Jason Davis SOC 5750-375: Social Stratification Assignment #3: Critical Summary of Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s, Racism without Racists Summary People of color still experience systematic discrimination. This excerpt claims that a new powerful ideology has emerged to defend the contemporary racial order: color-blind racism. Often this ideology blames the victim, but in a very indirect way. Bonilla-Silva places color blind racism into four central frames (2012). They are abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism and minimization of racism. Of these four, abstract liberalism is the most important, because it constitutes the foundation of the new racial ideology. Historically, liberalism has been about individualism, universalism, egalitarianism, and meliorism. According to Bonilla-Silva, “European humanism (and liberalism) usually meant that only Europeans were human” (cited from Mills, 2012, p. 206). In this new, liberal nation (the United States post Revolutionary War) racism reared its ugly head. Slavery, banishment of the Native Americans, as well as super exploitation and degradation of Mexicans and Asians are prime examples. Although liberalism can be progressive (Civil Rights and Women’s Movements) its central elements have been rearticulated to rationalize racially unfair situations (2012). Based on interviews with college students and DAS (survey) respondents, four central frames (often bundled together) are used to categorize the color blind racism that was found by Bonilla-Silva. The first central frame, abstract liberalism, is associated with political liberalism and equal opportunity. One example would be modern white opposition of Affirmative Action, because they give “preferential treatment” to minorities. This view uses individual choice to justify living in segregated neighborhoods or going to segregated schools. The second frame, naturalization, suggests that natural occurrences, such as “people gravitate to likeness” and “that’s the way things are”, explain racial matters (2012). Used to reinforce the nonracialism myth, this frame includes, “minorities do it too”, in referring to excluding races other than their own. The third frame, cultural, is based on presumed biological inferiority. Often stereotypes such as, “Mexicans do not emphasize education or blacks have too many babies”, emphasize this view. People do not view themselves as racists. Color blind racism is racism without racists (2012). The final frame, minimization of racism, suggests discrimination is no longer a central factor affecting minorities, and that “their” life chances are better now than in the past. “There are plenty of jobs out there”, and “they” use race as an excuse. This frame finds individual choices, education and demeanor to be the biggest factors in achieving equal status/opportunity, not discrimination (although it does sometimes happen). Those surveyed and interviewed used at least one of these frames in contextualizing racial discrimination, and often combined them to complete the color blind racism ideology. The vocabulary of individual, denial, blaming the victim, and education (or lack of), occurs often in these contexts. Bonilla-Silva (2012) concluded, “…in this land of milk and honey there is a tremendous level of racial inequality—a fact that could deflate the balloon of color blindness—they can argue this is due to minorities’ schools, lack of education family disorganization or lack of proper values and work ethic. In short, whites blame minorities (blacks in particular) for their own status” (p. 220). Critique This is definitely an interesting and important topic. Conversations in my personal life are often reflective of or related to issues found in social stratification. Recently, my wife and I (before reading this excerpt) discussed the idea of “classism”, instead of “racism”. As in the lazy, unemployed and/or poor are discriminated and disliked based upon their status or position rather than their race. I found this reading put our views right on target for the color blind racism ideology. Besides the statement by one of the respondents of, “Gee, I wish I could see the day when we have the first black president” (2012 p. 220), I found nothing in this reading to be, irrelevant or outdated. There were a few “blanket” statements made, that did stick out to me though. “Whites blame minorities for their own status”, could have read “some” whites, or “these” whites. Bonilla-Silva writes (2012), “…whites mix and match arguments as they see fit” (p. 220). Again, a rather encompassing statement. I understand this “new racial ideology”, and I do believe it exists and that it is a relevant view on racism. I would guess that there are some (white, black, anyone…) who know racism and discrimination exists, but still find truths in some of the articulations made within the four central frames (without being color blind). After reading this, the one question I keep asking myself is, “How am I supposed to think, without being racist?” This may make a good title for Bonilla-Sylva’s follow up. References Brueggemann, J. (2012). Inequality in the United States: A reader. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
Posted on: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 04:33:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015