[Marxism] "What kind of card is race?"

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Very worthwhile article from Counterpunch which I reprint here down to a
very interesting (and new to me) statistic on job discrimination -- that
whites with a criminal records are m likely to be called back for
interviews than Blacks without criminal records, given the same
qualifications. Of course, the criminal justice system is making sure
that there are fewer Blacks without criminal records.

Fred Feldman



 <http://www.counterpunch.org> www.counterpunch.org



April 24, 2006

The Absurdity (and Consistency) of White Denial

What Kind of Card is Race?

By TIM WISE

Recently, I was asked by someone in the audience of one of my speeches,
whether or not I believed that racism--though certainly a problem--might
also be something conjured up by people of color in situations where the
charge was inappropriate. In other words, did I believe that
occasionally folks play the so-called race card, as a ploy to gain
sympathy or detract from their own shortcomings? In the process of his
query, the questioner made his own opinion all too clear (an unambiguous
yes), and in that, he was not alone, as indicated by the reaction of
others in the crowd, as well as survey data confirming that the belief
in black malingering about racism is nothing if not ubiquitous.

It's a question I'm asked often, especially when there are several
high-profile news events transpiring, in which race informs part of the
narrative. Now is one of those times, as a few recent incidents
demonstrate: Is racism, for example, implicated in the alleged rape of a
young black woman by white members of the Duke University lacrosse team?
Was racism implicated in Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's recent
confrontation with a member of the Capitol police? Or is racism involved
in the ongoing investigation into whether or not Barry Bonds--as he is
poised to eclipse white slugger Babe Ruth on the all-time home run
list--might have used steroids to enhance his performance?*

Although the matter is open to debate in any or all of these cases,
white folks have been quick to accuse blacks who answer in the
affirmative of playing the race card, as if their conclusions have been
reached not because of careful consideration of the facts as they see
them, but rather, because of some irrational (even borderline paranoid)
tendency to see racism everywhere. So too, discussions over immigration,
"terrorist" profiling, and Katrina and its aftermath often turn on
issues of race, and so give rise to the charge that as regards these
subjects, people of color are "overreacting" when they allege racism in
one or another circumstance.

Asked about the tendency for people of color to play the "race card," I
responded as I always do: First, by noting that the regularity with
which whites respond to charges of racism by calling said charges a
ploy, suggests that the race card is, at best, equivalent to the two of
diamonds. In other words, it's not much of a card to play, calling into
question why anyone would play it (as if it were really going to get
them somewhere). Secondly, I pointed out that white reluctance to
acknowledge racism isn't new, and it isn't something that manifests only
in situations where the racial aspect of an incident is arguable. Fact
is, whites have always doubted claims of racism at the time they were
being made, no matter how strong the evidence, as will be seen below.
Finally, I concluded by suggesting that whatever "card" claims of racism
may prove to be for the black and brown, the denial card is far and away
the trump, and whites play it regularly: a subject to which we will
return.


Turning Injustice into a Game of Chance: The Origins of Race as "Card"

First, let us consider the history of this notion: namely, that the
"race card" is something people of color play so as to distract the rest
of us, or to gain sympathy. For most Americans, the phrase "playing the
race card" entered the national lexicon during the O.J. Simpson trial.
Robert Shapiro, one of Simpson's attorneys famously claimed, in the
aftermath of his client's acquittal, that co-counsel Johnnie Cochran had
"played the race card, and dealt it from the bottom of the deck." The
allegation referred to Cochran's bringing up officer Mark Fuhrman's
regular use of the 'n-word' as potentially indicative of his propensity
to frame Simpson. To Shapiro, whose own views of his client's innocence
apparently shifted over time, the issue of race had no place in the
trial, and even if Fuhrman was a racist, this fact had no bearing on
whether or not O.J. had killed his ex-wife and Ron Goldman. In other
words, the idea that O.J. had been framed because of racism made no
sense and to bring it up was to interject race into an arena where it
was, or should have been, irrelevant.

That a white man like Shapiro could make such an argument, however,
speaks to the widely divergent way in which whites and blacks view our
respective worlds. For people of color--especially African
Americans--the idea that racist cops might frame members of their
community is no abstract notion, let alone an exercise in irrational
conspiracy theorizing. Rather, it speaks to a social reality about which
blacks are acutely aware. Indeed, there has been a history of such
misconduct on the part of law enforcement, and for black folks to think
those bad old days have ended is, for many, to let down their guard to
the possibility of real and persistent injury (1).

So if a racist cop is the lead detective in a case, and the one who
discovers blood evidence implicating a black man accused of killing two
white people, there is a logical alarm bell that goes off in the head of
most any black person, but which would remain every bit as silent in the
mind of someone who was white. And this too is understandable: for most
whites, police are the helpful folks who get your cat out of the tree,
or take you around in their patrol car for fun. For us, the idea of
brutality or misconduct on the part of such persons seems remote, to the
point of being fanciful. It seems the stuff of bad TV dramas, or at the
very least, the past--that always remote place to which we can consign
our national sins and predations, content all the while that whatever
demons may have lurked in those earlier times have long since been
vanquished.

To whites, blacks who alleged racism in the O.J. case were being absurd,
or worse, seeking any excuse to let a black killer off the
hook--ignoring that blacks on juries vote to convict black people of
crimes every day in this country. And while allegations of black "racial
bonding" with the defendant were made regularly after the acquittal in
Simpson's criminal trial, no such bonding, this time with the victims,
was alleged when a mostly white jury found O.J. civilly liable a few
years later. Only blacks can play the race card, apparently; only they
think in racial terms, at least to hear white America tell it.


Anything but Racism: White Reluctance to Accept the Evidence

Since the O.J. trial, it seems as though almost any allegation of racism
has been met with the same dismissive reply from the bulk of whites in
the U.S. According to national surveys, more than three out of four
whites refuse to believe that discrimination is any real problem in
America (2). That most whites remain unconvinced of racism's
salience--with as few as six percent believing it to be a "very serious
problem," according to one poll in the mid 90s (3)--suggests that
racism-as-card makes up an awfully weak hand. While folks of color
consistently articulate their belief that racism is a real and
persistent presence in their own lives, these claims have had very
little effect on white attitudes. As such, how could anyone believe that
people of color would somehow pull the claim out of their hat, as if it
were guaranteed to make white America sit up and take notice? If
anything, it is likely to be ignored, or even attacked, and in a
particularly vicious manner.

That bringing up racism (even with copious documentation) is far from an
effective "card" to play in order to garner sympathy, is evidenced by
the way in which few people even become aware of the studies confirming
its existence. How many Americans do you figure have even heard, for
example, that black youth arrested for drug possession for the first
time are incarcerated at a rate that is forty-eight times greater than
the rate for white youth, even when all other factors surrounding the
crime are identical (4)?

How many have heard that persons with "white sounding names," according
to a massive national study, are fifty percent more likely to be called
back for a job interview than those with "black sounding" names, even
when all other credentials are the same (5)?

How many know that white men with a criminal record are slightly more
likely to be called back for a job interview than black men without one,
even when the men are equally qualified, and present themselves to
potential employers in an identical fashion (6)?

[snip]

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism