Introduction
This paper presents the notion that the continued development of racism and white supremacy during the post-civil rights era was in part due to an inherent bias found within social institutions at the time. It was only when such institutions were replaced by new ones that the idea of racial equality began to take off. First and foremost, the concept of structural inequality can be defined as an inherent bias within social structures which can provide some advantages to a select group of people within society while at the same time marginalizing others. This can be seen in instances related to racism, education, and discrimination wherein certain segments of the population are categorized and marginalized depending on the color of their skin and their particular race. Evidence of this can be seen in the article “Behind Blue Eyes,” wherein it is stated that:
“The downfall of official racial segregation brought about significant gains for racially defined minorities, yet the preservation of substantive racial inequality in income, education, housing, and other spheres quickly demonstrated the limits of the civil rights revolution.”
The reason why this occurred was due to the presence of social institutions in the form of cultural inclinations towards racism that were still present at the time. The concept of a social institution can be defined as a set of shared social practices that have been implemented into the consciousness of a society over time. These practices can range from early biases over homosexuals to how social groups viewed minorities (i.e., blacks, Asians, etc.) as inferior simply because they had been considered inferior by their respective social institutions up till that point. People tend to ascribe to this particular way of thinking to such an extent that they come up with absurd ideas simply to justify their actions.
This manifested itself in the idea that white men were getting a “raw deal” during the 1960s as a result of a lifting of racial segregation, which resulted in more blacks in the work force. They called it “white discrimination,” which did not exist at all yet was made up to justify perspective regarding job roles and how they should belong only to whites. Viewpoints such as these created a degree of social segregation even though the civil rights movement supposedly conferred equal rights to minorities. The result was that American society became increasingly divided over racial lines. Even without overt racial discrimination in play and with laws protecting minorities, wealth was increasingly being isolated towards the white majority.
The result of such actions is that minorities remained minorities with wealth, education, and connections being increasingly isolated to the upper echelons of society. What this means for various businesses is that often when minorities apply for jobs, they lack the educational capacity, experience, and networks that a person from a majority possesses which affects hiring decisions despite the presence of affirmative action programs and reverse discrimination policies.
Social Institutions and the Economics of the Black Workforce
Another social institution that was behind continued racism within America in the post-1960s era was the social economics behind America’s black workforce. One of the viewpoints provided in the “Behind Blue Eyes” article was the concept that various states had been captured by “race mixers” and that it was the duty of racial nationalists to take back the states that were captured to restore traditional values. The problem though with this particular concept that was being espoused was that after digging a little deeper into the article and examining the context of the situation, it can be seen that the development of racism at this point was due to what the people there perceived was a violation of a social institution, namely: the right of white workers to jobs and a decent wage and of the capacity of businesses to utilize cheap black labor.
The economics of racial discrimination focuses on the perceived cost of production without cheap black labor and the actual cost of production with black people. The fact is most forms of labor have an equivalent cost in the salaries and benefits accorded to the people working at a particular form of business, for the agricultural industry the perceived cost of operations without black people would increase exponentially if they were to hire their fellow white citizens to work in the fields thus increasing the overall cost of the finished product.
On the other hand, the actual cost of a product with black people is exponentially lower since slaves are not paid wages and the cost required for keeping them sheltered and fed is much lower as compared to hiring the same amount of people to do the same type of work. Plantations that did not use black people could not compete with the prices of those that did, as a result of basic economics plantations simply chose to employ black labor because of their inherent cost-saving measures.
This, in turn, benefited American consumers since prices of the product that is in demand continue to remain low. After the civil rights movement, not only did this impact various manufacturers and businesses since they now had to pay their minority workers a more decent wage, but it also impacted the ability of white people to get a job given increased local competition from black people that were willing to work the same type of job which the law said they were now allowed to work yet at a lower wage rate. These combined factors can be considered one of the reasons behind the development of American racist politics during this particular point in time since numerous social institutions which had been around for decades were all of a sudden swept away.
Social Institutions and the Moral “Justification” behind American Racism
While today the concept of racism is considered to be distinctly immoral, the fact remains that many individuals who specifically dealt with racism in the past namely those who openly discriminated against black people did so under the social institution of human-centric speciesism and as such they saw little moral ambiguity to discriminating another human being for their purposes. Humanocentric speciesism is based off two distinct concepts, the first being Humanocentrism which is described as a tendency for human beings to view the natural environment and other humans from the standpoint of a distinctly human majority (Lee and Ahn, 1-14).
Its premise is that anything that is outside the traditional concept of being part of a social group is immediately classified as non-human or in extreme cases “alien.” Speciesism, on the other hand, is based on the belief that the species a particular individual or group belongs to is inherently superior to all other species. One notable historical example of such a belief was the concept of the Übermensch developed by the German philosopher Nietzsche in 1883 and taken to its extremes by the Nazi regime (Lee and Ahn, 1-14). This particular brand of speciesism consisted of considering all other races inferior to Germans as the Übermensch or master race of humanity, a philosophy that helped to contribute to genocide of the Jewish population in Europe (Lee and Ahn, 1-14).
In the case of racial discrimination within the U.S., the distinctly white Caucasian majority who primarily dealt with the black people often did not see them as human beings on their same level but rather as beings inferior to them due to the color of their skin as such they were categorized under the same classification as being “lesser” and “the other” and treated in the same manner. Evidence of this can be seen within the context of the “Behind Blue Eyes” article wherein it is stated that the fascist elements on the far right of the political debate focused on their white skin color and religious doctrine as evidence behind their “racial superiority.” This can be considered as a type of social institution at the time wherein the shared practice of religion and “whiteness” created the level of discrimination experienced by minorities at the time.
In fact the human-centric speciesism view of this particular group has evolved over the years into present-day racism wherein anyone not part of a particular group’s race was considered a “non-entity” or someone from “outside” the defined norms of the group as it can be seen in many of today’s “White Power” movements (Lee and Ahn, 1-14). As a result of this particular distinction, African Americans were not afforded the same amount of human dignity given to other ethnicities, which made their treatment justifiable in the eyes of the white majority at the time.
Caucasians as Leaders, Blacks as Followers
Another of the social institutions that promoted racial discrimination was the concept of white supremacy based on leadership and being “masters.” The term “slave” has always been considered a derogatory term meant to indicate that someone is beneath you or that an individual has a certain degree of control over the other. This particular concept is seen in Nietzsche’s Master- Slave concept wherein the Master exerts a certain degree of control over the slave to establish a certain end. From an ethical and moral standpoint, such an association is unfair because most ethical concepts ascribe to the notion that everyone is born equal, and it is merely differences in social and economic status that differentiates them.
On the other hand, it must be noted that the master and slave dynamic is not exclusively set to a particular set of populations but is a form of being that shifts between individuals depending on certain circumstances and situations. This was seen during the various instances of racial discrimination in the “Behind Blue Eyes” article wherein there was a distinct focus of whites and only whites as taking leadership roles which justified their superiority over blacks who are just meant to be “slaves” (i.e., followers).
The justification behind the separation lies with the fact that if there is no one to take charge, despite that individual being no different from the others, then no concerted effort will truly be accomplished. It is the inherent necessity of the concept that makes it an integral part of society however instead of master and slave it is more commonly known an as the “leader and follower” concept due to the derogatory nature of the term slave however the distinct separation is still there nonetheless. Within the context of American expansionism and racial politics, it becomes immediately apparent that it was the social institution of being thought of as “the leader,” whether in society or on the global stage, which created even more instances of racial discrimination. From a sociological standpoint, the concept of whites as leaders and blacks as followers do have a certain valid point. Society cannot be composed entirely of dominating leaders since everyone would want to be the one in charge leading to no one working.
While on the other hand, a society composed entirely of followers would have the potential to create albeit unguided and thus chaotic. It is the interplay between a dominating leader (master) and a subservient follower (slave) that created the modern world as it is today. In essence, the only difference between the two is that one has the desire to be dominant and lead. It is this desire to be dominating, to control and to lead that creates leaders (masters), but from every other conceivable angle, there is no difference at all between the two. It must be questioned though whether it is fair from an ethical and moral standpoint that to create the society we had at present, discrimination can be thought of as a “requirement” so to speak to setup the fundamental system.
Works Cited
Lee, Debbiesiu L., and Soyeon Ahn. “The Relation Of Racial Identity, Ethnic Identity, And Racial Socialization To Discrimination-Distress: A Meta-Analysis Of Black Americans.” Journal Of Counseling Psychology 60.1 (2013): 1-14. Print.