt Park is a historically Puerto Rican neighborhood. When a call comes over the radio at the firehouse, summoning the firefighters or paramedics, and sounds something like “insert something” the firemen, as if rehearsed, all say ‘Puerto Rican hysteria.’ And make jokes about how they should take their time getting suited up and in the truck. Whether they do move more slowly for a so-called ‘Puerto Rican hysteria’ call is something I cannot say (and perhaps the subject matter of a future paper). Just the other day, my dad was telling me a story about someone who said that ‘gypsies are his least favorite people to deal with.’ The point of these personal anecdotes is not to say that I think the people my father or my brother work with are terrible racists. The point is to say that I think the culture of the fire and police departments fosters a fraternity-like setting where racist ideas run rampant.
Conclusion
After taking a hard look at the state of emergency response systems in place in the United States and their reasonable in-deniability, one must wonder if people of color even have a voice in the so-called American democracy? Have our systems that are designed to serve and protect their constituents dehumanized people of color to such an extent that their lives carry no significance anymore? While many would consider this critical analysis of the systems in place anti-government or anti-police, it is clear that the only way to bring about real and lasting change is to take off our rose-colored lens and see at long last the true state of this country.
Cite this page
Racism in Emergency Response Systems. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
The Economic Mirror of Racism
“The day of the white man is over. By his own hand he created a doomsday device designed to kill you and me” (Mosley, Futureland 345). This quote is an example of how Walter Mosley expresses the bigger picture of how economics has been weaponized as a tool of racism. Racism, though decreased in severity, still remains prevalent and will continue to thrive into the future unless society makes dramatic changes to correct the trajectory. In Mosley’s mystery fiction work, Devil in a Blue Dress, and science fiction novel Futureland that includes the short story “The Nig in Me,” the author delves into the theme of systemic racism, facilitated by large organizations, fleshing out the logical conclusions from the past and the present, while making dire predictions about the inevitable effects the current direction that racism will likely have on society and finance. In Mosley’s world, the future is doomed to a dystopian outcome based upon the examples from the past.
The economic racism from the early twentieth century is demonstrated in the novel, Devil in a Blue Dress. Mosley writes a compelling story of racism, centered on a young black veteran named Easy Rawlins who finds himself fighting against post-World War II society. The protagonist is loosely based upon Mosley’s own father’s experiences from that time (Lev 73). Easy is a reflective character determining how to resolve the moral complexities and ethical choices he experiences, both as a private detective and as a black man of the Post War era (73). Mosley’s noir-style story is set in the late 1940’s Los Angeles when Easy has been unfairly laid off from his job and finds work as a detective paid under the table (Mosley, Devil in the Blue Dress 5).
At the same time, Easy experiences the systemic racism of the period during the entire course of the novel. In one interaction, he chats with a Jewish woman and finds himself confronted by racist men; ""Hey!"" the tallest one said. ""What's wrong?""""N-----’'s trying to pick up Barbara.""""Yeah, an' she's just jailbait” (Mosley, Devil in the Blue Dress 22). Mosley’s work demonstrates a distant and different time period. The reader gets drawn into the specific injustices that reflect the kind of experiences that black men would have experienced during that time while trying to complete an honest day’s work. Mosley brings his own sense of the present day to this novel, creating a story that encapsulates the experience of his father’s generation that echo well into the present day. Mosley wants the reader to firmly grasp the experience of African American people, so that they can obtain a glimpse of what life must have been like for many people from the past. In doing so, he allows the message to resonate the reader’s experience in the present, and predict a potential future.
Mosley desires to create, for the reader, a world where African Americans are shown to be hard working and striving against a hostile society in spite of their circumstances. Much of the inequality he describes, in Devil in a Blue Dress and other novels, is the everyday, mundane racism. This is the kind caused by systemic inequality and is experienced by those that are not born into the lottery of the right zip code, the right family, or getting the acceptable education (Dews 2016).
In an interview, Mosley discussed that he was working diligently to show a new perspective of another society from a fresh pair of eyes, so that his readers could see the reality of a potential future compared to the distant past (Locus Online). In the science fiction novel Futureland, Mosley compiled a handful of loosely connected short stories that circulate around a predicted future African American experience. The novel is filled with strong, smart, self-reliant characters working toward a better future within the framework of a dystopian future. One story in particular, “The Nig in Me,” the author focuses on the experience of being an African American man in the future he describes. In the story, society has followed the logical conclusion of deeming the value and worthiness from the color of one’s skin. Mosley wants the reader to see the creeping effects of racism that has been seeping through the past and present situations and how they might affect a future society.
Mosley’s goal of this story is to serve as a warning to potential future generations. The protagonist, Harold Bottoms, is a black man whose family perpetually struggled financially and finds himself also fighting for survival in this bleak future. Harold is subjected to the experience of systemic racism based upon his own low income, lack of opportunities, and even his parent’s income. An example of this comes when Harold’s parents struggled and wound up lost to the system, lost in the dust to what Harold’s society knows as “white noise” and forbidden from finding work - “White Noise, Backgrounder, Muzak Jack — Words that define the poor souls that lost their labor rights permanently” (Mosley, Futureland 321). The white people of Mosley’s story do not struggle financially as much as Harold and the people from his culture seem to struggle.
Racism can be perpetuated through corrupt systems. It is found everywhere within our experience and Mosley seems to be stating that racism will not be eliminated unless there is massive change within the hearts of the people delivering actions. This mindset is often motivated by power, and greed, or in some cases, fear in others (Corlett 71). Economic racism can be amplified by the way organizations are managed and empower some groups to take advantage of others. The best way to push against this concept is to empower those individuals that can push back against corporate power (Dews 2016). These white groups and corporations are the main antagonists of both of Mosley's works.
A targeted and racist biochemically engineered disease is created in “The Nig in Me,” and capitalized upon by the racist Ku Klux Klan (KKK) organization. The disease was originally designed to target and kill the genes shared by African American people. The plague ends up backfiring on the same attackers, sending a less than subtle message to the reader that black people, regardless of the situation in which they find themselves, will always continue to prevail even in the darkest of times. It is a bleak message of hope. The racist plague unintentionally targets white people instead of its intended target, and the only survivors of the plague are those that have even the smallest amount of African DNA within their genes. Mosley describes racism as something that evolves, changes, and is eventually destroyed by the ones responsible for started it.
Mosley writes of a world where black people can find themselves surviving the racism of white people. Surviving those that want to murder them simply because of the color of their skin. In Devil in a Blue Dress, Easy Rawlins struggles, but continues to survive. He knows how to protect himself, and warily enjoys the support that his white employer provides him. Mosley writes of the situational racism he has experienced and watched personally. It shapes his own writing and the characters he forms are on the defensive, they are strong, young men that fight for their rightful place in a society that seeks to undermine them.
For example, in “The Nig in Me,” Harold, though losing his family to a corrupt and racist system years prior, and the threat of a new plague ends up surviving because of “a sizable portion of Negro blood in their veins” (Mosley, Futureland 346). The characters of each story still struggle for money and the life they want just like anyone. The protagonists from each story, Easy and Harold, have forged a home within the world where they do not feel like they are wanted. Mosley wants to create a world where his characters are black, yet feel at home, and they feel that they can survive, even when the world they live in works against them (Finding a Way Home: A Critical Assessment of Walter Mosley's Fiction, XI, 3-4).
Money is an ever present and urgent need and Mosley uses examples to show the racial divide within a society where corporations use people for their own gain. In “The Nig in Me,” he focuses on the potential reality of what a systemically racist future may hold. Corporations hold Harold’s culture and society close, taking the money that he needs to survive. In the future scenario, Harold desperately requires money, and if he cannot procure the money he needs, then he will die, or worse, lose everything. “Roving mobs of black and white ruffians were battling in the streets of the major American cities. Astonished Caucasians who survived the plague realized that there was a sizeable portion of Negro blood in their veins” (Mosley, Futureland 351).
The white antagonists in the story do not struggle like Harold does. He requires an identity card to live, which gets him access to places, and provides him with the basics of food and shelter. If that identity card were to be lost, Harold would not survive for long, finding himself forgotten or even ignored. “If I go off the force one more time, Sheila says she’ll pull the plug. Three times more and I’m White Noise” (351) Mosley uses this tension to demonstrate the financial desperation the characters feel. Money is a primary motivating element in each of Mosley’s works and the author demonstrates that fact by using monetary value as a focal point to create tension within each of the stories.
Mosley believes that the need for money forces people to work harder than they normally might. In Harold’s scenario, corporations actively work against the better interests of society and steal money from them. The plague that Harold survives was literally created by wealthy racists to kill all people of African American ancestry (Mosley, Futureland 336). ""World’s comin’ to an end.” Jamey said to his friend. “And ElectroDog wants to get the last dollar"" (346). Even at the end of the short story, companies are still fighting to gather more money. They create new products and toys for people in a consumerist scenario under the misperception that they desperately need them. In Harold’s view, he cannot do anything without the identity card, and he cannot get a replacement.
The Corporations in his life are mimicking the corporations that Mosley says exist today. In “The Nig in Me,” Mosley uses this fictional world to show how money has become scarcer, and how hard the people in the future will have to work in comparison to the people of the present day. In the fictional world of Mosley’s future corporations, society is divided into a fractured, parallel world of struggling black and white people: Each member of society either works to support “the System” or struggles to work in spite of it. Either way, those that struggle find themselves lost and forgotten. (Conversations with Walter Mosley, 103). This scenario of sacrificing lives for money can also be reflected in the past.
Pressure from large corporate interests play a role in Mosley’s work. In Devil in a Blue Dress, the theme of money has the applied pressure from racism of the time. “The law,"" he (Easy) continued, ""is made by the rich people so that the poor people can't get ahead...” This is a common thread in the author’s work and since the novel is set in the 1940’s, even a small amount of money plays an important role in comparison to the present or in the world of “The Nig in Me’s.” Easy Rawlins is fighting for every last dollar, using each to get further into his business of finding what he set out for. What today’s society would consider a small amount of money is a foreign concept to Easy Rawlins, because that is what can be found in a rich man’s wallet.
However, Easy quickly obtains a generous amount of money during the course of the novel. ""The law,"" he continued, ""is made by the rich people so that the poor people can't get ahead"" (Mosley, Devil in the Blue Dress 75). Easy understands that the odds are stacked against him, but he makes the most of his situation and pushes through to be a successful young man regardless of his circumstances. Mosley writes of Easy’s careful spending and how everything he spends his money on was used for his benefit like bills, or paying for drinks to get future persons of interest to open up their knowledge. As a black man, Mosley shows that Easy was a fighter, and working hard for his cash because just a few years prior, he is still not respected for his race. The money that Easy earns in the story is all an investment for a secure future.
Mosley writes this dissonance between the two stories to show how race impacting monetary value. In contrast to Easy’s character, Harold lives many years in the future. Racism is still prominent, but not as rampant as Easy’s world. The racism that thrives is easily hidden while the gap between rich and poor is wider, making the racist plague a shock to everyone around them (Mosley, Futureland 345). Harold, while struggling with his income, does not take time to care or protect himself from The System. He obsessively protects his identity card and his life. “He hadn’t let go of his ID-Chip in twelve years, since the day of his labor adulthood at fifteen” (Mosley, Futureland 329). However, when it comes to money, Harold is the opposite of Easy Rawlins. He is reckless and ambivalent about tomorrow. For example, he dismisses the objections of his friend after taking money from a dead lover, ""She was dead, man. She didn’t need it and her family’s rich.
You know the parmeds woulda taken that shit in a minute"" (Mosley, Futureland 345). This is an example of how Harold spirals into a mindset of deviancy when the world begins to end, rationalizing his behaviors and thought processes. Mosley uses this example to show that young black men in America will always survive, even when the odds are stacked against them. Mosley uses this to urge that the world should change how they perceive racism in respect to why Harold behaves in this manner. For a reflection on a possible future, Mosley discussed his view on a cultural milestone of his futuristic novel Futureworld in comparison with the sci-fi fantasy Star Wars films during an interview. He remarked on the lack of African American representation in Star Wars as a reflection of the future being free of people of color, and even though the filmmakers attempted to remedy that picture, they were never truly successful (Locus Online). In each story, racism revolves around learned behaviors, stubbornness, and greed.
White people in Moseley’s stories are either racist antagonists or passive bystanders. The Jewish woman that Easy spoke to did not take the opportunity to defend him against racist threats and Easy remained cautious. For example, Mosley writes, “Junior liked to make up any old wild story, I knew that, but there were too many white people turning up for me to feel at ease” (Mosley, Devil in the Blue Dress 75). Easy’s experience captured the experience of people of color of the Post-War period, competing for and failing to gain access to the coveted white suburbia of the time (Mullins 2013).
While Harold and Easy do not have an active distaste for white people within their stories, they are justifiably cautious men when it comes to their interactions with other races. This is a learned behavior that the two men have experienced, though many years apart in history. The two men struggle with their finances but in altogether different ways and reasons. Both men live in societies that allow people of color to struggle, and the large institutions of their times take extra measures to allow those struggles to exists due to greed and capitalism. During Easy’s time, African Americans were actively discriminated from purchasing homes in white neighborhoods (Mullins 2013).
Walter Mosley’s works sadly show that racism may not ever change. The philosopher George Santayana once wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (Santayana 284). The experience of racism goes much deeper for people that live behind the color of their skin. This theme of systemic racism goes hand in hand with the poverty that affects the income of African Americans. Mosley writes from the point of view that people of color are prisoners within their own skin, because of how society has placed that burden on them. In his works, these prisoners of their own skin, and their basic needs, become a constant focus, but they cannot make a good wage because the companies of their respective times are empowered to take advantage of others.
The results of systemic racism and palpable at the end of each story. Racism becomes personal and not limited just to how one group may hate another. Racism, in all of its forms, will not only remain in America, but endure for many years to come, due to the overtly corrupt system that exists, unless substantial changes are made. In his works, Mosley concisely displays that racial prejudices of each respective time period remains unchanged. The future of racism, in the form of economic disparity, must be balanced with not only the knowledge of the past, but the implementation of its lessons to change the course of civilization. In this way, society will avoid the dystopia that Mosley keeps predicting.
Cite this page
The Economic Mirror of Racism. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Cultural Racism and Secularity in French Society
Despite the fact that a greater Muslim population is found in France than in most other European countries and that Muslims have dwelled in France for many generations, this community has been continuously outcast from mainstream French society (Pew Research Center, 2017). This general rejection of Muslim culture is evident in the French attitude towards hijab: the various forms of veiling practiced by Islamic women. The stigma placed on public displays of hijab in France is a direct manifestation of the cultural racism entrenched in French society. This cultural racism finds its roots in the historical ideal of the French nation. Furthermore, policy that directly targets the religious freedoms of Islamic women residing in France is normalized because it is implemented under the guise of maintaining the secularity that defines French society.
Before one can begin to analyze any discourse surrounding Islamic veiling, it is imperative to develop an understanding of the history of hijab, and one that is beyond the context of Islam. In Muslim culture, hijab denotes both a physically and conceptually significant item, as it commonly used to describe “a complete ensemble that refers to Islamic clothing rules”, and not merely a singular article of clothing (Boulanouar, 2006). Less well-known is the reality that veiling among females existed long before Islam; in ancient, pre-Islamic societies, only wealthy women who were deemed respectable were permitted to veil (Nayebzadah, 2010). Thus, the custom finds its origins as an incorporation into Islamic tradition as Islam spread through the Middle East and gained popularity, rather than having originated in the religion itself (Killian, 2003).
The discourse in France surrounding this single practice is characterized by two opposing narratives. I will refer to them as the narrative of oppression and the narrative of power and piety. Those in agreement with the former tend to regard the hijab as a symbol of oppression, a tangible manifestation of Islam treating women as the inferior sex. However, those in agreement with the latter narrative? primarily insiders on the subject? argue that hijab cannot be reduced to a mere symbol of oppression. They assert that it not only serves as a form of liberation, but as an expression of piety through modesty. With the lack of emphasis placed on physical appearance, it allows women to be freed from “the feeling that one has to meet the impossible male standards of beauty” (Mustafa, 1993). Naheed Mustafa explains that contrary to popular belief, hijab is “a woman’s assertion that judgement of her physical person is to play no role whatsoever in social interaction” (Mustafa, 1993).
In terms of piety, a study found that for many veiled Muslims, hijab is a demonstration of “obedience to their faith” (Siraj, 2011). This perspective has forced me to consider that perhaps the narrative of oppression is partially the product of a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of Islam. This idea of a personal and voluntary submission to God through modesty has been kicked to the curb in favor of the portrayal of an involuntary submission to meet Islamic cultural standards which disproportionately discriminate against women.
The consistent failure of French society to acknowledge and absorb this side of Muslim belief is a product of cultural racism. Cultural racism differs from the classical definition of racism in that is veers away from the idea that one group is superior to another and focuses more on an “insurmountability of cultural differences” and an “incompatibility of life-styles and traditions” (Balibar, 1991).
This form of neo-racism is deeply rooted in the foundations French society and its historical focus on a nationalistic ideal, or “the optimal version of [France] in the contemporary world” (Silverman, 2014). Maxim Silverman points out that this desire for a homogenous society in which “differences are fixed and naturalised” become racist in their tendency subordinate and exclude (Silverman, 2014). Consequently, North Africans dwelling in French society have been historically othered due to their differences on both physical and religious levels. Further evidence of this othering is present in the discourse surrounding the general topic of immigration in France. The terms “immigrant” and “foreigner” are often “popularly and politically blurred” (Silverman, 2014). Furthermore, it is predominately those individuals of North African descent who are immediately assumed to be immigrants regardless of their actual citizenship status in France (Silverman, 2014).
It is this deeply entrenched difference-equals-deficit mindset that can explain the gradual alienation of the Muslim community in France to this day? but this is only part of the underlying issue. The notoriously French emphasis on secularism has played a major role in facilitating discrimination against the Muslim community. Since the French Revolution, the French have regarded this acute separation of church and state as a key component of how the French republic operates.
The hijab, as a tangible and outward expression of religiosity, is perceived as a threat to this principle of secularity that French society holds so near and dear. However, legislative action taken to combat violations of this secularity is done so in a way that targets veiled Muslim women more than any other religious group. A 2004 law passed under the guise of maintaining secularity in education prohibits students from wearing signs of their religion in the classroom, but it was clear that the passage of the law was meant as a strategy to eliminate the presence of hijab specifically. The discriminatory nature of French legislation against Muslims is nothing new; during a previous attempt to pass such a law, France’s Prime Minister at the time was quick to “[reassure] France’s peak Jewish representative body that the measure wasn’t intended to have anything to do with the Jewish kippah” (Riemer, 2016).
This same focus on Islam as the pinnacle of the threat to secularity in French society is present outside education as well, such as was seen with the banning of the “burkini” by authorities in many French towns. The burkini is a type of swimsuit designed for Muslim women so that they can continue to adhere to the principles of hijab while engaging in aquatic activities. In one instance on a beach in Nice, a photograph emerged of a Muslim woman in a version of the burkini being confronted by police officers at the beach. As a result of this confrontation, the woman is pictured removing her tunic. The ticket she was given read that her outfit did not resemble an outfit “‘respecting good morals and secularism’” (Quinn, 2016).
What should not be treated as anything more than a cultural difference is treated as highly problematic by those who have the power to promote equality and autonomy. It is highly unlikely that if you walked around in France wearing a Christian crucifix that you would receive any sort of verbal reprimand, let alone a physical ticket, from the French authorities. This supports the notion of an underlying cultural racism in French society is directed at Muslim women and the Islamic faith in general.
The burkini was designed to facilitate the practicing Muslim woman’s desire to participate in a certain activity, similar to a restaurant offering vegetarian options. This ban is no less restrictive than that of the vigorously theocratic governments of Iran and Saudi Arabia. Anywhere a woman is denied agency, she is oppressed. For this reason, I am so baffled the ability of French society to normalize the restrictions it places on the headscarf, while simultaneously asserting that these Middle Eastern societies are barbaric and backwards in their imposed restrictions. In both environments, though they are on ideologically opposite poles, the resulting reality is the same: Islamic women are denied the right to wear what they choose.
Although this injustice runs rampant in French society and has for a long time, the potential for Muslim women to achieve equality in this realm begins by dismantling the negative perception of hijab through comprehensive education. This, of course, does not mean you should go around accusing every French person opposed to hijab of being a cultural racist. This is counterproductive to promoting an actual productive dialogue and must instead be pursued in the manner of remedying a fundamental misunderstanding of the Islamic faith.
One could begin with the interpretation of Quranic texts, the holy scripture of Islam, whose verses are so often considered to be anti-women by outsiders and therefore anti-hijab. Riffat Hassan However, Hassan argues that this misunderstanding can be attributed to a lack of understanding regarding the relationship between the the Quran and the ahadith (Hassan, 1994). She explains that the Quran is too often interpreted through the lens of the ahadith. This distorts the meaning of the Quran, as these are not the words of the Prophet. Instead they are representative of “Arab culture of the 7th and 8th centuries” and that “Islam, coming after Judaism and Christianity, as the youngest of these three religions has incorporated the biases of these earlier religions towards men” (Hassan, 1994).
An interpretation of the Quran through this lens is outdated and should not be allowed to characterize authentic Islamic beliefs. Much how Christian laypeople reinterpret text, Hassan argues that every generation of Muslims, male and female, should have the right to reinterpret the verses of the Quran as it is an “open text” (Hassan, 1994). These interpretations include those regarding hijab. Hassan, along with many other Islamic feminists, has found that this more accurate interpretation of the Quran results in the realization of a multitude of feminist notions within the holy text. It is crucial that the members of French society consider this concept of reinterpretation when evaluating their perspective of the Islamic faith, for it is crucial that all interpretations of text are taken into account when making any sort of critique.
Despite the complex and multi-faceted nature of hijab and its surrounding discourse, one thing remains certain: A woman should be able to choose to wear whatever garment she feels best conveys what she identifies with as an individual. It should not matter whether she is wearing her hijab to show devotion to God, out of respect for Islamic tradition, or as a means of making a political statement. An unveiled Muslim woman who feels that who she is can be most adequately expressed through a tank top and miniskirt is as valid as the Muslim woman expressing her identity through the total concealment of the burqa, even if that identity is rooted in religiosity.
Cite this page
Cultural Racism and Secularity in French Society. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Racism is Still Alive
According to the Declaration of Independence “all men are created equal,” but are all men truly created equal when the freedom of the United States is limited to men and women who are not free from the abuse of racism? The American nation has had its fair share of trial and error but has surpassed many obstacles to overcome, but this nation is still faced with a horrific overshadow of brutality and discrimination against race in this nation of the free and home of the brave (US 1776)
The nation was young and optimistic at the time that Frederick Douglass was using his first amendment to stand up for how he as a former slave and those still in slavery were in a constant gloom of feeling unwanted in the nation that was deemed as free. He spoke out for his race, the minority, in hopes that something would be done about the way they were being treated. Douglass goes through trials of his life and the things he had seen, those who wanted the taste of “virtuous freedom” were the ones that were uneasy about what it would be like to be free.
The slaveholders would not want them to run off and experience the chance at freedom, so they conditioned those who wanted a taste of freedom by giving them a bottle of the white man’s drink and convincing them to get drunk, thus leading for the slaves to think a certain way about what it would be like to be free. This is still shown through today as police brutality; the use of force, verbal assault, and psychological intimidation. As shown in a growing body of scholarly research, it is revealed the it is more likely for an African American man to report brutality than it is for any other race, there are lower standards for the African American race based off prejudice, many deem the African American man as aggressive and criminal making them seem as if they are a danger to the society, and that the race is seen as a threat in engaging in criminal activity so they must be punished by force if needed. This reveals that the nation has lost optimism and replaced it an evolved lessened method of the past (Douglass 77).
Discrimination against a certain race has been going on for many of years and has manifested itself into a vendetta against the society, this carries and emotional hatred for In recent years, the role of discrimination that is played in the lives of many African Americans has been looked at closely, they have linked the use of discrimination as a source for the negative mental health. For the most part it is seen to branch from the already existing stereotype that is evident today. Many forms of discrimination come from an encounter that has been personal or from someone else, thus forming a generalized idea of the entire group making it hard for stereotypes to be thrown out the window. If emphasized, most children are taught at a young age about discrimination and what it means.
Many are taught whether it is okay or if it is not okay to discriminate a race. As many things are taught, there are several aspects that attach to a person's beings to form these opinions about someone, such as social media, music, and historical documents. After someone has formed an opinion on how they feel about discrimination in the society, there are only a few things that could change their mind such as: social payoff, psychological payoff, economic payoff, and cognitive payoff. Discrimination may be hard to determine because once an attitude for a certain amount of payoff is connected, then the idea of changing the way your attitude is towards it, then the resistance of change is increased. In the society today, the forms of discrimination come in all different ways; racial slurs, harassment, insults, or inappropriate jokes that are directed to a race to let their guard down to fuel a hatred that is not needed in the society today.
Although this may be true, there are several factors to the racial predicament that stand as the opposing sides clash such as: police go through extensive training to know when to suppress someone and know the force to use when dealing with someone, when being physically assaulted it is okay to use force, it is easier to categorize the cultures, allows us to respond appropriately towards one another, and provides people with a sense of wholeness to a group. But at the end of the day, there is still those things happening in our world today whether some like to accept that, based on someone's personal account they could have used too much force on someone when it was not needed or they could have made a comment about the race that does not seem to offend, but in reality it does. The way the minority group is treated compared to how others are treated is an entirely different atmosphere.
Are all men truly created equal when it is shown in America today that even through trial and error, the progressive nation has only evolved its horrific aspects to form a nation that is bound in the chains of the past, prejudice is moving forward causing the race for equality to slowly lose its battle.
Cite this page
Racism Is Still Alive. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
The Truth about Scientific Racism
Throughout the decades scientific racism has been brought up less, but that does not mean that it ever went away. People use science to try and prove their theories that claim that the white race is superior above all. Although people in the past would measure people’s skulls and weigh their brains in order to provide evidence to their claims, it ultimately came down to people being at a certain white standard. Scientific racism has been proven wrong time and time again, but even in today’s society with the new political leaders, human rights for minorities are being dismissed because people who are white believe they are naturally superior.
In The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould, he talks about Paul Broca, a French physician, and how he would measure different peoples skulls as well as weigh their brains in order to prove that white people were smarter than anyone else. It is mentioned that Broca claimed that the size of the brain corresponds with intelligence and that white males have the biggest brains; larger brains than women, poor people, and lower races.1 When Broca would stumble upon issues, such as a white male’s brain not weighing enough, he would simply write down a larger number for the mass he was recording.2 This makes Broca’s findings unreliable because there were white males with smaller brains than black males, which would never happen if his claims were true.
As well as that, in Race and the Enlightenment by Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze, an essay is shown by Immanuel Kant who believes that all people originated from a white brunette and that black people are essentially white people who have been stained.3 Kant explains how all people are born white, but some are born with a specific dark spot that later spreads and eventually turns someone black. It was this easy for Kant to come up with these facts because he had never seen a person with darker skin than him which would make him superior too. It was not proven that white people were better, most people had never someone who was black which made it easier for them to make these claims.
In addition, in The Mismeasure of Man, Gould has a section about a man named Louis Agassiz who was a Swiss naturalist. Agassiz had never seen a black person in Europe so when he encountered a black servant he was disgusted.4 He then claimed that black people and white people had to be different species because their black faces and thick lips made him feel the need to tell them to stay away.5 Since Agassiz did not think his first encounter with a black person was pleasant, he easily stated that it was obvious they had to be different species.
To further add on, white people used their superiority as an excuse to dehumanize black people. Gould also mentioned that there were two main groups, the soft-liners and the hardliners.6 The hard-liners believed that blacks were inferior and that their biological status justified their enslavement and colonization. The soft-liners still believed that blacks were inferior but that they also deserved to have human rights despite their skin color.
Finally, in the Four Statements on the Race Question by Unesco, they say that scientists have recognized that all human beings belong to the same species and that physical traits can change due to geographic and cultural isolation.
7 This helps further understand why certain races have different skin tones. People with darker skin were known to live in warmer climate areas than people with light skin. Just as the soft-liners believed that blacks were inferior but still deserved to have certain rights, people nowadays think the same. Many people’s truth was unveiled once Donald Trump came into office and started saying radical things about minorities. People still compare race to their intelligence quotient (IQ) without thinking about the lack of resources in environments in which minorities live in. Lack of resources and environmental situations need to be considered before deciding that race is what determines intelligence.
It may be easy for some to justify their racism on science and the environment, but scientific racism continues to be wrong, whether it was in the 19th century or in today’s society. Applying this scientific knowledge seems to be a way to further white supremacy and people will continue to talk about it even though it is not reliable. People continue to judge others based on their skin color without actually knowing how educated they may be or how up to standard they are.
- 1 Stephen Jay Gould, “Measuring Heads,” in The Mismeasure of Man (New York, 1981), 88.
- 2 Stephen Jay Gould, “Measuring Heads,” The Mismeasure of Man (New York, 1981), 93-94.
- 3 Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze, Race and the Enlightenment (Massachusetts: Blackwell Publisher, 1997), 60.
- 4 Stephen Jay Gould, “American Polygeny and Craniometry before Darwin,” in The Mismeasure of Man (New York, 1981), 76.
- 5 Stephen Jay Gould, “American Polygeny and Craniometry before Darwin,” in The Mismeasure of Man (New York, 1981), 77.
- 6 Stephen Jay Gould, “American Polygeny and Craniometry before Darwin,” in The Mismeasure of Man (New York, 1981), 63.
Cite this page
The Truth About Scientific Racism. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Race Discrimination in Sport
With sports come racism, it’s as simple as that. The famous Jackie Robinson said, “But as I write these words now I cannot stand and sing the National Anthem. I have learned that I remain a black in a white world”(""Jackie Robinson"" ). Saying that yes he plays a professional sport but this sport is a white man's sport and I would argue that it is still one today. Black athletes in sports have always pushed back against racism and have made lots of headway but “As Malcolm X once said: ""Don't tell me about the progress the black man has made. You don't stick a knife 10 inches in my back, then pull it out three or four, then tell me I'm making progress.""”(Skin games).Sports and racism have always gone hand in hand, there has never been a sport without racism, sports fuel the fire of racism, they fuel the uprising against racism and they fuel the backlash against it. The history of racism in sport has, in the end, despite numerous examples in which black athletes have overcome the color barrier, done more to promote racial bias and misassumptions than it has destroyed them.
Racism in sports has is as common as they come. The color barrier has yet still not been broken in sports in spite of countless attempts to break it. From the famous Jackie Robinson, who did the unthinkable and first broke the color barrier to, “when Jack Johnson fought Tommy Burns to become the first African American heavyweight champion of the world”(""Boxing the Color Line.""). These acts of bravery and courage from these men helped the dissemination of the color barrier but still today it still hasn’t been fully eradicated. We continue to tell ourselves that it is getting better yet it has just gotten worse. The work of these famous Idols will surely never be forgotten but the work they started is not done yet.
When Jack Johnson beat Tommy burns in 1908 the world was shocked. Tommy Burns was described as unbeatable, he’d never been defeated and was today’s equivalent of Mayweather. Then came Jack Johnson, Johnson beat Burns in round 14 of 20. The world was shocked, white people were shocked. Their “undefeatable” hero had been knocked down by a black man. After the match journalist, Jack London wrote, “Naturally I wanted to see the white man win. Put the case to Johnson and ask him if he were the spectator at a fight between a white man and a black man which he would like to see win. Johnson's black skin will dictate a desire parallel to the one dictated by my white skin"" (“Boxing the Color Line”).
This was the view that many white people had at the time since Jack Johnson did not have there skin color he was not the peoples Heavyweight Champion of the World, he was the black man's Heavyweight champion of the world. This all came to the racism in the country at the time, many people, like it is today, still didn’t conform under the National Identity of an American. White people still thought of themselves as the privileged race. So when an African American took the title from a white man people started looking for a “great white hope” to beat Jack Johnson. White people could not accept Jack Johnson as there champion, they had an undying fear of black superiority, so they decided to actively try to find a white man to beat him, which funny enough, they never did. Meanwhile, Jack Johnson as the new Heavyweight Champion became under major public scrutiny. His publicists came up with a list of rules to make him “less black” or “good Negro rules”.
These rules included, “""He could not gloat over opponents. He could not be seen in public with white women. He had to be seen as a Bible-reading, mother-loving, God-fearing individual, and not to be 'too black.’”(Boxing the color line). Making him “less black” was common among black professional sports players at the time. Winning the match not only propelled him forward and made him a national figure but it also didn’t help him in some ways. Because he was in the spotlight of a white man's game he was made to become less of what he already was, by doing this he showed that through sports black people are almost always tried to be fixed.
Another example of this would be the long forgotten black Jockeys. During the 1800s and early 1900s black men dominated the sport of horse racing. They couldn’t be beaten. Black Jockeys were the first African American sports superstars long before Jack Robinson or Jack Johnson came along. This was because for centuries plantation owners made their slaves work with there horses. Because of this, these men learned the inside and out of horses and horse racing. For hours they would ride, groom and train there masters horses. This caused the white horse owners to put their slaves on their horses as jockeys because they knew more about the horse than anyone else. Even after the emancipation black jockeys still destroyed any competition. During the first-ever Kentucky Derby 13 of the 15 riders were black. Not only that but African Americans “won 15 of the first 28 runnings of the Kentucky Derby”(The Kentucky Derby’s Forgotten Black Jockeys).
The most famous of these Jockeys was called Isaac Murphy who, “was the undisputed king of jockeys and rode consistently for the top stables of the day”( Isaac Murphy). That is like saying he is today's version of Lebron James. He won an impressive 49 out of 51 starts during a stint in his career and near the end of his career he was making 25,000 a year. Murphy was part of the domination of black jockeys in horse racing. Then slowly they started to disappear. “The rising tide of institutional racism that swept across Gilded Age America finally seeped into the world of horse racing.”(The Kentucky Derby’s Forgotten Black Jockeys). Jealous white riders at northern tracks started to conspire against black Jockeys. Made more confident by societal changes started to force black jockeys out of the races. They warned the owners of the horses to not put black jockeys to ride their horses if they wanted to win. To carry out their threat they would block black jockeys into the side of the inside railing of the course and force them to go over the side. They would also whip the Black Jockeys with the whips meant for the races.
All the while race officials would look the other way and ignore the misdoings that were happening in the sport. Quickly all black jockeys were out of jobs because the horse owners would know they would lose. Even Willie Simms, the only African American to win all three of the Triple Crown events had to beg for a horse to ride. This is an example of how sports promote racism, if still around today black jockeys would still dominate the sport of horse racing. But because the white population was scared of black superiority they methodically pushed all black jockeys out of the sport and now even today there is barely any black jockeys. This is what was happening in almost all the sports in that time period if it hadn’t happened already.
“The NBA, where today nearly 75 percent of the players are black, originally had no black players. Zero”(In its early years, NBA blocked black players). Today one of the most famous sports in the world the NBA is almost all black players but back in the days, there were absolutely none. It was a completely white-dominated sport even though black players were clearly the superior at the sport. The best of the black players played on teams like the Harlem Globetrotters. They were so popular that owners of NBA teams would hold doubleheaders on the same night where the first game was played against a regular NBA team while and then afterward they would play against the much more exciting Globetrotters. “The Globetrotters traveled around the country beating all sorts of teams, including the NBA champion Minneapolis Lakers”(In its early years, NBA blocked black players). Beating the Lakers clearly pissed a lot of white people off, the Lakers were their all-star team and the Globetrotters came in and easily whupped their asses. The Globetrotters with all their new found fame got a ton of hate. They had to use fake buses to distract hate marches from getting to there buses. But with all this fame the NBA owners started to notice.
The owner of the New York Knicks finally decided that he wanted to draft Nat “Sweetwater” Clifton a current player on the Globetrotters. At first, every single owner of the other NBA teams refused to have him play in their games but when the Owner of the Knicks threatened to leave the league they finally caved in. Clifton also came into the NBA with two black men named Chuck Cooper and Earl Lloyd. “The fact that all three players joined the NBA during the same season. Thus, no single player had to bear the burden on his own”(Nat Clifton). Since they all came in at the same time they all got less amount of hate since it was all divided between the three of them. But that doesn’t mean they didn’t get any hate. Some games that they played in fans would boycott because they didn’t think that black players should play in the league. Being in the spotlight gave the white people someone to hate and someone to blame when something went wrong. No longer were white players for the faults that they did but those faults were put on the black players even if they didn’t do the fault.
A university in Colorado did a survey where the main thing found was, “false notions about black athletes being more “naturally talented” than their “gritty” white peers”(How the 'natural talent' myth is used as a weapon against black athletes). Meaning that people believed that white players had to work hard to where they had to get to while black players were naturally gifted and didn’t have to work to where they are now and didn’t have to overcome any obstacles. This how sports truly promote racism because we can not find it in ourselves to believe the black players deserve to be good at sports and do not deserve to be in the position in where they are now.
Throughout history we have seen this, starting with Jack Johnson and how he had to conform to rules to make him less black. Then on to the black jockeys who were the first all-star black superstars in sports who were pushed out of the sport violently by jealous white jockeys and white owners. And finally on to the NBA who now is almost completely dominated by black players used to block black players from playing and hated on the ones who eventually did. Why must we continue to think of our Nation in sports as two separate races? Why can we not be proud of both races under one Nation? That is the question that we still ask today and are yet to be answered.
Cite this page
Race Discrimination in Sport. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Institutional and Individual Racism
According to Jorge L. A. Garcia, we view racism as a malicious, racially based disregard for the welfare of certain people. He describes it simply and specifically as a hatred for another’s wellness, due to their race. Viewing racism in this way fundamentally concerns the “heart” of the racist, referring to his or her sentiments and attitudes. He believes that racism as an act is racist to the extent that a racist heart corrupts the absolute manner of the racist. An institution, on the other hand, is racist to the degree that it is founded and established with racist attitudes that produces racist-infected thoughts and actions presented by its originators or fellow supporters.
Furthermore when viewing racism in this way, Garcia suggests that this connection and their intentions, clarifies why racism is always immoral. He further explains that it’s immorality originates from being against the virtues of benevolence and justice towards a specific race. This could mean that one might not feel hatred for someone, but merely indifferent. Exclusively from a third-persons perspective, an understanding of someone’s beliefs about race is necessary for determining whether their ill-will is racial or not.
Likewise, he also states that the definition of racism must include that racism is inheritably wrong. Throughout time, the meaning and use of racism has changed. Garcia states that many respected individuals such as Mills and Flew have changed their definitions and conception of racism over time. This can become problematic as it is important to have a clear conception of racism in mind as we need to know its core principles before we can truly decide if it is definitively immoral or not. As racism is generally widely accepted to be immoral already, having a clear conception is important in order to rectify racism and rid it's immoral nature from our society.
When looking deeper into Garcia’s precise interpretations of racism, his account is based off of four main characteristics: (1) volitional, (2) virtue ethical, (3) non-doxastic, and (4) individualistic. Garcia justifies his volitional theory of racism, as it is done of one’s own free will. One’s racist acts are done of one’s own free will and done intentionally, with the inability to “hide behind” other misinterpreted meanings (since they are done purposefully). It is important to be able to understand how a volitional racist expresses himself so that we can identify their actions on the basis of ill will towards others. This allows us to be able to call an act or situation racist. Garcia declares that racism is virtue ethical as racist individuals are not naturally born racist. They have been brought up to believe in racist beliefs and therefore their natural “pure heart” has been corrupted. Racism is thought to be non-doxastic as it is not necessarily concerning the beliefs and truths of a particular individual or distinct race, but further regarding their feelings and motivations. Garcia’s last account states that racism arises and stems from the individual. He believes the institution or system can inclusively drive racist policies, however those racist policies all originate from the individuals who created and/or run the institution. Racism can spread from individual hearts to inevitably contaminate institutions with their opinions, deliberations, and actions.
With this in mind, Garcia discusses that institutional racism instigates when racism spreads from the heart of individual people to institutions. Therefore, institutional racism initiates from social groups or individuals who control behavioral norms. These customs support ignorant racist views and actions merely because of someone’s skin color, culture background, or ethnic origin.
In particular, the most notable example of institutional racism in the United States is arguably Slavery. This manifestation began in the colonies in 1619 when the first boat of slaves arrived in Virginia. The process of discrimination started modestly and quickly progressed from the people as they actively purchased and traded slaves. States then slowly started to recognize this evident practice - legalizing it in each colony, and entirely institutionalizing nearby states as the interest in Slavery spread across the borders.
Similar to Garcia, Tommie Shelby and Charles Mills have other distinctive verdicts on the philosophical discussion topic of Racism, specifically Garcia’s volitional account. Shelby reflects on Garcia’s volitional account, and states that this account of racism is wrong. Shelby does not believe that racist beliefs themselves are both necessary and sufficient to be racist. One does not need to necessarily be intentionally partaking in racist acts to be racist. In Shelby’s article, Is Racism in the “Heart”?, Shelby goes over the example where a young woman was brought up learning that African Americans are “naturally violent, irresponsible, and indolent.” Even with these beliefs, she doesn’t hold any ill will towards African Americans as she believes that it is in their very nature and justly not their wrongdoing. However, as she matures and ages, these beliefs affect her perceptive on discrimination as a juror, hiring or giving out loans against African Americans - even though she has no ill will in her decision making. Her choices may all have good intentions as she believes she is doing good in distributing justice and making financially responsible decisions for her company, where no ill will is considered in her decisions.
According to Garcia, this woman is not a racist as she had a “pure heart” and no ill will towards the African Americans she discriminated against. However, Shelby continues disagreeing with Garcia’s sentiment. He says that he does not recognize how these circumstances are not considered racist, as her beliefs are the overall cause for these discriminations. These biases should be ethically racist as her decisions appropriated race as a definite factor in her decision making. Racism, according to Shelby, is a widespread belief that delivers oppression to a certain race. It is stated that racist beliefs are both necessary and sufficient for racism; racism is all in the mind, not in the heart.
Surely while racial ill-will is a defining characteristic of racism, it does not solely define the concept. As Charles Mills argues in his critique of Garcia, “Heart Attack”, racism largely depends on one’s situation and the context. He provides 6 statements of ill-will to prove his point. They all focus on the aspect of race, but differ in their purpose or meaning. The odd numbered statements say things like “All white people (at all times and places) are bad”, while the even numbered statements voice that “White people (at this time and place) are bad.” This makes them easily distinguishable. The odd statements reflect ill-will without consideration for that group or the situation, whereas even numbered statements show ill-will or distaste based on time, location, situation, and other influences. It is all based on the context! For example, if someone says “All white people at the airport are rude”, there is no sufficient evidence to support that, as it is lucidly bias. This may easily be viewed as racist. On the other hand, if an individual declares “All white people gather at this particular venue for a Klu Klux Klan meeting”, they noticeably have better evidence to back up their statement. They are also speaking about a precise group of white people, as opposed to the entire white population. Based on this insight, it can easily be argued that two of Mills’ examples do not show racist intent. These include his fourth statement, which shows distaste for a particular group because of their racial socialization, and his sixth statement which is aiming to punish guilty individuals of racial crimes.
After profoundly considering these different views, racism to me, is thought of as any type of discriminatory ignorance and misplaced hatred towards another that possesses a particular skin color or ethnicity. Any belligerent verbal usage, physical bias, or any other forms of prejudice against someone constructed on the belief that their race is inferior, is deemed inequitable. Institutional and individual racial deliberations do not originate from the heart, but otherwise can spread others or arise from immoral situations.
The thought that one individual is not born a racist, but is taught, generally elucidates that racist-minded people are not essentially born with the sense of hatred, but are raised to distrust, form stereotypes, and follow the prejudice that is shown around them. Garcia’s claim that racism is virtue ethical correlates with this, as these individuals have been raised or taught to believe in racist beliefs. Not to mention when reflecting on Garcia’s claim that institutional racism begins from an individual, this is a similar process from what he describes. In this case, racial discriminations are brought up and passed from other individuals or shown first-hand through society.
Through families, individuals or society, patent bias can be taught through actions and words which inevitably lead to acts of intentional or accidental racism. Contrasting Garcia’s volitional account, one of Shelby’s main views discusses how racism can both result from intentional or nonintentional doings. One can communicate a racial misuse, verbal slur, or engage in an act of discrimination without realizing or having the intention to propose racial tenacities. Some societies are raised in customs that are taught certain prejudices are completely moral, whereas others may see this as discrimination and therefore have an issue with their acts. Since racism as a whole is a very wide topic, there are many different understandings of what truly is seen as immoral or acceptable. As Shelby approves, one does not need to necessarily be intentionally partaking in racist acts to be racist.
On the other hand, some are certainly raised appropriately without the use of racism. There is a notion that racial opinions could possibly develop from a situation. An event in an individuals’ life may, in a sense, trigger racial thoughts or beliefs. For example, if the life of a woman’s baby is taken by a person of a certain race, she may begin to fear and have enormous amounts of hatred for not only that person, but their race as well. I feel that this is very rare, but is sure to happen amongst some people regarding their situations. This can be explained through Mills’ statements reflecting ill-will and it’s influences as everything is all based on the context it is put into.
Throughout the years, judgements of what is actually deliberated as racism has dramatically increased. Many situations that occur in today’s society are misjudged and are considered racist, when it truthfully is not the case. In most of these instances, it is to receive attention or blame the person of whom they are being disrespectful towards. We see videos that go viral and stories all over social media between Police Officers and African Americans in most cases of which something has occurred and the officer has to take the man or woman away with them. They accuse the officer who is solely doing their job, of being racist and the video streams online. Instead of accepting the issue and abiding with the officer, bringing up their own race is many times the resort of taking attention off of themselves and blaming the wrongdoing on the officer. Of course this is only one example, and does not taken into consideration the many things that are missed off camera. Certainly in some cases there are racist officers, but in many cases the racial context in which the African American is accusing, is false. This example entirely associates and well represents Garcia’s non-doxastic account of racism.
Consequently, institutional and individual racism are expressed in opposing and diverse ways from many scholarly individuals such as Garcia, Shelby, and Mills. Racism is unjust no matter what race is being targeted, what context is being used, whether it is taught from others or society, or whether it is intentional or not. Discrimination can spread from individual hearts to inevitably contaminate people and institutions with their opinions, deliberations, and actions. Racism will always remain immoral whether it arises from individuals or institutions.
Cite this page
Institutional and Individual Racism. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Racism and Different Background Ethnicity in Disney’s Movies
Introduction
Walt Disney is one of the biggest entertainment companies to exist with an annual revenue of $59.43 billion (Statista). Yet, some would find it a bit shocking that racism and stereotypes would exist in their films. Because in most homes Disney’s movies are a beloved collection. Though, a lot has changed since the early 1920s when Disney was first founded (Farland, David). But, the question still remains today, do racism and ethnicity exist or play a role in Walt Disney’s animation?
Many have argued and believed that most of Disney’s cartoon animation and films have portrayed ethnicity and racial bias along with stereotypical gender roles (Underlying Racism in Disney).
The Princess and The Frog
Compared to Disney’s early animated films, that openly showed racism like Dumbo and Fantasia, Disney has made some progress in improving diversity and depicting ethnic heroes and heroines like Aladdin (1992), Pocahontas (1995), Mulan (1998) and etc (Nunez, Veronica). However, these films contain racist connotations and a distorted portrayal of other cultures (POC, Nerdy).
Though she is not heroic and before the film was released, Disney’s first African-American princess Tiana “The Princess and the Frog” was already undergoing scrutiny for its stereotypical portrayal of African Americans (Barnes, Brooks). Like Disney’s original classic princesses like Snow White and Cinderella, Tiana was hand-drawn, wore a tiara, had an upsweep hairdo, was a songbird, strong-willed and found her prince charming though all odds. Yet, some critics question: Was the film based in New Orleans in the 1920s to degrade African American stereotypes or uplift them? While others were offended by the film’s storyline being based in New Orleans, due to the devastating tragedies of the to the community.
Another issue critics had with the film was Prince Naveen and how he was voiced by a Brazilian actor “Bruno Campos”(Barnes, Brooks). Though in Disney’s offense he is not white. Others believed Disney studio doesn’t think a black man is worthy of the title prince. The characters hair and features described as non-black did not make it better for their defense. At the end of the day, some critics wanted a black prince. Along with Ray the firefly voiced by “Jim Cumming” some people believe his voice was too much like an uneducated southern African American (Barnes, Brooks).
A rumor surfaced about an early script of the film and the Disney’s princess early name and her role in the film. Her original name would have been Madeleine. Maddy for short, but some believed the name was too close to the racist name Mammy (Barnes, Brooks). Maddy’s role in the film would have been a chambermaid for a Caucasian woman, a historical profession for an African American during the 1920s. To a lot of people, the character reminded them too much of slavery and the idea was quickly ignored.
But, while others bashed Disney for sticking to stereotypes, others saw differently and applauded Disney for trying to be diverse and add diversity. A web designer from Los Angeles stated “Who knows if Disney will get it right,” she added. “They haven’t always in the past, but the idea that Disney is not bending over backward to be sensitive is laughable. It wants to sell a whole lot of Tiana dolls and some Tiana paper plates and make people line up to see Tiana at Disney World.” While members of the N.A.A.C.P. gave extremely positive feedback about the film (Barnes, Brooks).
Other Walt Disney’s Animation
Though a lot has changed and evolved since the early Disney, people today can’t believe that such an aspiring, positive and innocent media could still have some racist undertone in its animation (Underlying Racism in Disney). Early films like Dumbo that had a crow named Jim Crow and portrayed the crows as pimped hat wearing uneducated speaking crows (YouTube). The Jungle book: All of the animals in the film had proper accents yet, King Louie and the monkeys all spoke jive and wanted to become “real people”(POC, Nerdy). Directors of the film wanted Louie Armstrong to be the voice of King Louie but did not want to offend the N.A.A.C.P. by voicing a black man the character of a monkey (YouTube).
Though judgment is not being passed on the people that we behind the scenes during this time because, certain films where a product of their time and normal to their society. However, films like Aladdin is no excuse. In 1993, The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee was not thrilled with the Aladdin soundtrack and complained to the company for a lyrics change (Barnes, Brooks). (“Where they cut off your ear/If they don’t like your face/It’s barbaric, but, hey, it’s home”). The committee saw this as disparaging towards the Arab people. Disney did comprise part of the lyrics and released an updated version of the lyrics on VHS (YouTube).
Conclusion
In conclusion, I am still a very huge Walt Disney fan. But, I feel as though a bit more consideration can go into the idea and production of Disney’s films and animations that are based on people ethnicity, culture, and race so that people are not offended. Disney’s executives feel as though people should stop jumping to race and conclusions about their films when critics feel as though they are trying to be sneaky about including stereotypes or trying to be offensive about their films (Barnes, Brooks). It’s not their intentions.
A producer at Disney also stated “We feel a great responsibility to get this right. Every artistic decision is being carefully thought out” (Barnes, Brooks). While cast members have defended the company as well. Anika Noni Rose voice of Tiana (The Princess and The Frog) stated “There is no reason to get up in arms,” she told reporters at a Los Angeles Urban League dinner. “If there was something that I thought was disrespectful to me or to my heritage, I would certainly not be a part of it” (Barnes, Brooks).
In the end and until the end of time, people are going to have their own personal opinions about Walt Disney’s films and if they portray racism and stereotypes of people from different background. Who is to say that they are right or wrong? Because, in the end, everyone is entitled to their own personal opinion and feelings and at the end of the day, you can’t please everyone.
Cite this page
Racism and Different Background Ethnicity in Disney's Movies. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Racism and Research
The main discussions in Brandt’s article were basically explaining how they conducted the experiment and the how the era in which It happened effected it. Social Darwinism was big at the time so the way white people saw people of color was horrific but what was worse is that some physicians accepted these beliefs so that reflected in their work. Brandt, A.M. discussed how they chose their subjects, the tests given to everyone to evaluate them to see if they were right for the tests, how the health authorities portraited these men as sexual animals and how they were really focused on their genitals, and the end results of the study. One of the positive things in my opinion was the formation of boards and legislations for the health department. It consisted of nine board members. It is beneficial to the people of the community to feel safe and protected by the people who are supposed to be taking care of them. Having this committee was a crucial first step in rebuilding trust. Although it was formed afterward it was still needed.
This case study should never be replicated nor, will it ever be acceptable to replicate. Anyone who has basic knowledge and understanding on how to treat people can tell you this case study was unethical. There are rules and regulations, as well as basic human rights to follow for every person to perform their duties in each chosen field of profession. The health providers conducting these experiments blatantly offered a treatment to these men with no real intentions of treating them. From the way they selected the subjects, to the way they got tested to be a part of the experiment, to the time length of the experiment, to how many people died and how many kids born after had syphilis, it is all unethical. Although some people will argue that these consequences were needed to get the results of finding an antibiotic to properly treat this disease, many will argue that the health service system could have went about it a different way. Which they should have.
From a sociological perspective this is a conflict. I believe at the time the white race did feel threatened by people of color and they felt it was a competition. There was inequality, there was racism, there was two groups of people who didn’t like each other. This case however involved heavy conflict because again it disregarded basic human rights as well as not providing the right medicine to save lives even when they said they would treat them. To avoid these conflicts they should have provided people with the truth from the beginning. If we are looking at it from a utilitarianism stand point the consequences of the study did not bring overall happiness to the community. Although I think Khant would argue the logic of the study was to find a cure in which they did but, I also think he would see it as unethical. I believe the people who were behind this study had no virtues, they were not truthful, they were not compassionate, nor did they have any moral code of conduct. In my final thoughts I think the people who conducted these studies should be given the death penalty based on the number of people they allowed to die.
Cite this page
Racism and Research. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Racism in Shotgun
The terrible occasion of hurricane Katrina wiped out the city, as well as creating lasting scars in everybody's heart and homes. Beside the absence of monetarily assistance from the government there were racial intricacies and pressure among the people.
Shotgun opens calmly then rapidly changes into racial exchange. In the first scene Dexter, Beau, and Eugene are acquainted with each other. Dexter starts to toss a little racial articulation about how he "lost a lot of his people that day", with much accentuation on "his" as though they can't relate because of skin shading. Eugene instantly reacts, "You not the only one lost somebody." In reference to his mom and being taken from home. (Biguenet page 8) As much as Dexter attempts to persuade Mattie not to lease the opposite side of the shotgun she doesn't tune in and continues getting the keys. He advises her, "You asking for trouble you do this, Mattie. Trust an old man. Mixing black and white, it's nothing but a jug of gasoline looking for a match." (Biguenet page 10) however that doesn't stop her. The following scene, it's New Year's Eve and Beau cooked. Eugene communicates his scorn for the circumstantial situation that they're in. Beau attempts to cheer him up by proposing things will improve when school begins stating he’ll make new companions. Eugene's reaction is "Friends? This school over here, Daddy, it's all black. Those new friends of mine going to beat the crap out of me."…"You’re not the one has to go to a new school with a bunch of black bastards gonna kick my ass everyday." (Biguenet page 14)
In Act 1 scene 5, Dexter and Willie talk on the front porch about the discourse given by the mayor and racial issues. Willie says "You hear what the mayor say? Say God meant this to be a chocolate city, but those white people Uptown, they don't want black folks ever going home again." Dexter reacts with "Only thing they care about, those people, we don’t move in next door to them" (Biguenet 23) Dexter remembers a sign at a laundromat saying "No coloreds Maids in uniform excepted." Willie reacts with a slight joke about white individuals having a wet dog aroma when their hair is wet and the smell clings on their apparel. Dexter states, "Well I don't trust them any more than you do, but I don't trust that mayor of yours, neither" and Willie answers "Better him then some white man." (Biguenet 24)
Later on in the play, Willie stands up to Beau about the speech and attempts to start a argument. A racial side of Beau rises in the play in endeavors to strike back towards Willie saying, "You swing by the parking lot of Home Depot in the morning, with all the Mexicans looking for work, I wouldn’t be surprised we wind up some kind of refried bean city before we’re done." (Biguenet page 29) Willie neglects the statement and proceeds with tossing affronts at Beau like "So the msyor’s right you white people looking to take things back." All Willie can do is assault towards white people. "White man do that, nobody open their mouth. Black man come along, all of a sudden, shit, we got to do something about all this corruption dragging us down." (Biguenet page 29)
In the start of Act 2, plastered Eugene stumbles in requesting to rest in the bed however Beau won't allow it. Mattie turns out subsequent to hearing the arguing and advises Beau to give Eugene a chance to have the bed. Furious Eugene irritates seeing Mattie come out the room and has a racial upheaval. He tells Beau "I understand all right. I understand I come home after getting cut from the football team and find you in bed screwing that nigger."(Biguenet page 38) This scene may be the most racial and awful on the grounds that Eugene demonstrates some reality behind the "clich©s" behind white individuals and white privelliage.
In Act 2 scene 3, Beau and Dexter talk about reconstructing Mattie's shed that was demolished because of the storm. Dexter has no issue making it known of Mattie and Beau being an unsuit fit. Dexter asks Beau "You really think that things are ever gonna change down here? They already going back to the way they always was – and worse." Beau reacts "But look at us, you and me, black and white, living here together under one roof." Dexter denies in a route by saying "Yeah, with a wall running between us." (Biguenet page 46)
Scenes later, Dexter indicates at Eugene to begin cleaning and reconstructing the house that Beau and him used to live in, completely mindful Eugene despises living there utilizing it to his advantage as he wants them out (Biguenet page 51)
The play closes in a pitiful state of mind, Beau ends his association with Mattie and moves back home. It's unmistakable neither wanted things to end, however Beau clarifies how they're diverse races will never enable them to proceed on and live happily. The play has its affection filled minutes, yet the primary concern of the play is the contempt that the vast majority of the characters are racial among each other. The steady thought of things returning to the way they were and proceeding racial dispositions need some healing and it won't be simple and occur incidentally; physically as well as social and inwardly.
Cite this page
Racism in Shotgun. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
Cure for Racism
Even though slavery and separation of races ended many years ago, racism can still be found in nursing today. Racism is an immense fault that many health care professionals exhibit in the field. Working in the healthcare field revolves around patient centered care. A major part of patient centered care is accepting the patient's culture, race, background, and ethnicity. “As nurses, we meet and engage with people from all walks of life and cultures in our practice” (Holland, 2018, p.xii). It is important for healthcare professionals to respect and accept patient’s cultures and race. Effective care cannot be achieved if there is no respect for the patient’s culture, trust and a relationship with the patient cannot be built.
Racism reflects negatively on a hospital or care facility and makes a patient apprehensive to return. Shephard analyzes patient’s responses to racism in healthcare and “...participants who had experienced racism were more likely to be afraid of visiting typical health care services” (Shephard et al., 2018). Patients who experienced racism during their time in health care facilities become apprehensive about returning. Patients feel as though they are unworthy of healthcare and would prefer to go to a healthcare facility that has a multicultural community. A facility that contains a multicultural community provides the patient with the respect and acceptance they deserve. The diverse group of people working there appreciate the patient's culture and understand it. Shephard conveys in his results that Native American’s and other minority groups received poor treatment and were hesitant to return to normal healthcare facilities. A patient should not receive anything less than normal treatment because of their race. A healthcare professional’s job is to make a patient feel comfortable and safe in their vulnerable state. Their job is not to belittle the patient and make them feel less than for their difference in culture or race. A patient should have a positive reflection about their stay and should feel confident enough to return.
In order to produce effective and powerful nurses, schools and institutions should teach the importance of cultural and racial acceptance in the nursing field. A study was done in healthcare facilities and nurses are scoring a three out of five for cultural competence (Kim, D. & Kim, S., 2013). Thus, proving that there is much improvements to be made. Nurses need to know cultural competence and the key components; attitude, awareness, knowledge and skills. By expressing cultural competence, a patient will feel reassured and will better communicate their pain and symptoms with the healthcare professional. The patient needs to feel comfortable and respected around the nurse in order to communicate effectively. Both the nurse and patient need to trust each other, without trust the patient cannot be properly cared for. Racism in the health care can only be eliminated if cultural competence is taught.
Nurses and healthcare professionals are important “Because nurses have the opportunity to impact a vast segment of society, the impact can be positive and meaningful” (Montenerey, S. et al., 2013). It is up to the care taker whether they want to have a positive effect or negative effect on a patient’s stay. While a patient is healthcare facility, they are in their most vulnerable state. Just being there for the patient and listening to them helps them immensely and makes their day. Patient’s pay attention to the little things, it’s what means the most to them. Montenerey analyzes the importance cultural competence has in patient care and how important it is for nurses to be sensitive and understanding towards a patinet’s culture and values. Cultural competence plays a key part in caring for a patient. Just like talking, feeding, or covering the patient up to protect their dignity; these are all parts of patient care. Respecting a person’s ethnic background, race, and culture are also an important part of patient care. Everyone was raised different and has different backgrounds. However, this does not make them less deserving of standard patient care. Every patient is entitled to equality in care and treatment.
Part of being a nurse if putting the job and patient’s first. Whether the nurse believes in the patient’s beliefs too doesn’t matter. A nurse is there to provide care and treatment, not malice and racism.
Cite this page
Cure for Racism. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
How Racism Affects Urbanization in America
The urbanization of America and the history that ties to it has been examined and theorized by many. The influences of what created such a history is up for debate. When cities began to develop in America, it appeared to be a result of the limited resources that were available in rural areas. People believed that if they moved from a rural area to an urban one, the potential for a better life and opportunity would be possible for their families. Migration from all areas of the world generated a wide range of characteristics in people and one of those differences, although there were many, was race. Cities were known as “Melting Pots.” These people were representing a collection of cultures, beliefs, religions, and new ways of life. Race, although disguised in many ways, was the driving force in the reshaping and overall development of Urban America.
African Americans first migrated North and West right after Emancipation. Millions of them decided to move into cities in these regions, this “… played a highly influential role in redefining American culture and transforming the political landscape of the century.” (357)^1 Due to the fact that African Americans and Immigrants migrated to the Americas with little to no money, there was high demand for low-income housing. With so many people flooding the cities for hopes of a better life, there was restricted space for people to live. The new urban American society developed to accommodate the large numbers of people moving in from the rural areas. This diverse population, bringing together different ethnic backgrounds and new ideas that were trying to exist as one, provided a deep necessity to make some big changes. The combinations of many cultures, languages, and religions forced the development of an urban society to accommodate the needs of all. Initially, the population in cities increased so quickly that people were losing jobs. One example would be the increase in agricultural efficiency, which caused many farmers to be unemployed. Farmers were forced to look to the city for employment. Another example would be how the immigrants came to the cities looking for employment in order to escape the poverty in their previous country, but were unaware of the challenges faced ahead when they arrived in America. These challenges consisted of malnutrition, poverty, unpleasant living conditions, and language barriers. When people migrated to America, they searched for jobs in factories because they required limited to no communication. These jobs were few and far between because of the overpopulation of immigrants during that time. When immigrants didn’t have a source of income to rely on, they turned to what they knew best. Immigrants began selling goods and cultural commodities just to make a living. Not having the opportunity to obtain a factory job was another example of racial discrimination. The city limited the immigrants to a small number of possible jobs. This is where people had to get creative. For example, places like Chinatown evolved because their goods only appealed to other Chinese immigrants, forcing them to reside in the same communities. Include more examples This trend seemed to carry on with others as well.
The combination of millions of immigrants migrating to the city with little to no money as well as searching for work led city officials to formulate a plan for low-income housing. City planning became a top priority, which helped the development of low-income housing. Tenements were built, which were the beginnings of urbanization. Building the tenements also opened up a whole other set of challenges. Tenements were “ divided into small apartments, as numerous as decency will admit.” (60)^1 These divided apartments tended to be split, and closet size rooms were not far off. These small apartments were rented to the poor. Tenants were required to pay their dues in advance in order to guarantee the lease. Families that had first priority were able to find the apartment in good condition. Due to no management and supervision of the tenements, they quickly became out of control. With numerous people living in one small area, poor sanitation, bad hygiene, grime and filth quickly became a problem. This lead to disease and many times even death. This called for the cities to implement sanitation laws and getting reformers to fight for the rights of the people. This sanitary movement inspired urban novelists such as Upton Sinclair and social commentators such as Jacob Riis to acknowledge the reputation of filthy cities, New York being at the top. These sanitation laws attempted to create better health conditions, a clean environment, and an escape from poverty for immigrants. These reformers recognized the racial discrimination of putting immigrants in this living state.
Over the course of U.S. history, the role of race was continuously a part of the decision making process in almost every aspect of the creation of urbanization in America. People in communities were not willing to admit the significant role that our government played in the verdict of development; however, it clearly stood center stage. For several decades, city planners tramped through neighborhoods in the name of urban renewal. This was underwritten by federal funding from the 1949 Housing Act, as well as the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956. These Acts increased housing standards that, in turn, eliminated the slum areas and drastically improved living conditions. According to David Naguib Pellow and Lisa Sun-Hee Park, urban renewal was “devastating to many communities earning urban renewal the nicknames “Negro removal” and “Mexican removal.” (300)^1 African Americans had limited housing options at this time, even though they may have been willing to pay more than a white person for the same house. The real estate industry made a large effort to create all black suburbs, which ended up being highly overcrowded. The newly created suburban communities quickly turned into slum areas, which caused property values to decrease significantly. This trend continued for many years after. Realtors additionally contributed to this racial segregation by using scare tactics to guide prospective home buyers to stay clear of certain neighborhoods, all with their racial prejudices leading the fight. These are just a few examples of the many federal programs that displaced residents in the black communities.
There was a huge misconception linked to segregation based on race. This misconception was that African Americans simply couldn’t afford to live in middle class neighborhoods and chose to live in areas where waste and filth was welcomed. According to Clifton Hood, communities with the highest racial and ethnic residents were located near commercial hazardous waste facilities. To be exact, “Three out of the five of the largest commercial hazardous waste landfills in the U.S. were located in predominantly Black or Hispanic communities.” (331)^1 Reader) Blacks and other minorities were placed in these undesirable living areas because of race and poverty issues. The government soon began to create large subdivisions; however, strict conditions were enforced and only Whites were allowed to purchase the homes, giving African Americans limited options. African Americans were eventually forced to live in apartments due to the fact that the values of the homes purchased by the Whites nearly doubled, resulting in many African Americans being forced out because they couldn’t afford the houses. Realtors used this idea to their advantage, and obviously knew that African Americans wouldn’t ever have enough money to afford them. The government once again, masked behind their racism, passed zoning ordinances that would exclude minorities. The ordinances prevented apartments from being built in suburbs that had existing single-family (white) homes, making it obvious to most that they wanted to make the suburb racially exclusive. This racial trend seemed to continue on for many years.
Behind racial discrimination lies the members of the federal government. While some of the members were behind the newly implemented laws, other members were not able to openly admit their desire to keep African Americans separate from whites. If one were to look back as early as the inception of the U.S. Census in 1790, the way Blacks were categorized was based on the percentage of their blood. This was a very cruel way to view a human being, no matter their race, or ethnic background. The American government started their misconstrued conception of race based on those African American categorizations. As time passed, and leadership evolved, America somehow was able to desegregate the buses, the restaurants, the schools, as well as other things, but their biggest challenge has always been desegregating neighborhoods. Desegregating neighborhoods is essential in order for people to come together as a community. If people are segregated in the areas in which they live, the potential for unity is simply not there. To this day, neighborhoods are still failing to desegregate, but the main issue behind it is that people tend to stay in the areas in which they were born. People don’t have the ambition to overcome adversity. According to Sharkey, “Urban neighborhoods became battlegrounds where African Americans, who sought to live wherever they chose and have equal status under the law and equal representation in government, faced fears and violent resistance.” (14)^4 All policies that were formulated were racially explicit and were prevalent at every level of government, federal, state and local.
In cities such as Chicago, African Americans were restricted to the “black belt” by law. The black belt was the area they were segregated to live in by the city officials. Being contained to one area of the city, African Americans still continued to live in places that suffered from poverty, crime, and political corruption. These neighborhoods were not created by coincidence, but were created by institutions that pressured realtors to ensure that neighborhoods would not be integrated. Having cities discriminate against people for the color of their skin, even after the Emancipation, caused outrage. No matter where minorities migrated to, they could never escape racial discrimination, whether it be from the Government, city members, or white supremacists. For example, the author who wrote Uncivil War talks about the Five New Orleans Street Battles. These battles addressed how the South ultimately was not at peace after the Civil War. Riots and fighting occurred in the streets of New Orleans because many African Americans could not afford to leave and had to stay in the vicinity of where they had been freed. African Americans were contained to certain areas due to Jim Crow Laws and Black Codes. The riots that broke out were between white supremacists who still believed in the confederacy and ex union troops. This would determine the future of the southern society.
Even after the Civil War, racial discrimination seemed to still be apparent because everyone was still divided with his or her own thoughts and ideas. The southern states wanted no part of the way the government and union was being run, and were trying to find every way around assimilating to these new ideas of racial equality and created laws known as “Black Codes.” Black codes clearly violated African Americans civil rights and were used to model how people, such as government officials and citizens, were against the ideas and were not willing to except equality. These codes had the potential to arrest African Americans who were homeless, had no job, were wondering the streets, and required them to work. This was again a prime example of how the South was racially discriminating against African Americans. They were finding ways around the Unions laws to still keep slavery alive.
A culmination of Black Codes, the segregating of houses, race riots, and poverty, it was apparent that no matter what African Americans did, they clearly couldn't escape racial discrimination. Therefore, African Americans tried everything they possibly could to beat the system of inequality. Life for African Americans remained extremely difficult (mentally and physically). Due to the competitive nature of America, and the need of money to succeed in society, African Americans were willing to do whatever necessary to achieve social status and a bank account. For African Americans turned to a life of crime, doing, and selling anything they may need to support their family and achieve the “American Dream”.
A social activist, Martin Luther King Jr., was responsible for a majority of the American Civil rights movement in the 1950’s. Martin Luther King Jr. fought for the rights of African Americans and even lead the Montgomery bus boycott, as well as the March on Washington. The Montgomery Bus Boycott evolved after the arrest of Rosa Parks. Parks, after a very long day of work, refused to give up her seat to a white passenger. During this time in history, African Americans were forced to sit in the back of the bus and were supposed to give up their seat for a white passenger if the seats in the front ran out. Arresting Rosa Parks is a sign of racial discrimination in the south and the people had to fight for what is right. Choosing Martin Luther King Jr. as the protest leader, the people fought for Rosa Parks and created the Montgomery Bus Boycott. The boycott lasted 381 days, which put an economic stress on the mass transit system and local businesses. Martin Luther King Jr. was a target of white supremacists during the American Civil rights movement, which later lead to his assassination. The assassination of King confirms that the fight against racial discrimination was a struggle. Whites were willing to go that extra step just so they didn’t have to adapt to a new way of life. In the south, people had the hardest time acknowledging African Americans as “free” and equal according to the law. Another example of how African Americans fought back against racial discrimination was “sit- ins”. In Greensboro, North Carolina on February 1st, 1960, four black college students sat in the “Whites Only” section at a restaurant. When asked to leave, the students refused and decided to stay as a way to protest against racial discrimination in public places. They were denied service immediately and white supremacists would surround them….(need to finish with other ways people tried to fight back racial discrimination).
Paragraph about Los Angelos
Paragraph about Present Day.
What is this American Dream that individuals are searching for? For most it is typically represented buying a home, and having a job to provide for living needs. Most Americans have their home and job as their greatest asset. It provides the means for a family and everyday life.
There are really no characteristics that have not been discriminated against in our society. However, with many challenges still in place, race and opportunity, although slightly improved continues to remain unequal and sadly the gap grows.
Urban history has really been simply put, moving people to solve problems but perhaps instead of looking at it so simplistically individuals should evaluate the roots to it all in racism. Why do people only try to make move when there are people of color and poor? Why do individuals restrict those with language barriers and cultural differences? How has it become normal to take privilege over time for middle class whites when it is clear as day that it still continues in our lives? Who are these city planners? Has anyone ever looked at their racial bias in their decision-making? Is it even possible after all of this progression and growth that we still in 2018 remain stuck in the racist theme of city planning. Our misconception of race masked behind our government and others has fueled the fire to many aspects of our world. City planners, the government, realtors and many others, have played a key role in creating structural barriers and ethnic issues that make racial inequalities in housing, jobs, and our everyday life still persistent today. In due time one can only hope our perceptions of people change all based on views of race.
Bibliography
[1]Steven H. Corey and Lisa Krissoff Boehm, The American Urban Reader History and Theory (Nueva York: Routledge, 2011). 71 [1]James K. Hogue, Uncivil War: Five New Orleans Street Battles and the Rise and Fall of Radical Reconstruction (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2011). 3Kenneth T. Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985). 4PATRICK SHARKEY, UNEASY PEACE: The Great Crime Decline, the Renewal of City Life, and the next War on Violence (S.l.: W W NORTON, 2019).
Cite this page
How Racism Affects Urbanization in America. (2019, Feb 05).
Retrieved November 5, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2019/02/page/16/
