Institutional racism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2007) |
Institutional racism (or structural racism or systemic racism) is any form of racism that occurs specifically within institutions such as public bodies, corporations, and universities. Institutional racism is one of three forms of racism: institutionalized, internalized, and personally-mediated. The term was coined by black nationalist, pan-Africanist and "honorary prime minister" of the Black Panther Party, Stokely Carmichael. In the late 1960s, he defined the term as "the collective failure of an organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin1
Contents |
[edit] Classification
Institutional racism is defined as the differential access to goods, services, and opportunities of society. When this differential access seeps into our institutions, it eventually becomes common practice, making it that much harder to rectify. Eventually, this racism dominates our public bodies, corporations and universities, and is reinforced by the actions of newcomers and conformists. Another difficulty with reducing institutionalized racism is that there is no true identifiable perpetrator. When racism is built into the institution, it appears to be an act of the collective population.
There are three major types of racism: institutional, personally-mediated, and internalized. Personally-mediated racism includes the specific attitudes involved in the act of prejudice (involving differential assumptions about abilities, motives, and intentions of others according to their race), discrimination (involving the differential actions and behaviors towards others according to their race), stereotyping, commission, and omission (involving lack of respect, suspicion, devaluation, and dehumanization). Internalized racism is the acceptance by members of stigmatized races of negative messages about their own abilities and intrinsic worth, characterized by their not believing in themselves or others who look like them. This form of racism is manifested through embracing “whiteness” (e.g., stratification by skin tone with communities of color), self-devaluation (e.g., racial slurs as nicknames, rejection of ancestral culture, etc.) and resignation, helplessness and hopelessness (e.g., dropping out of school, failing to vote, engaging in risky health practices, etc.).
Persistent negative stereotypes add fuel to the fire within institutionalized racism. The presence of stereotypes matters because of their influence on interpersonal interactions. Stereotypes not only contribute to patterns of racial residential segregations but also shape views of crime, crime policy, and welfare policy, especially if contextual information is stereotype-consistent. A substantial percentage of white individuals rate blacks and Latinos as less intelligent, having greater preference to live off welfare, and harder to get along with in social situations. Stereotypes have changed over time, however. In the past, they were biologically determined, while, currently, an increasing number of whites personally reject negative stereotypes, and stereotypic characteristics now tend to be seen as product of environmental and group cultural traditions.
Institutional racism is distinguished from the bigotry or racial bias of individuals by the existence of systematic policies and practices within the institution, that have the effect of disadvantaging certain racial or ethnic groups. Certain housing contracts (see restrictive covenants) and bank lending policies (see redlining) are seen as forms of institutional racism. Other examples can include racial profiling by security and law enforcement workers, use of stereotyped racial caricatures by institutions (such as "Indian" mascots in sports), the under- and mis-representation of certain racial groups in the media, and barriers to employment or professional advancement based on race. Additionally, the differential access to goods, services, and opportunities of society are defined within this term, whether it involves unpaved roads, inherited disadvantage, standardized tests (each ethnic group usually prepared differently before taking these, and many are prepared inadequately), etc.
Some have distinguished between institutional and structural racism. With the former focusing on the norms and practices within an institution and the latter referring to the interaction between institutions that produce racialized outcome. One of the things that is important about structural racism or structured racialization is that it cannot be reduced to individual prejudice or the single function of an institution. It is also important to note that once a structure is in place, it is likely to impact not just specific racialized groups but the entire population. Structural racialization also brings into focus many of the institutional arrangements that are often identified as American exceptionalism such as the lack of a labor party, weak unions and a fragmented government system. Structural racialization borrows from system theory which looks at the interaction between institutions or entities and rejects reductionist thinking. There is a mutual and cumulative causation instead of a single cause. The use of the system's approach for structural racialization also calls into question of whether race or class in the United States is more important. Instead, it suggests that there is an interaction between race and class and they have an impact both on institutional design and meaning.
[edit] Examples of institutional racism
Examples from U.S. history can help clarify the nature and effects of institutional racism.
- In 1935, the U.S. Congress passed the Social Security Act, guaranteeing an income for millions of workers after retirement. However, the Act specifically excluded domestic and agricultural workers, many of whom were Mexican-American, African-American, and Asian-American. These workers were therefore not guaranteed an income after retirement, and had less opportunity to save, accumulate, and pass wealth on to future generations.
- The U.S. property appraisal system created in the 1930s tied property value and eligibility for government loans to race. Thus, all-White neighborhoods received the government's highest property value ratings, and White people were eligible for government loans. Between 1934 and 1962, less than 2% of government-subsidized housing went to non-White people.[1]
These examples depend not on the individual, isolated, and idiosyncratic beliefs or biases of individuals, but rather on biases embedded in social structures and in institutions. Moreover, in the first example, no "race" was specifically named to be excluded from the Social Security Act, but the Act effectively allowed wealth benefits to accrue to certain racial groups and not to others. There need not be, therefore, any explicit intent associated with institutional racism in order for it to benefit certain races over others.
The use of standardized testing has also been termed institutional racism by some commentators, who claim that this kind of assessment is significantly biased towards people of a certain cultural and social background, with the supposed result that in much of the Western world racial minorities tend to score lower.
Charges of institutional racism have been applied to other governmental, social, and educational policies as well. For example, institutionalized racism affects general health care as well as acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) health intervention and services in minority communities. The over-representation of minorities in various disease categories, including AIDS, is partially related to racism. The national response to the AIDS epidemic in minority communities has been slow, showing an insensitivity to ethnic diversity in prevention efforts and AIDS health services.[2]
Unpaved roads in a predominantly black neighborhood are a prime example of institutionalized racism, as well as the presence of older edition, used textbooks in predominantly black schools. School funds are largely based on the property taxes in the surrounding areas, so a school located in a low income black neighborhood cannot afford the new textbooks that a school located in middle to high income neighborhood. Therefore, many schools are forced to provide old textbooks passed down from other schools, adding further to the already existing large racial differences. The prevalence of used textbooks in predominantly black schools is another argument for the racism lying within standardized texts. Each ethnic group is prepared differently, and only one is usually prepared adequately.
[edit] Institutional racism in Canada
[edit] In exclusionary anti-Chinese immigration laws
The government of Canada passed The Chinese Immigration Act, 1885 levying a "Head Tax" of $50 on any Chinese coming to Canada. After the 1885 legislation failed to deter Chinese immigration to Canada, the government of Canada passed The Chinese Immigration Act, 1900 to increase the tax to $100, and The Chinese Immigration Act, 1904 further increased the landing fees to $500, equivalent to $8000 in 2003.[3] - as compared to the Right of Landing Fee, or Right of Permanent Residence Fee, of merely $975 per person paid by new immigrants in 1995-2005, and further reduced to $490 in 2006.[4]
The Chinese Immigration Act, 1923, better known as the Chinese Exclusion Act, replaced prohibitive fees with an outright ban on Chinese immigration to Canada with the exceptions of merchants, diplomats, students, and "special circumstances" cases. The Chinese that entered Canada before 1923 had to register with the local authorities and could leave Canada only for two years or less. Since the Exclusion Act went into effect on July 1, 1923, Chinese at the time referred to Dominion Day as "Humiliation Day" and refused to celebrate Dominion Day until after the act was repealed in 1947.
[edit] Institutional racism in Malaysia
Ketuanan Melayu (Malay for Malay supremacy or Malay dominance) is the claim that the Malay people are the tuan (masters) of Malaysia. The Malaysian Chinese and Indian-Malaysians who form a significant minority in Malaysia, are considered beholden to the Malays for granting them citizenship in return for special privileges as set out in Article 153 of the Constitution of Malaysia. This quid pro quo arrangement is usually referred to as the Malaysian social contract. The concept of ketuanan Melayu is usually referenced by politicians, particularly those from the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the most influential political party in Malaysia.
Although the idea itself predates Malaysian independence, the phrase ketuanan Melayu did not come into vogue until the early 2000s. The most vocal opposition towards the concept has come from non-Malay-based parties, such as the Malaysian People's Movement Party (Gerakan) and Democratic Action Party (DAP); although pre-independence, the Straits Chinese also agitated against it. The idea of Malay supremacy gained attention in the 1940s, when the Malays organized themselves to protest the Malayan Union's establishment, and later fought for independence. During the 1960s, there was a substantial effort challenging ketuanan Melayu led by the People's Action Party (PAP) of Singapore — which was a state in Malaysia from 1963 to 1965 — and the DAP after Singapore's secession. However, the portions of the Constitution related to ketuanan Melayu were "entrenched" after the racial riots of 13 May 1969, which followed an election campaign focused on the issue of non-Malay rights and ketuanan Melayu. This period also saw the rise of "ultras" who advocated a one-party government led by UMNO, and an increased emphasis on the Malays being the "definitive people" of Malaysia — i.e. only a Malay could be a true Malaysian.
[edit] Institutional racism in Sri Lanka
 |
This article or section has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page.
|
In Sri Lanka, Tamils were discriminated at certain levels. In 1956, the Sinhalese government introduced “Sinhala Only Act”, which replaced English with Sinhalese as the official language of Sri Lanka. “Quotas” were introduced to stop Tamil students entering universities. LTTE terrorist attacks on the Sri Lankan army unleashed riots against Tamils living in South were to North and East of Sri Lanka. Huge number of Tamils fled the country for good leaving all their property and wealth behind.
In the late 1980s, as a token gesture to blunt international criticism, the use of Tamil was permitted in the north and east of the island, where the Tamil homelands are located.
However, with the government and military, the use of the Tamil language in government has not been systematically reduced over the years. This was not an intentional eradication of a language as claimed by the LTTE.[citation needed]
A number of states including USA, UK, EU, India, human rights groups and media organisations have begun acknowledging that Tamil grievances do exist. Many[who?] have asserted a need to recognise Tamils’ fundamental rights - to live free from discrimination and language rights amongst others.
The most prominent recent convert to this ‘Tamil grievance’ position has been the United States, which, in a promising step forward, acknowledged the legitimate political aspirations of the Tamil people.
[edit] Institutional racism in the UK
[edit] In the Metropolitan Police Service
In the UK, the inquiry following the murder of Stephen Lawrence found the investigating police force to be institutionally racist. Sir William Macpherson of Cluny used the term as a description of "the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin", which "can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and racist stereotyping which disadvantages minority ethnic people.".[5] This definition is almost identical to that used by Stokely Carmichael.
The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report, and the public reaction to it, were a major factors in decisions of the Metropolitan Police to address the issue of institutional racism.
More recently the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair has also called the media institutionally racist,[6] a comment which provoked a heated response from the media despite being welcomed by the Black Police Association.[7]
[edit] See also
- Affirmative action
- Ketuanan Melayu
- State racism
- Teaching for social justice
- Race and health
- White privilege
- Environmental racism
[edit] Footnotes
- ^ "Where Race Lives", Race: The Power of an Illusion, PBS, 2003
- ^ Hutchinson J. "AIDS and racism in America", Journal of the National Medical Association, Feb. 1992 Feb PubMed:1602509
- ^ Inflation data (Consumer Price Index) since 1914 provided by Statistics Canada can be found e.g. at the Bank of Canada inflation calculator
- ^ CIC Fee Schedule, accessed 2006-12-02
- ^ "Metropolitan police still institutionally racist", The Guardian, 22 April 2003
- ^ "Met chief accuses media of racism", BBC, 26 January 2006
- ^ "Met chief labels media institutionally racist", The Guardian, 27 January 2006
[edit] References
- http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm42/4262/sli-06.htm,}
- Stokes, DaShanne. (In Press) Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom
- Griffith, Derek, Childs, Erica L., Eng, Eugenia, and Jefferies, Vanessa. "Racism in organizations: The case of a county public health department.." Journal of Community Psychology 35.3Apr 2007 287-302. 6 Nov 2008
- Fitzgibbon, Diana. "Institutional racism, pre-emptive criminalisation and risk analysis." Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 46(2)(2007): 128-144.
- Green, David G, (Editor), Institutional Racism and the Police: Fact or Fiction, published by The Institute for the Study of Civil Society 2000, ISBN 1-903 386-06-3
- Dennis, Norman; Erdos, George; Al-Shahi, Ahmed; Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics: The Macpherson Report and the Police, published by The Institute for the Study of Civil Society 2000, ISBN 1-903 386-05-5
[edit] External links
- Institutional Racism and the Police Institutional Racism and the Police: Fact or Fiction?
- ERASE Racism A multifaceted definition of institutional racism
- Defining Institutional Racism Definition and history of the term
- Racism: Institutional Racism - The Canadian Encyclopedia
- Race: The Power of an Illusion Interactive resource tracing the history of race in America and the effects of institutional racism
- Paying the Price: The Human Cost of Racial Profiling On causes and effects of institutional racism in the Canadian criminal justice system
- Arabic Workers Network Eliminating prejudice against Arab and Muslim Australians
- Newham Monitoring Project Monitoring racist incidents and statutory response, especially policing, in East London
- Weaver v NATFHE (now part of UCU) Racial discrimination case - tribunal reports and documents. Also known as the Bournville College Racial Harassment Issue.
- Equality of Tamil a facade
- Indictment against Sri Lanka
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
