For A-plus Writer Only

Race & ethnic relations: American and global perspectives

Marger, M. N. (2015). Race and ethnic relations: American and global

perspectives (10th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

AFRICAN AMERICANS CHAPTER 7 The experience of African Americans 1 is unique among American ethnic minorities. N o other group entered the society as involuntary immigrants, and no other group was subsequently victimized by two centuries of slavery. The vestiges of these social facts account for the uninterrupted inequalities between whites and blacks through- out American history and the agonizing nature of the adjustment of blacks to a pre- dominantly white society.

Throughout most of its history, the American racial-ethnic system was, essen- tially, a binary structure, in which persons were classified as either black or white. Asians and other groups distinctly non-European or non-African in origin were sim- ply too small in population to significantly complicate this system. Obviously that is no longer the case. With the society's growing ethnic diversity in the past several dec- ades, race and ethnic relations have taken on a much broader scope and become more complex. Yet African Americans remain the most visible ethnic group, a fact that must be combined with the heritage of slavery in accounting for the extraordi- nary character of the black experience. Hence, despite the emergence of a more het- erogeneous ethnic configuration, it is the place of blacks in the racial-ethnic system

' that continues to present the major challenge to American ethnic relations.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE BLACK MINORITY

The history of blacks in American society is complex and subject to a variety of in- terpretations. There is no disagreement, however, that it is a history marked above all by the continued stress of accommodation to the culture and institutions of a white-dominated society. Stress between whites and blacks has varied in intensity at different times, but it has never been far from eruption into overt and oftentimes

1 Whether African American rather than black is a more appropriate and acceptable term for the .\merican black population is a debated point. Surveys consistently indicate that most people do not have a strong preference for either (Gallup Organization, 2001c; Jones, 2013b; Sigelman and Tuch, 2005). In this book, the terms are used interchangeab ly. Technically, however, whereas black stresses the racial dist inction that sets off this group from others, African American emphasizes the group 's ethnic dentity- that is, its culture and historical origins (Patterson, 1997).

...

164 PART II ETH N ICITY IN TH E UN IT ED ST AT ES

violent hostility. With the understanding that conflict has been a constant underlying theme of black-white relations, we can subdivide the history of those relations into three broad epochs, each characterized by a somewhat different pattern: slavery, the Jim Crow period, and the modern era.2 During these three periods, relations were shaped most fundamentally by social and economic trends and structures of the larger society. As those trends and structures changed, black-white relations, in turn, took on new form and meaning.

SLAVERY: PATERNALISTIC DOMINATION

Blacks first entered American society when they landed in Virginia in 1619. Their legal status, however, was undetermined for at least forty years. Until the 1660s, the status of blacks as servants was not essentially different frotp that of many others, including some whites. 3 Various forms of bondage had been prevalent in all the colonies almost from the founding of the society (Handlin, 1957). Perhaps the most common form was voluntary servitude, or indenture, in which a person was bound by contract to serve a master for a certain length of time, usually four to seven years (Jordan, 1969). In exchange, the servant's passage to the colonies was paid. A great number of people, particularly from Scotland and Ireland, entered the country in this manner.

Although no specific date marks the establishment of chattel slavery, slave codes and statutes evolved piecemeal, so that by the 1660s most southern states had en- acted laws defining blacks as slaves rather than as indentured servants. Most of the features of American slavery were now settled and, at least in the slave-holding states, the ambiguity of black status was resolved.

TH E C HOICE OF BLACKS Other groups in the colonies seemingly could have served as slaves; only blacks, however, were inevitably to qualify. Other groups were treated harshly, and even the enslavement of some was seriously considered. The Irish were dealt with severely, and attempts were made to enslave Indians. Why, then, in the end, were only blacks chosen for indeterminate bondage (that is, slave status)? The historian Oscar Handlin gives us some clues. In the mid-seventeenth century, the col- onies were in dire need of labor; immigration from Europe therefore had to be stim- ulated. As a result, the colonies adopted legislation that promised better conditions for servants and expanded the opportunities for release from servitude. To encour- age immigration, the master-servant relationship gradually evolved into a contrac- tual one. But blacks did not benefit from the liberalization of the bondage system. Because they were involuntary immigrants, the application of these policies could have no effect on their numbers. In short, there was nothing to be gained by placing blacks under this legislation. "To raise the status of Europeans by shortening their terms would ultimately increase the available hands by inducing their compatriots to emigrate; to reduce the Negro's term would produce an immediate loss and no ultimate gain" (Handlin, 1957:13).

2 This broad historica l subdivision of the black experience conforms generally to that delineated by William Julius Wilson (1980). 3 Jordan (1969 ), however, maintains that some blacks were enslaved even before the 1660s.

CH APT ER 7 AFR ICAN AME RI CANS 165

The choice of blacks was dictated as well by white ethnocentrism. Most simply, their physical and cultural traits were more obviously distinct than those of other groups. Especially significant to the English settlers was what they interpreted as the heathenism of blacks. This served as a vital part of the rationalization for en- slavement. Indeed, as historian Winthrop Jordan (1969) points out, the religious dif- fe rence between whites and blacks was of greater importance, at least initially, than the physical distinction. As Christians, white indentured servants could not be dealt with as nonhumans. Yet the religious factor is not in itself a sufficient explanation fo r black enslavement, because the colonists made no distinction between black non- believers and those who had been converted to Christianity; both groups qualified as slaves . Jordan concludes that it was an aggregate of qualities, the total of which set blacks sufficiently apart from others, that made them the most likely candidates for slavery. Their lack of Christianity and unique physical appearance were vital, but other traits that the English interpreted as savage and bestial "were major compo- nents in that sense of difference which provided the mental margin absolutely requi- ite for placing the European on the deck of the slave ship and the Negro in the

hold" (1969:97). The prevalent white images of blacks, explains Jordan, can be traced to the first contacts between the English and Africans in the sixteenth century. From the first, "Englishmen found blackness in human beings a peculiar and impor- rant point of difference" (1969:20) . Black skin became a key visible mark for identi- fying people who were believed to be defective in religion, savage in their behavior, and sexually wanton. ,

But what of Indians? Were not they, like blacks, nonbelievers and even physi- cally distinct? On these bases, they were as subject to white ethnocentrism as were blacks and thus, logically, could have been eligible for slavery. But Indians main- rained certain advantages. First, they were unused to settled agriculture and therefore not easily suited to plantation labor. Moreover, unlike blacks, Indians were familiar with the terrain and could more easily escape to their own people (Stampp, 1956) . The most important difference between blacks and Indians in regard to their ultimate ra tus, however, was the power resources each could command. Put simply, Indians ould offer greater resistance to enslavement. As William Wilson (1973) notes,

blacks were forced to live in a foreign land, lacked organization, and were scattered a bout the countrys,ide. In no way did Indians face a similar situation. Indians re- mained culturally and politically organized in nations, whereas blacks, following en- sl avement in Africa and the brutal middle passage, were dispersed and purged of their native cultures. As a result, they remained more dependent on white settlers in the way of culture and sheer survival and posed little collective threat (Jordan, 1969).

In sum, the cultural and physical differences of blacks were important rationales £or their enslavement, but in the end the critical factor was differential power Geschwender, 1978; Noel, 1968) . Although black skin and "heathenism" gave rise

-o white ethnocentrism, this did not predetermine the choice of blacks . Rather, lacks simply lacked a viable community from which they might have mustered suf-

5cient counterforce to resist slavery. Color became the visible symbol of slave status, and gradually a racist ideology was developed to buttress the system.

The American form of slavery that evolved was unique, having had no precedent in seventeenth-century England (Elkins, 1976; Handlin, 1957). Indeed, it was a sys- -em different from any earlier forms of slavery. The Portuguese and Spanish had

..

166 PART 11 ETHN ICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

already enslaved blacks in their colonies and had maintained slaves at home since the early fifteenth century. But the status of slaves in these societies differed somewhat from that of their American counterparts. As we will see in Chapter 15, in Brazil and other colonies of Portugal and Spain, slaves maintained certain property and family rights and were often freed. In the American form, however, the slave was es- sentially an object not to be afforded common human privileges .

In the final analysis, the evolution of slavery in the United States was primarily a consequence of economic rationality, prompted above all by the demand for cheap labor in the underpopulated colonies. "The use of slaves in southern agriculture," explains historian Kenneth Stampp, "was a deliberate choice (among several alterna- tives) made by men who sought greater returns than they could obtain from their own labor alone, and who found other types of labor more expensive" (1956:5). Al- though it had existed in all the colonies at one time or another, slavery by the middle of the eighteenth century was confined to the South, where plant~tion agriculture had become the foundation of the economy. In the North, political and moral factors had been influential in the decision to abandon slavery, but more important, the sys- tem was seen there as a hindrance to continued industrialization.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RACIST IDEOLOGY As explained in Chapter 3, negative belief sys- tems regarding ethnic groups are more likely to follow than precede the development of systems of discrimination. This is clearly seen in the case of American slavery. The pseudoscientific form of racism-the belief that blacks are innately and permanently inferior to whites-did not arise forcefully until well into the nineteenth century. Racial prejudice was evident before that time, of course, but black inferiority was seen as a product of slavery itself, not of inherent deficiencies (Fredrickson, 1971 ). Before the nineteenth century, beliefs in cultural, not biological, inferiority were in effect (Wilson, 1973 ). Blacks were seen as heathens and as savages but not necessarily innately so.

During the 1830s, slavery came under serious attack. Drawing on the environ- mentalist thought of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, abolitionists argued that blacks should be freed to develop their capacities to the fullest. During the three dec- ades between 1830 and 1860, proslavery theorists, in response to abolitionist thought, developed a racist belief system replete with ideas pertaining to irreversible physiological differences, such as cranial size and shape, which allegedly explained mental and physical inferiority. Also stressed in these new racist theories were the failure of blacks to develop what Westerners considered a "civilized" life in Africa and the dangers of miscegenation (or intermarriage)-that is, racial interbreeding, in this case between blacks and whites; many feared this would lead to racial degen- eracy (Fredrickson, 1971, 2002) .

Racist ideology was not limited to the South, however. Most northerners were likewise unprepared to accept blacks as equals and subscribed to basically similar ideas. Fredrickson notes that "a common Northern dream depicted an all-white America where the full promise of equality could be realized because there was no black population to be relegated to a special and anomalous status" (1971:323). Even antislavery forces included at least one school of thought (whose supporters in- cluded Abraham Lincoln) holding that only by establishing a colony for blacks in the Caribbean or in Africa would the issue of slavery and the racist fears of white Americans be solved.

C H APTER 7 AFR ICAN AMERI CANS 167

After the 1830s, almost all whites of whatever persuasion agreed that blacks were inferior to whites in certain fundamental qualities, especially intelligence and initiative, and that those differences were essentially unchangeable. Because of these differences, an integrated society, it was maintained, was not feasible. Barring their elimination, therefore, continued subordination of blacks was natural and necessary (Fredrickson, 1971). These ideas did not change fundamentally until well into the twentieth century.

The development of a racist ideology, then, is best seen as a response of southern slaveholders to the threat of abolition of the slave system, but a response that gained national acceptance. Perhaps most significant in contributing to the general accep- tance of biological racism were the ideas of social Darwinism, which gained wide- spread recognition in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Indeed, the fu llest flowering of the racist ideology did not occur until after slavery had been a bolished (Woodward, 1974) .

.V1ASTER-SLAVE RELATIONS The American brand of slavery was a system of paternalistic do mination, creating, in some degree, a father -child relationship between master and slave (Elkins, 1976). The total control of the slave's existence by the plantation mas- ter was explicitly legitimized by the slave codes of the various slaveholding states . Slaves lacked virtually all legal rights. They could not own or inherit property, testify in court, hire themselves out, or make contracts. Slave laws clearly provided that marriage between slaves held none of the rights of marriage between free people. As a result, families could be broken up in trade with no consideration given to keep- ing husband, wife, and children intact as a single unit. Finally, laws forbade teaching slaves to read and write .

Enforcement and interpretation of the slave laws were left almost entirely to the master, not the courts (Fogel and Engerman, 1974 ). With such wide discretion, utter cruelty was not uncommon; but it was felt that brutal treatment would be controlled through public opinion, by the master's sense of decency, and above all, by economic interest (Elkins, 1976). Slaves, representing a significant financial investment, would not be physically or emotionally abused to the point of incapacity. Historians Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman (1974) explain, for example, that although slave mar- riages were not legally recognized, masters nonetheless encouraged their slaves to marry and establis'h families to ensure an atmosphere of stability. Thus slave families were not separated if this was avoidable (see also Gutman, 1976).

As noted in Chapter 4, systems of paternalistic ethnic relations do not require the maintenance of great physical distance between groups. Rather, it is the social distance that is of greatest importance. In the pre-Civil War South, a rigid stratifica- rio n system was enforced through a well-understood racial etiquette, in which physi- ca l contact was not uncommon but the social places of whites and blacks were not Yi olated. Social intimacy might often be seen between master and slave in the form of oncubinage between white men and black women or the raising of white children

by black "mammies." It was out of this apparent physical closeness that emerged the myth of racial harmony in the Old South. But such intimate personal contacts in a paternalistic system are always relationships between unequals. Moreover, the degree of physical intimacy between the two groups should not be overstated. On large plantations, where most black slaves were held, personal relations with masters

..

168 PART II ET HN ICIT Y IN THE UN ITED ST AT ES

were limited to household servants. The majority of slaves were field hands who rarely came into physical contact with the white master or his family.

Although most blacks in the South remained in rural slavery, a few hundred thousand free or quasi-free blacks, mostly concentrated in cities, lived within the slavery regime. But these free blacks were scarcely better protected by law than slaves, and the degree of discrimination mounted against them was not significantly less. They could make contracts and own property, but in most other respects their civil rights were not much greater than slaves' (Stampp, 1956; Woodward, 1974). Furthermore, blacks living in the North, though not subjected to slavery, were by no means accepted by whites into the mainstream society. As Wilson describes it, "Whites rejected slavery as an acceptable institution in the North but were unwilling to endorse the view that blacks should receive social, economic, and political equal- ity" (1973:94).

SLAVE RY AND THE WH ITE P OPULATION The immediate effects of slavery on blacks were ob- vious, but the impact of the system on whites must be considered more carefully. Most whites in the South did not accrue direct benefits from the slave system. In fact, most whites were small farmers who owned no slaves. In 1860, there were 385,000 owners of slaves among 1,516,000 free families in the South. Moreover, the typical slave owner held only a few slaves. In 1860, 88 percent held fewer than twenty, 72 percent held fewer than ten, and 50 percent held fewer than five (Stampp, 1956). Obviously, large -slave owners-the planter class- represented only a tiny fraction of the southern white population. Most of the slaves, however, were concen- trated in those few large plantations.

For the elite planter class, slavery provided substantial economic and social rewards; for smaller slaveholders, it offered correspondingly more modest benefits. But what did slavery provide for nonslaveholders, and why did they so universally accept it? Clearly, it could provide them no direct economic payoff, but it could serve as a means of controlling potential economic competition from blacks. In addition, it furnished to poor white farmers a kind of prestige that could be derived from the thought of belonging to a superior "race" (Stampp, 1956). In short, both fear of competition from blacks and social-psychological rewards account for the acceptability of slavery by nonslaveholders . Moreover, the power of the ruling planter class to impose its racist ideology on all whites, regardless of social class, was substantial. As explained in Chapter 2, nonruling groups ordinarily ac- cept for the most part the prevailing social system in the belief that it works in their interests and is justifiable, even though it may work primarily in the interests of the powerful few .

In sum, the two hundred years of slavery were a period in which the subservi- ence of blacks to whites was legitimized in the South and informally recognized in the North. In addition, a racist ideology emerged out of the slave system that contin- ued to influence the perception of blacks by whites well into the twentieth century.

R ACIAL C ASTE: THE ]IM CROW ERA

For a brief historical moment following the Civil War, it appeared that blacks might overcome the crippling social effects of slavery. With the abolition of slavery and

CH AP TER 7 AFRI CAN AME RI CANS 1 69

with the protection of the federal government, freed blacks began to acquire some of the power resources necessary to enter into the mainstream society with whites. They now exercised the vote and were even elected to high offices in state and federal gov- ernments. An educational system was also established that promised still greater po- tential opportunities. The decade of Reconstruction from 1865 to 1877 marked the end of paternalistic relations between blacks and whites and the beginning of com- petitive relations. But it was this competition that eventually led to the system of seg- regation as a means of controlling the black threat to white economic and social advantage. And to reinforce that control, a racist ideology was developed into a more sophisticated and generally acceptable belief system.

T HE E ND OF R ECONSTRUCTIO N The process of denying blacks compet1t1ve power re- sources had begun well before 1877, but that year serves as a historical benchmark ending Reconstruction. The results of the presidential election of 1876 were dis- puted, and as a means of breaking the impasse, the Democrats and Republicans agreed to a compromise: federal occupying troops, guaranteeing protection to blacks, would be removed from the South in exchange for the electoral votes of southern Democrats for the Republican candidate, Rutherford B. Hayes. This was not simply a symbolic action; it enabled whites to establish further control over the black population without fear of interference by the federal government. By that time, the planter class had already reasserted its traditional place of power, and the economic dependence of blacks on their former masters was revived with the advent of the sharecropping system. With the removal of the federal government's oversight, rhe drive to reinstitute white dominance was given greater impetus.

Perhaps the most significant mechanism in this process was the disenfranchise- ment of blacks. When it became apparent that they might hold the balance of politi- ca l power between competing white factions, efforts to deny voting rights to blacks began in earnest. This put an end to the incipient alliance that had begun to form within the Populist movement between poor blacks and poor whites. Through vari- ous constitutional provisions, blacks were effectively disenfranchised throughout the So uth by the first decade of the twentieth century. In South Carolina, for example, a cla use was adopted that called for two years ' residence, a poll tax of $1, the ability to read and write any section of the U.S. Constitution or to understand it when read aloud, the owning ,of property worth $300, and the disqualification of convicts Franklin, 1980). Such measures, of course, automatically disqualified most blacks

fro m the registration rolls.

THE GROWTH OF SEGREGATIO N Following disenfranchisement, the path was cleared for the enactment of the entire array of Jim Crow measures designed to separate blacks :ind whites in almost all areas of social life: housing, work, education, health care, transportation, leisure, and religion. Trains, waiting rooms, drinking fountains, parks, theaters, hospitals, and other public facilities were now segregated. Access to hotels, restaurants, and barbershops was limited to those serving either blacks or whites, and by 1885 most southern states had enacted laws requiring racially sepa- ra te schools. With the 1896 Supreme Court decision in the case of Plessy v. Fergu - :on, the "separate but equal" doctrine was upheld, and the system of segregation in the South was securely in place.

..

1 7 0 PART ll ETH N ICIT Y IN T H E UN ITED ST ATE S

Segregation as it now appeared was not the same as what had been practiced during slavery. As van den Berghe (1978) explains, roles and institutions that had previously been racially complementary now became racially duplicate. Rather than whites and blacks maintaining different statuses and roles within the biracial planta- tion, separate economic and social institutions now served each racial group in a cas- telike system. Although state laws requiring separate facilities for the two groups stipulated that these would be equal, the Supreme Court never defined "equality" while repeatedly upholding the "separate but equal" principle. As a result, the most consistent fact of this system was that separate facilities were inherently unequal; those reserved for blacks were grossly inferior or inadequate, usually by design.

In addition to physical separation, there was the need for a system of racial eti- quette, for blacks and whites obviously could not be totally isolated from each other. The etiquette was intended to make clear the caste positions of dominant and subor- dinate groups. Whites could not shake hands with blacks, for exampl~, nor would blacks be addressed as "mister" but rather as "boy" or by first name. And most im- portant, racial endogamy was rigidly enforced. Indeed, prohibition of interracial marriage was one of the first formal measures enacted by southern states in the for- mation of the Jim Crow system.

Racial segregation was maintained by both force and ideology. As to the former, blacks in the South could be dealt with in an almost totally unrestrained fashion. Where legal techniques were found inadequate, extralegal measures were used. With the rise of vigilante groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, violence and physical intimidation became the order of the day. Lynching, the most extreme technique employed to maintain black subservience, was resorted to with increasing frequency. From 1884 to the outbreak of World War I, more than thirty-six hundred lynchings occurred, most in the South and with most of the victims black (Franklin, 1980). Fear and humiliation were integral parts of everyday life for blacks in the southern states. 4

Conditions in the North, though not supported by legal mechanisms as in the South, were not significantly different. Although black civil rights were acknowl- edged, segregation in virtually all areas of social life typified black-white relations. Indeed, as the historian C. Vann Woodward (1974) points out, segregation actually emerged first in the North before the abolition of slavery. Despite the free status of blacks in the northern states, their inferiority and inability to assimilate had not been questioned in any quarter. Segregation was a means of assuring that blacks under- stood and kept "their place," and it was well established in all the free states by 1860. Moreover, blacks in most of these states had been effectively disenfranchised.

The system of segregation in both the South and North was abetted by the fullest development of a racist ideology, replete with ideas of racial superiority and inferior- ity, supported by scientific thought. Woodward (1974) notes that a further contrib- uting factor to the vehement racism of this era was American imperialistic ventures at the turn of the century, involving nonwhite peoples in the Philippines and the Caribbean. The negative stereotypes of blacks that emerged from slavery- lazy,

4 A poignant description of the constant terror and degradation to which blacks were subjected is provided in the works of Richard Wright, one of the great black writers of the twentieth century. See especiall y Black Boy (1945 ) and Uncle Tom's Children (1938).

CH APTER 7 AFR ICAN AMERI CANS 17 1

childish, irresponsible, uncouth- became even more potent. In short, ideas of white- specifically, Anglo-Saxon- supremacy were at a zenith at the turn of the century and for two decades afterward.

b.rrEGRATI ON OR SEPARATISM? Early during the period of caste, black leadership strongly debated whether to adapt to or challenge the system of segregation and denial of black rights. One school of thought, reflected most clearly by Booker T. Washington, contended that the most realistic course was to accept a form of separatism based on .. the idea of self-improvement. In his famous "Atlanta Compromise" address in 1895, Washington deemphasized the effects of racial discrimination and called for blacks to learn industrial skills and trades that would help strengthen the black community internally. Opposed to this strategy of accommodation and withdrawal were those le d by W. E. B. Du Bois, who argued for the complete acceptance of blacks into all areas of the society and advocated militant resistance to white racism. Du Bois con- tended that it was not solely the responsibility of blacks, nor was it in their capacity, to alter their collective place in American society, but that it was primarily the re- sponsibility of whites, who held the power to effect such change. His efforts were instrumental in the founding in 1909 of the National Association for the Advance - ment of Colored People (NAACP) , which eventually became the chief organization working for black civil rights. 5

The alternative strategies of integration or separation were debated by succeeding generations of black leaders. The theme of separatism reemerged strongly in the 1920s when Marcus Garvey, a Jamaican immigrant, led a movement advocating the return of American blacks to Africa. Integrationist thought prevailed among most blacks, however, although the separatist issue, as we will see, surfarnd again in the 1960s.

- ORTHWARD MIGRATI ON AND UR BANIZATI ON Relations between blacks and whites took on a particularly confrontational and violent tone during the early 1900s. This was brought about by demographic and economic changes in the society that placed the two groups in direct competition.

Industrial expansion in the North created an increased demand for labor, and along with immigrants from Europe, blacks from the South began to fill these places. If jobs were the key "pull" factor impelling black out-migration from the South, the declining cotton' economy and the continued enforcement of Jim Crow were the chief "push" factors. The demographic changes involving the black populace were pro- fo und . In 1910, almost 90 percent of blacks were living in the South, but eighty years later, little more than half remained there. Streams of blacks from the South to the :--Jorth and West reached epic proportions from 1940 to 1970, with almost 1.5 mil- lion leaving in each of these three decades. Moreover, this migration was almost wholly to the cities, making blacks an increasingly urbanized population.

With their movement to the cities, black workers began to pose a labor threat to white workers in the North, and the violence and intimidation that had characterized so uthern race relations became a national phenomenon. Adding to the tension created by job competition was the discontent expressed by the many black World War I

' Wa shington' s and Du Bois's major ideas concerning the place of blacks in American society and their approach to change are contained in Rudwick and Meier (1969).

..

172 PART II ETHNICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

veterans who had been exposed to more liberal social conditions in Europe. As well, racist ideology, premised on the belief that blacks were inferior to whites, was no less accepted by most people in the North as in the South. As Fredrickson notes, "The mi- gration of blacks ... from the directly oppressive conditions in southern rural areas to the somewhat freer atmosphere of the urban North did not alter the conviction of most whites that they were lower-caste people, born to serve" (2002:93). The upshot of the rising competition for work and housing, the growing impatience of blacks, and the pervasiveness of racism was an increase in the frequency and severity of black-white hostilities. Serious race riots occurred in numerous cities throughout the first two dec- ades of the century (Rudwick, 1964; Rudwick and Meier, 1969; Tuttle, 1970).

In sum, black-white relations from the end of Reconstruction in 1877 to the 1940s involved a system of restrictive competition (Wilson, 1973). The forces of industrialization created the potential for significant changes in th~ structure of race relations, and blacks were now theoretically capable of competing with whites, in contrast to their previous slave status. But, in fact, strict segregation in most areas of social life and the denial of political participation severely limited their accumula- tion of competitive resources-jobs, education, and housing. Wilson has noted that when groups lack the necessary political resources, whatever opportunities are cre- ated by industrialization are offset by new controls imposed by the dominant group. "Race relations become competitive, but only in the narrowest sense" (1973:64). Blacks could offer littl_e resistance because of the strength and resolve of whites of all classes to maintain the discriminatory system through both legal and extralegal mechanisms. Furthermore, the system was buttressed by a scientifically endorsed rac- ist ideology, which posited the innate inferiority of black people.

FLUID COMPETITION: THE MODERN ERA

Whereas the Jim Crow period was one of restrictive competition between blacks and whites, World War II marked the emergence of more fluid competitive relations. In such a system, according to Wilson ( 1973 ), the minority group's power resources are increased to the point at which it can begin to challenge the dominant group's au- thority and invalidate racist stereotypes. Members of the minority begin to move into positions formerly occupied only by the dominant group; in the process, institu- tional racism is exposed and challenged, and individual racism is seriously under- mined. As these changes occur, some members of the dominant group begin to question the legitimacy of racial discrimination and either refrain from practicing racist norms or openly attack the racist system. As Wilson explains, "The greatest threat to any form of racism, then, is the significant entry of minority members into upper-status positions within the larger society" (1973:59).

The mid-twentieth century was clearly that period in which the acquisition of power resources by blacks impelled the most forceful challenge to the American rac- ist system. This challenge involved the efforts of organized pressure groups as well as unorganized forces. Together they made up what became the most compelling U.S. social movement of the twentieth century.

THE NASCENT CrVIL RIGHTS MovEMENT Several factors account for the emergence of the movement for black rights after World War II. Much of the impetus had been

CHAPTER 7 AFRICA N AM ERICA NS 173

established in the 1930s, when the Roosevelt administration began to appoint blacks to non-policy-making government advisory positions (Franklin, 1980; Myrdal, 1944 ) . .\iioreover, blacks benefited from the administration's relief programs even though these continued to be administered in a discriminatory fashion (Katznelson, 2005; Roediger, 2005). Another significant inroad made by blacks in the 1930s was their en- trance into the labor movement, specifically the Congress of Industrial Organizations CIO). Unlike the American Federation of Labor (AFL), the CIO was relatively nonex-

clusionary in its organizing activities. Representing industries in which most black un- skilled laborers were employed (steel, automobiles, mining, clothing), the CIO now afforded blacks labor union participation in significant numbers for the first time.

Wartime conditions in the 1940s opened new areas of work to blacks and pro- vided an even greater push to the northward migration that had been occurring since the early part of the century. Jobs in the defense plants of cities like Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and New York attracted a new surge of migrants from the South, whites as well as blacks. Blacks, however, continued to suffer the effects of discrimination in the distribution of these jobs. As a result, black labor leader A. Philip Randolph organized the March on Washington movement and threatened to mobilize millions of blacks in protest. Hoping to squelch mass unrest, President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941 issued an executive order prohibiting racial discrimi- nation in federal jobs and created the Fair Employment Practices Committee to mon- itor the order. Randolph's movement was an early sign of the effectiveness of black protest, which would reach much greater heights after the war.

In addition to the economic opportunities World War II provided, it presented white political leaders with a dilemma: how could the United S_tates support a racist ystem at home while it was at war abroad with the most flagrantly racist regime,

_ azi Germany? This inconsistency was difficult to reconcile without a greater com- mitment to black rights. Moreover, following the war, racist policies proved an inter- national liability in dealing with the emerging nations of nonwhite Africa and Asia. As a result, the federal government now seemed more amenable to efforts at ending patterns of discrimination. One of the first institutions to be desegregated was the armed forces.

THE BROWN DECISION "'ND THE END OF ]IM CRow Perhaps the most momentous single gov- ernment action during the 1950s that stimulated the push for black advancement was the Supreme Court decision of 1954 in the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. In that case, the Court ruled invalid the separate but equal doctrine, which had been upheld in the famous Plessy v. Ferguson decision of 1896. The 1954 decision basically removed the legal foundation of segregation and thus marked the beginning of the end of the entire Jim Crow system. Influenced by the -estimony of social scientists, the Court made clear in its ruling that separate schools were inherently unequal and imposed an inferior status on black children, causing irreparable psychological change. School segregation laws, the Court declared, there- :ore violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Con- -ritution. This clause stipulates that no state shall deprive people of life, liberty, or

roperty without due process of law, or deny them the equal protection of the law. The Brown ruling was subsequently used as the legal basis for court decisions that -rruck down other segregated institutions.

174 PART Il ETHNIC ITY IN THE UNITED STATES

The significance of the Brown decision cannot be overstated, for it provided the spark to ignite a surge of hope among blacks that had begun to build in the 1940s. Lewis Killian has described its psychological impact on blacks: "The authority of the law of the land was now cast on the side of change, not on the side of the status quo. Any Negro with even the vaguest idea of what the Supreme Court had said now had good reason to hope for an improvement in his life and, even more so, in the life of his children" (1975:43). The drive for integration and an end to societal discrimina- tion may be said to have begun with Brown. One year after this decision was handed down, the civil rights movement was symbolically launched with the boycott by blacks of the segregated bus system of Montgomery, Alabama.

NoNVJOLEl'ff PROTEST From the late 1950s to about 1964, nonviolent protest and civil disobedience were the chief tactics of the civil rights movement. The basic idea was that individuals had a moral duty to disobey the law when it was clea'rly unjust. This was a strategy that had been applied many times historically in a variety of social settings, its most notable success occurring in the 1940s in India, where Mahatma Gandhi led the movement for independence from Britain (Sibley, 1963 ). The tech- nique was to actively oppose the law but in a peaceful fashion. The proponents of nonviolent protest, Martin Luther King Jr. in particular, emphasized that it was nec- essary to win over the opposition through friendship and understanding, not through defeat or humiliation. Those participating in sit-ins at segregated lunch counters, freedom marches, or freedom rides were therefore prepared to accept suf- fering without retaliating in kind (King, 1964).

Hostile whiti:; retaliation against demonstrators and civil rights workers, much of it in the South carried out by civil authorities, included shootings, beatings, fire- bombings, and even killings. A pivotal year was 1963, when several key events oc- curred. Police brutally suppressed black demonstrators in Birmingham, Alabama; a Birmingham church was firebombed, killing four black children; and National Guardsmen were used to carry out the court-ordered desegregation of the University of Alabama. These events were given prominent media attention and galvanized public and governmental support for black civil rights. This supportive mood cli- maxed in the summer with a march on Washington of more than two hundred thou- sand people. One year later, the most comprehensive civil rights measure since the Civil War was enacted, prohibiting discrimination in voting, public facilities, schools, courts, and employment. And in 1965 the Voting Rights Act was passed, ending the systematic disenfranchisement of southern blacks.

SH1FrING Focus FROM THE SouTH In essence, the civil rights acts of 1964 and 1965 signi- ., fied the demise of official segregation and discrimination in the United States. But the

end of de facto racial separation and inequality was not yet in sight. Moreover, black leaders became increasingly aware of the discrepancy between what had been accom- plished in a legal sense and what had not been accomplished in the actual improve- ment of life conditions for most blacks. This was sharply evident in northern cities, where blacks were concentrated in depressed ghettos. The black movement, accord- ingly, shifted its focus from the South to the urban areas of the Northeast and M id- west. This shift signaled a move not only in the geographic locus of protest but also in the goals and tactics of the movement itself.

CHAPTER 7 AFRICAN AMERICANS I75

Securing legal rights was not the primary aim of black protest in the North, as it clearly had been in the southern states. Technically, those rights had been in place for many decades. Instead, emphasis was placed on economic issues- jobs, hous ing, ed- ucation, and all other life chances- which, through discriminatory actions, were be - ing denied or poorly provided to most blacks. These issues, however, did not lend themselves to the kind of direct amelioration that had been the case with previously state-approved segregation and denial of civil rights. Legal maneuvering and sit-ins were inapplicable to socioeconomic problems.

As a result, the black movement passed temporarily through a more militant phase, in which many black leaders now proclaimed that ending racism required sys- temic changes in economic and political institutions, changes that purely nonviolent protest had failed to address . The shift away from defensive and nonviolent tactics produced not only more militant rhetoric but also serious urban violence throughout the late 1960s (Bergesen, 1980; Jacoby, 1998; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968).

BLA CK PowER Complementing the substantially changed strategy of black protest dur- ing this period was a reformulation of the movement's ideological goals. Until the mid-1960s, the chief aims of black protest were the abolition of segregated public fa cilities, the achievement of legal equality, and the encouragement of eventual racial integration at all societal levels . It was the third of these objectives that now came under attack from black leaders like Malcolm X and Stokely Carmichael, who pro- nounced the need for independence of black action and the establishment of black control of black community institutions. This was the essence of the idea of black power. Integration was rejected in favor of a separatist position, coalitions with white liberal organizations were severed, and whites were generally purged from the movement. Racial prejudice and discrimination were seen not simply as the atti- tudes and actions of individuals but as structural features of the American social or- der. The notion of institutional racism now became popular ized (Killian, 1975). The ideology of black power (or black nationalism) was espoused most vehemently by the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and, later, by the Con- gress of Racial Equality (CORE) . Less militant black protest organizations, such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and King's Southern Chi istian Leadership Conference (SCLC), however, remained stead- iastly committed to integration.

Black power was widely interpreted as the advocacy of militant tactics against the white power structure, and the stridency of its proponents represented what seemed to many whites a kind of racism in reverse. Black power, however, com- pris ed a twofold campaign: to assert control over the development of the black com- munity with minimal interference by whites and to instill self-pride among blacks, who, in the view of black power advocates, had for generations internalized the ;\·hite stereotyped image of black people.

The black community in the United States was seen essentially as a colonial peo - ple dominated by white institutions- hence the rejection of integrationist objectives . - rokely Carmichael and Charles V. Hamilton stated this position: "The fact is that integration, as traditionally articulated, would abolish the black community. The :=act is that what must be abolished is not the black community, but the dependent

..

176 PART II ETH N JCITY JN THE UN IT ED STATES

colonial status that has been inflicted upon it" (1967:55). Blacks were urged to build genuinely black communities by taking control of school boards, businesses, and po- litical bodies in their areas of the central cities. Only by closing ranks and asserting power within their own communities, it was felt, could blacks emerge as a viable po- litical force, able to compete within a pluralistic system.

The development of a black communal identity and pride that had long been sti- fled by white oppression prompted an acceptance of African cultural roots that had previously been consciously shrouded. As Isaacs contends, the slogan for which the black radicalism of this period is likely to be remembered is "Black is beautiful." "In both its literal and its symbolic meanings," he notes, "it became the password to a measure of self-acceptance by black Americans that generations of earlier leaders and tribunes of the people had sought in vain to achieve" (1989:85- 86) .

The militant phase of black advocacy was short-lived . In the late 1960s, public concern with black civil rights in general was increasingly displaced by preoccupa- tion with the Vietnam War. Most important, with the advent of the N ixon adminis- tration, it became clear that the federal government's response to black nationalist goals and tactics would be severely repressive (Button, 1978). The militant stage of the movement came to an end, according to Killian, not because the racial crisis had passed but because the white power structure effectively demonstrated the dangers of such measures by imprisoning, assassinating, or forcing into exile the most "dramat- ically defiant" black leaders (1975 :155).

Though ephemeral and seemingly unsuccessful in achieving its long-range goals, the black power phase of the civil rights movement may, in retrospect, be judged more positively. First, black nationalism in the 1960s created a degree of self-pride among blacks that had not been achieved by previous nationalist movements such as Garvey's in the 1920s. Second, short-run profits in the form of increased govern- ment assistance followed the urban turbulence. Although it is commonly believed that violence is counterproductive to groups employing such techniques in political protest, historical evidence seems to reveal the contrary. When ruling elites make concessions to challenging groups- or conversely, when challenging movements are effectively stifled- violence or the threat of violence on the part of the successful group looms large in the picture (Gamson, 1975). Francis Fox Piven and Richard Cloward (1971) maintain that protest movements like the one for black civil rights do not gain establishment concessions because of the successes of their organization and leadership but because of the social disturbances they create. Relief programs such as welfare and unemployment payments are set up not so much because of moral incentives as because of the need to contain the social disorder created by mass protests. This conclusion seems to be borne out by events of the 1960s. Follow- ing the riots of that decade, the federal government extended numerous programs to the cities designed to address those social conditions that were believed to be at the core of black discontent. As with the aid provided to the unemployed of the Great Depression, write Piven and Cloward, "[t]he expansion of the welfare rolls was a po- litical response to political disorder" (1971:198).

Of course, when concessions are granted under these circumstances, they may be only superficial, momentary, or symbolic; that is, their long-range effect may not be great. As Piven and Cloward (1971) explain, government relief to the poor and un- employed is usually withdrawn once social order has been restored. Such was clearly

CHAPTER 7 AFRICAN AMERICANS 177

the case with aid to the urban ghettos. In his study of government responses to the riots of the 1960s, James W. Button (1978) shows that once the level of hostilities su bsided and the areas were relatively pacified, the programs were either discontin- ued or emasculated by underfunding.

ASSESSING THE CIVIL RIGHTS ERA By the early 1970s the "Second Reconstruction" had ._ ended, and blacks began to take stock of their advances and failures of the previous two decades. Most important, the legal infrastructure of the system of segregation in the South had been dismantled. No longer could state and local ordinances prevent blacks from entering public facilities previously reserved for whites. Unlike the first Reconstruction following the Civil War, white vigilante groups like the Ku Klux Klan were limited in their influence and were not supported either materially or morally by most whites. Most important, the federal government accepted the commitment to black civil rights and effectively countered state and local governments that sought to sustain segregation in some form. This was in sharp contrast to the abandonment of southern blacks by the federal government during the post-Civil War period.

A second major achievement of the civil rights movement of the post-World War II era was the expansion of black economic opportunities and the consequent emergence of a sizable black middle class . But it is also in the economic realm that the movement's most glaring failures were to be found. As we will see in the follow- ing section, blacks accumulated much greater competitive resources, such as white- collar jobs, middle-level income, and higher education, than at any previous time. These were not distributed equitably among the black _population, however. Thus, although the black middle class expanded considerably, the conditions of a signifi- cant black underclass , submerged mainly in urban ghettos, were not seriously affected.

Finally, if the decline of biological racist ideas was clearly on the horizon as early as the 1930s, the postwar period of black-white relations, despite its volatility, seemed to further diminish the persuasiveness of this ideology. The notion of innate black inferiority- biological racism- was no longer given credence by the vast ma- jority of white Americans.

BLACK DEMOGRAPHICS

POPULATION Representing about 13 percent of the population-forty-one million people-African Americans were until recently the largest ethnic minority in the United States, a distinction now held by Hispanic Americans. This figure includes all those who identify themselves as either entirely or partially black. The latter, however, make up only a tiny portion (about 7 percent) of the total (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012a) . Much of the population growth among African Americans in recent years stems from the entrance of newer ethnic elements-black immigrants .

BLACK ETHNIC DIVERSITY As we will see, the contemporary African American popula - rion is internally divided between middle- and working-class families, on the one hand, and poor families, on the other. Indeed, so wide has the gap emerged between these two elements that almost four in ten African Americans today no longer see blacks as a single racial-ethnic group (Pew Research Center, 2007a).

..

178 PART II ETHNICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

It is becoming increasingly difficult to describe the American black population not only in broad class terms but in ethnic terms as well. Though the overwhelming majority of American blacks trace their heritage to slavery, an increasing minority are voluntary immigrants or their descendants. Indeed, more Africans have entered the United States since 1990 as voluntary immigrants than entered as slaves before slave trafficking was outlawed in the early nineteenth century (Roberts, 2005). Al- most all foreign -born blacks come from Caribbean and African nations. Specifically, the most sizable element of contemporary black immigration to the United States has comprised people from the West Indies, in particular, Haiti, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago.

The foreign-born black population rose by almost seven times between 1960 and 1980 and more than tripled between 1980 and 2005. Today more than 8 percent of the U.S. black population is foreign-born, and that figure is estimated to rise to almost 10 percent by 2020. Between 2000 and 2006, immigration contrib- uted at least 20 percent of the growth of the U.S. black population (Kent, 2007). In three states, New York, Massachusetts, and Minnesota, more than one quarter of the black population is foreign-born. In New York City alone, over one-third of its large black population is foreign -born (Bernstein, 2005). Although New York and Miami have been the major destinations for black immigrants, Jamaicans, Haitians, Somalis, Ethiopians, and Nigerians can be found increasingly in a variety of U.S. cit- ies and towns (Kent, 2007; Logan, 2007).

As a result of this ne_w immigration, the American black population is evolving into a somewhat broad, multicultural ethnic category similar to that of Asian Amer- icans and Hispanic Americans, though certainly to a lesser degree. Despite racial sim- ilarities, black im~igrants culturally have little in common with African Americans. As the American black population becomes more culturally diverse, one can no lon- ger make assumptions about group characteristics simply on the basis of racial des - ignation. Moreover, black ethnic diversity has created dilemmas of group and individual identity. The question is "Who is African American?" Traditionally this term has been applied to blacks whose ancestry is traced to American slavery. But does it now also include those blacks born in the Caribbean or Africa, many of whom prefer to describe themselves as "Jamaican American" or "Nigerian Ameri- can " or "African "? As one Ethiopian-born activist explains, "If I walk down the streets, white people see me as an African American. Yet African Americans are say- ing, 'You are not one of us.' So I ask myself, in this country, how do I define my- self?" (Swarms, 2004:14). Or, as a Haitian immigrant in Miami describes the reaction of his fellow high school students: "I was just another brother until I opened my mouth" (Fears, 2002:31).

Although the reality of racial categorization in American society often brings foreign -born blacks and African Americans together, sharp cultural differences have at times made for tense rela tions between these two elements of the black popula- tion. Some in the traditional African American population see foreign -born blacks as a new source of competition for jobs, education, and other social resources and are reluctant to view them as genuine coethnics. In fact, immigrant blacks generally rank higher than native-born blacks on various measures of socioeconomic status in- cluding education, income, and employment (Logan and Deane, 2003; Model, 2008).

C H APTE R 7 AFRI CAN AM ERI CANS 179

Black economic and cultural differences have sometimes translated into in- tragroup animosities. For example, psychologist Marvin Dunn, who has studied black diversity in Miami, notes the common stereotypical views of African Ameri- cans among Caribbean- or African-born blacks: "They are violent, they don't respect their elders, they have no sense of family, they don't want to work. They depend on welfare." By the same token, African Americans often say of black immigrants, "They're here to take our jobs. They'll work for nothing. They're cliquish. They smell. They eat dogs. They think they're better than us" (Fears, 2002:31).

G EO GRAPHIC P ATTERNS As explained earlier, in the early and middle decades of the twentieth century, blacks moved in large numbers from the rural South to the urban North. In the past two decades, however, this pattern has begun to reverse itself as more blacks remigrate to southern states (Frey, 2010). As seen in Figure 7.1, in six states, all of them located in the South, blacks represent one-quarter or more of the total population.

African Americans, whether in the North or the South, reside mostly in urban areas. Table 7.1 shows the urban areas with the largest African American

'

-

fIGU RE 7 . r I PERCENT BLACK BY STATE o urce: U.S . Census Bureau (2012a).

D 25.0 or more D 10.0 to 24 .9 D 5. o to9. 9 0 Less than 5.0 U.S. p ercent 13.0

180 PART II ETHNICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

T I

METROPOLITAN AREAS WITH LARGEST AFRICAN ABLE 7.1

AMERICAN POPULATIONS (1,000s)

New York

Atlanta

Chicago

Washington, D.C.

Philadelphia

Miami

Detroit

Dallas-Fort Worth

Houston

Los Angeles

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2012a).

Number

3,363

2,773

1,722

1,438

1,242

1,169

980

962

935

908

Percent of Total Population

17.8

33.6

18.2

25.8

20.8

21.0

22.8

15.1

15.9

7.1

commumties. Within metropolitan areas, blacks traditionally had been heavily concentrated in central cities rather than suburbs. That trend changed during the 2000s, and today more than 50 percent of blacks live in suburbs (Frey, 2010). Whites, however, are still far more likely to be suburban residents than blacks or other minorities.

AFRICAN AMERICANS IN THE CLASS SYSTEM

In the post-civil rights era, attention has been focused on the speed and extent of African Americans' movement toward parity with whites in various dimensions of social, economic, and political life. Where do African Americans stand in the so- ciety's class and power hierarchies, and how has that position changed during the group's sociohistorical development, particularly the last few decades? Answers to these questions must be approached cautiously because there are various measures of stratification, and data can be marshaled to support a variety of often contradic- tory views. As explained in Chapter 2, minority status does not necessarily indicate the position of a group at the time its members enter the society in large numbers but

-. rather the patterns that develop to keep them in a disadvantaged position generation after generation. Such patterns are clearer for African Americans than for any other ethnic group in American society.

THE ECONOMIC STATUS OF AFRICAN AMERICANS

The fact of slavery weighs so heavily on the black experience that its lingering effects continue to make African Americans a special group in the American ethnic hierar- chy. Obviously, blacks' collective status under slavery was at the lowest rung of the

C H APT ER 7 AFRI CAN AM ERI CANS I 8 I

economic class system, even for those who were free in the North or South. Follow- ing the abolition of the slave system, this status changed little, as we have seen. In- deed, the economic standing of blacks was even more tenuous following slavery because they were denied the opportunity to compete on an equal basis with whites. Clearly, they did not fare well in resisting a system of blatant discrimination and re - pression that kept them in a subservient position.

Even after large-scale migration to northern cities starting in the second decade of the twentieth century, a system of direct and intentional discrimination effectively thwarted serious competition with the white population. For the most part, blacks .. were shut out of higher-skilled, more prestigious, and higher-paying jobs. Recall the split labor market theory of discrimination, discussed in Chapter 3. Not until the 1950s and 1960s did blacks begin to move out of the lowest-level jobs in significant numbers. In effect, then, meaningful comparisons with other ethnic groups can be made only for the post-World War II period.

African American economic progress in the last five decades is debatable; social scientists as well as policy makers, both black and white, have reached no consensus on either its extent or substance. There is, however, relatively broad agreement re- garding several general patterns: (1) the 1960s was a decade of substantial improve- ment in the economic status of blacks collectively, as measured specifically by income, occupation, and education; (2) by comparison, in the 1970s and 1980s the rate of progress was curtailed except for a few specific subsets of the African Ameri- can population; (3) in the 1990s and 2000s, the economic status of blacks rose but, despite black upgrading, the economic gap between blacks and whites collectively remained wide; ( 4) the economic progress of the modern period oreated a substantial black middle class but had little impact on blacks at the bottom of the economic scale; and (5) the deep economic recession of the late 20QOs severely impacted black families of all social classes.

Let's look at some specific variables of economic class, comparing the position of blacks and whites.

INCOME Depending on how the data are interpreted, there are grounds for both positive and negative views regarding black income. The real income of black fam- ilies increased substantially after World War II, especially during the 1960s (Farley and Hermalin, 1972; Levitan et al., 1975). And the enormous expansion of the black middledass is undeniable. This is the positive picture. But the negative view arises when we look at the gap between median black income and median white income. As shown in Figure 7.2, this gap has changed only slightly in the past sev- eral decades. In 2011, median black household income was about 60 percent of median white household income- not significantly different from what it was in the 1960s.

During the past five decades, the income gap between blacks and whites vacil- lated: during some periods black median income rose relative to whites but at other times blacks seemed to fall further behind whites (Holzer, 2001; Mishel et al., 2009; Smith, 2001). What has remained constant throughout, however, is the income in- equality between blacks and whites at all points of the class hierarchy. Thus poor blacks are generally poorer than poor whites, and affluent blacks are less well-off than affluent whites.

..

1 82 PA RT II ETH N ICI T Y IN T H E UN ITED ST ATES

$60 ,000

$50 ,000

$40,000

$30 ,000 ,,.------· ,' $20 ,000

.. ______ .. ______ .. ______ .. --- $10,000

$0-+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1967 1970 1980 1991 2000

I-+- White (non-Hispanic) --•- · Black I F IGU RE 7 .2 I M EDIAN H OUSEHO LD I NCOY!E OF B LACKS AND WHITES Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2004a, 2012d).

2011

However, this general picture should not obscure the fact that comparisons be- tween black and white income are subject to a number of variables, including region and urban location. More important, the black population is polarized between rela - tively stable middle- and working-class people, on the one hand, and those in pov- erty, on the other.

P OVERTY Another mixed indicator of the current economic status of African Ameri- cans is the poverty rate. The discrepancy between white and black poverty has de- clined, but blacks are still almost three times as likely to be in poverty as whites (Figure 7.3).

An important factor in accounting for these statistics, both positive and negative, is changes in the African American family structure. Those families that have experi- enced income increases have been dual-breadwinner families. Among such families there are only slight differences between blacks and whites. Similarly, much of the halt in the relative rise of black income from the late 1970s through the early 1990s is attributable to the increasing number of female-headed, single-parent families, which earn considerably less than husband-wife families (Mather, 2010; Farley, 1993). Today more than one-half of black families are single-parent, most of which are female-headed. Median income of female-headed black families is less than half of median income of married-couple black families (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012d).

CHAPTER 7 AFRI CAN AM ERI CANS 183

60

\ \

50 \ \

\ \

40

c Q)

\ \ \

\ \

\ \

\

(_) 30 Q5

0...

·------·- ---- -·----. ·, ,,,'•

' , '•""""

20

10

1959 1970 1980 1990 2000

I-+- White (non-Hispanic) --•- · Black I FIG URE 7. 3 I PERSONS BELOW THE P O VERTY L EVEL So urce: U.S. Census Bureau (2012d).

2011

W EALTH Wealth, or property, refers to the economic assets that families possess- homes, bank accounts, stocks and bonds, real estate, and so on. Wealth is extremely important as a determinant of class position because it can be invested and thus earn income, or it can be accumulated and passed down to other family members. It also reduces families' reliance on wages and salaries, thus enabling them to withstand fi- nancial crises lik~ the loss of a job or a serious medical emergency. Indeed, some con- rend that wealth is the single most significant factor in accounting for the persistent difference between black and white socioeconomic status. "Understanding the racial wealth gap," writes Thomas Shapiro, "is the key to understanding how racial in- equality is passed along from generation to generation" (2004:6).

Regarding wealth, differences between blacks and whites are much greater than differences in income. Blacks are less likely than whites to own any type of wealth, and the holdings of those blacks who do own wealth are far smaller than for white wealth owners. For example, less than 7 percent of black households own stocks ~ompared to 27 percent of white households (Pew Research Center, 2011; Shapiro, _004). In fact, the typical white household has assets more than twenty times those o f the typical black household (Figure 7.4).

Recent studies indicate that the wealth gap between blacks and whites not only iailed to narrow over the past two decades but actually widened significantly Pew Research Center, 2011; McKernan et al., 2013; Pendall et al., 2012; Shapiro

'·

184 PART II ETHNICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

All households 70 ,000 13,566

Non-Hispanic I 113 149 white householders I 29, 169 '

Black householders

• Med ian net worth

D Median net worth exc luding home equity

FIGURE 7.4 I WEALTH DIFFERENTIALS BETWEEN WHITES AND BLACKS (2009 DOLLARS) Source: Pew Research Center (201lb ).

et al., 2010). In 2009, the gap was almost twice as wide as it was in 2005. Moreover, the studies showed that middle-income whites own substantially more wealth than high-income blacks.

Home ownership-the most significant form of wealth for most Americans- differs substantially among white and black families. Although the gap in home own- ership rates had begun to close in the 1990s, with the housing bust of the late 2000s, rates fell steeply for African Americans (and Latinos), far more than for whites. In 2010, fewer than half of black and Hispanic families owned homes, compared to three-quarters of white-families (McKernan et al. , 2013 ; Pendall et al., 2012) . Since most black wealth is in the form of home equity, the housing crisis proved disastrous to many families who had assumed costly and risky subprime loans-targeted at the African American community. As a result, many who had borrowed against their home equity lost the little wealth they had accumulated or lost their homes when they could no longer make mortgage payments (Kochhar et al., 2009; Oliver and Shapiro, 2008; Wright, 2009).

Most black income, then, even within the middle class, does not originate from property or self-employment. And, for single-parent families in particular, more common among African Americans, the presence of only one breadwinner makes it extremely difficult to accumulate wealth from savings (Campbell and Kaufman, 2006; Mather, 2010). A recent study, in fact, showed that single black (and His- panic) mothers with children of any age have less than 1 percent of the wealth of single white mothers with children of any age. Single-parent, female-headed families with children younger than age eighteen, the study showed, have median wealth of zero (Chang, 2010).

Lacking significant financial assets with which to cushion the impact of a pay cut or a job loss, most black families are apt to struggle during hard economic times, such as the deep recession of the late 2000s. And, lacking wealth, they are less able to give their children the financial assistance that provides advantages and opportunities (such as buying a home or helping with school tuition) that translate into upward mobility.

OccuPATION If income and wealth are the chief determinants of life chances, work is, for most people, the medium through which income and wealth are acquired.

C H APTER 7 AF R ICAN AMERICANS I 8 5

Occupationally, African Americans as a group have improved their place over the past several decades, progressively moving into better-paying and higher-status jobs. In 1890, most black males were in agricultural jobs, and females were in do- mestic and personal service occupations. By 1930, the structure of black employment had changed substantially, with an enormous drop in agriculture and an increase in manufacturing. This was due, of course, mainly to the out-migration of rural south- ern blacks to industrial cities of the North. But the most significant occupational changes occurred between 1940 and 1970. Whereas in 1940 about one-third of all employed blacks were farmworkers , by 1960 only 8 percent were, and by 1970, 3 percent. By contrast, in 1940, only 6 percent of all employed blacks were in white -collar occupations . By 1970, 24 percent were white-collar workers, and by 2000, well over half were.

Although it is clear that blacks have been increasingly integrated into the main- stream workforce, black-white disparities remain evident. Blacks are underrepre- sented in jobs at the top of the occupational hierarchy and overrepresented at the bottom. A far higher percentage of whites are in managerial and professional occupa- tions, whereas blacks predominate in service jobs such as cleaners, cooks, security guards, and hospital attendants. Moreover, the apparent occupational advancement of blacks need not be seen only as a product of the decline of discrimination in employ- ment. Much of it is due to changes in the occupational structure itself as the economy shifted from an agricultural to an industrial base and subsequently to a service base.

Furthermore, the discrepancy between blacks and whites in {ate of unemploy- ment is wide (Figure 7.5). Since the end of World War II, black unemployment has

16

14

12

10

6

4

2

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2011

I-+- White (non -H ispanic) --•- · Black I FIGURE 7.5 I U NEMPLOYMENT R ATES FOR PERSONS A GE 16 AND OLD ER So urce: U.S. Census Bureau (1979, 2004b, 2012a) .

'·

186 PART II ETHNICITY IN THE UN IT ED STATES

been, except for a few years, at least double that for whites. When one considers that government unemployment statistics do not account for those discouraged people who have given up the search for a job, the unofficial number and percentage of un- employed is much higher.

EDUCATION As with income and occupation, there is room for interpreting educa- tional data for African Americans both positively and negatively. Measured by years of schooling, blacks have increased their educational achievement both absolutely and relative to whites during the last five decades . Especially noticeable gains were achieved in the number of high school graduates. Among the adult population, 82.5 percent of blacks in 2011 had completed high school, compared with 88 per- cent of whites (Figure 7.6) . Also, today there is only a slight difference in the high school dropout rate for blacks and whites.

100

90

80

70

60

c 50 Q)

2 Q)

o_ 40

30

20

10

0

...... . ,,"" ........ ...... ,

......... ,

/ , /

...........................

. ... ,

... • ........................

. ...

··········• ····················• ·····················• • ············ ········· ·····

1960 1970 1980 1990

--+--- White, high school grad or more - - • - · Black, high school grad or more

___,._ White, college grad or more

...... ..... Black, college grad or more

2011

FIGURE 7.6 I EDUCATIONAL ATIAINMENT OF PERSONS AGE 25 AND O LD ER

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (1979, 1997, 2012a) .

C H APT ER 7 AFRI C AN AMERI CANS 187

Substantial gains have also been evident in black college attendance and gradua- tion. In 1967, fewer than 300,000 black eighteen- to twenty-four-year -olds (13 per- cent) were attending college; by 2008 more than 1.3 million (32 percent) were (Fry, 2009) . As shown in Figure 7.6, whereas in 1980, 8 percent of adult blacks had earned at least a bachelor's degree, in 2011, over 18 percent had done so. Black col- lege attendance, however, has vacillated in the past two decades, rising in some years and declining in others. A similar trend is apparent in the number of blacks earning graduate degrees.

Despite the narrowing differential in years of schooling, black achievement con- tinues to lag behind white achievement at all school levels-elementary, secondary, and college (Dillon, 2009; Kane, 2004; Massey et al., 2003; Neal, 2006; Schmidt, 2007). Moreover, this gap seems to hold across class lines. Lower educational achieve- ments are, of course, translated into fewer opportunities for occupational advancement.

Explanations vary for racial differentials in educational achievement. At one ex- treme, some argue that much of the difference between blacks and whites is due to genetic factors (Herrnstein and Murray, 1994; Jensen, 1969, 1973). This view is overwhelmingly rejected by the vast majority of social scientists and educators. At another extreme, many maintain that the schools themselves are inherently racist in both content and technique and thus guarantee the failure of blacks (Bowles and Gintis, 1976). A third position emphasizes a variety of social and environmental fac - tors. The essential argument is that family background and individual and peer- group attitudes are more important determinants of academic performance than ei- ther genetic inheritance or the characteristics of the schools (Coleman et al., 1966; Fordham and Ogbu, 1986; Jencks et al., 1972; McWhorter, 2000).

Another factor that negates much of the increase in access to higher education for African Americans is the far lower percentage of high -school graduates who at- tend elite or highly competitive colleges and universities. Most attend less competi- tive four-year institutions or two-year colleges, whereas whites predominate at the most selective schools. This pattern is evident even among equally qualified white and African American high school students (Carnevale and Strohl, 2013 ). The result is a perpetuation of inequality in occupations and earning power, with advantages going to those who attend more selective schools.

EXPLAINING THE BLACK-WHITE ECONOMIC GAP

It is clear that on all economic measures, blacks as a group-despite their advances- continue to lag behind whites. The questions that such statistics prompt are whether the persistent gap between blacks and whites is attributable to lingering racism, whether deeper structural forces impede the attainment of economic equality, or whether something unique about the black experience contributes to the group 's continued plight. The latter question is covered later in this chapter when comparing African Americans with other American ethnic groups. The first two questions have stirred a lively debate among sociologists for several years. The issue is essentially this: Does racial discrimination continue to affect the economic status of blacks more than their socioeconomic background and current circumstances? That is , do blacks succeed or fail mainly on the basis of their skills and education, or does the racial factor still play a major role in their economic destiny?

..

188 PART II ETH N ICITY IN THE UN IT ED STAT ES

In considering this issue, remember that the black population is not homoge- neous in terms of economic status. Indeed, some have suggested that there are really "two black Americas"- one that has established itself solidly within the middle and working classes and one that is isolated and not fully part of the mainstream work- force. The latter is what has been referred to as an "underclass" and constitutes per- haps one-third of the total black population (Hochschild, 1995; Smith, 2001; Wilson, 1980). What is really in question, then, is the persistence of a much larger low-income proportion of the African American population, compared to the white population.

CONTINUED DISCRIMINATION Some see the economic gap between whites and blacks as the result of continued discrimination in labor, housing, and credit markets (Hacker, 1995; Pager and Karafin, 2009; Steinberg, 1995). Andrew Hacker, for example, takes this position: "To be black in America is to know that you remain last in line for so basic a requisite as the means of supporting yourself and your family. More than that, you have much less choice among jobs than workers who are white" (1995:110). The idea is that whites still harbor negative stereotypes of blacks, which prevents full acceptance of blacks into all levels of the workforce and into stable and secure neighborhoods . Employers, for example, often see blacks as less dependable and less trustworthy than members of other ethnic groups and, even for low-skill jobs, prefer to hire immigrants (Bertrand and Mullainathan, 2004; Giuliano, 2008; Wilson, 1996).

In a related argument, others point to continued residential segregation as pre- venting the moveinent of blacks out of inner-city areas, where decent jobs are scarce or where there is no accessible transportation, to areas where jobs do exist. Residen- tial segregation is sustained, they argue, by the continued refusal of whites to accept more than a token representation of blacks in primarily white suburban neighbor- hoods. As a result, poor blacks remain trapped in neighborhoods that are resistant to racial change, perpetuating a cycle of poverty (Massey and Denton, 1993; Sampson, 2009).

A family's residential environment affects not only poor families but those that are near or part of the middle class as well. A recent study shows that only a small percentage of white children live in high-poverty neighborhoods throughout child- hood, but a majority of black children do. This is found to be a critical factor in ac- counting for the lower rate of upward economic mobility of blacks and their considerably greater chance of experiencing downward mobility. Living in a socially disadvantaged environment makes it difficult for black families that have achieved middle -class status to retain and pass on to their children the advantages of their

.. class position (Sharkey, 2009).

D YSFUNCTIONAL CULTURE Another explanation for the continued high proportion of African Americans in poverty is found in the notion of "dysfunctional culture." The essential idea is that blacks living in a ghetto subculture find it difficult to thrust themselves out of that environment and to take advantage of available opportunities. The environment to which observers refer is one in which there are mostly families without fathers, neighborhoods infested with drugs and crime, and unusually high rates of unemployment. Perhaps most important, the work ethic has disappeared.

CH APTER 7 AFRI CAN AME RI CANS 189

The underclass-not entirely, but primarily, black- therefore lacks the attitudes that lead to meaningful employment in the mainstream workforce (Kaus, 1995). Others explain that a black ghetto culture is an adaptive mechanism to life in low-income neighborhoods but becomes a handicap when manifested in a mainstream social en- vironment (Anderson, 1999; McWhorter, 2000).

STRUCTURAL FoRcEs Among a majority of sociologists, the most compelling explana- tion for the black-white economic gap is structural rather than the result of either white racism or cultural failures. William Julius Wilson (1980, 1987, 1996, 2009) is a major proponent of this position. His contention is that although discrimination based on race accounted for the denial of necessary economic resources to African Americans in earlier times, today those impediments are of less importance. Most critical in determining the contemporary economic fate of African Americans are class factors- education, occupational skills, and pathways into the job market.

The American economy, it is explained, has been restructured in the past several decades, favoring those with higher education and technical skills. Individuals who lack those occupational requisites find themselves shut out of an increasingly high- tech workforce and tossed aside or forced into low-paying, dead-end jobs. African Americans have made up a disproportionate part of that unskilled, low-income part of the workforce. Moreover, industry and commerce have moved to areas on the ur- ban fringe so that any available entry-level jobs are outside the range of the central city, where most low-income African Americans live. The result is a semipermanent state of unemployment (Cawthorne, 2009; Sharkey, 2009; Stoll, 2006; WilsQn, 1999).

The lack of job opportunities creates a vicious cycle in which blacks are forced to remain in inner-city ghettos, attending inferior schools _and thereby reinforcing their disadvantaged position in the labor market (Haskins, 2009). Moreover, high rates of joblessness, Wilson explains, "trigger other neighborhood problems that un- dermine social organization, ranging from crime, gang violence, and drug trafficking to family breakups and problems in the organization of family life" (1996:21). Sev- eral studies support this view (Harkins, 2009; Holzer, 2009).

BLACK MrnDLE- C LASs F RAGILITY In comparing black and white economic status, the question arises as to whether middle-class blacks have attained the equivalent status of middle-class ~hites, or whether their middle-class status is marginal, making them "second-class" Americans despite their personal achievements (Conley, 1999; Lacy, 2007; Landry, 1987; Pattillo-McCoy, 1999).

It is clear that the path to middle-class status for blacks has been much more tor- tu ous than for whites, and their middle-class position remains far more tenuous. Some have even suggested that the black middle class itself is subdivided into a "frag- ile" lower middle class that continues to lag behind the white middle class on most measures of socioeconomic status, and a "stable" middle class, virtually the same as its white counterpart in occupation, income, education, and housing (Lacy, 2007; Patillo, 1999) .

The severe economic recession of the late 2000s revealed the precariousness of the black middle class. African American families at all class levels were strongly im- pacted by this downturn, but middle-class families in particular felt its effects, losing much of the modest gains they had experienced in earlier years. As previously noted,

..

..

1 90 PART II ETH N ICITY IN TH E UN ITE D STATES

the differences in assets (wealth) held by middle-class blacks and whites are striking, with most black wealth concentrated in home ownership, which proved devastating in the recession.

No matter how it is measured, however-income, home ownership, unemploy- ment-the decline in economic security for African Americans, regardless of their social class, during the recession of the late 2000s was much sharper than for whites (Weller and Logan, 2009). In the second decade of the century, there is no indication that the economic disparities between whites and blacks will be reduced in the near future.

AFRICAN AMERICANS AND SOCIETAL POWER

As noted in Chapter 2, whatever changes occur in the distribution of the society's resources-education, income, jobs-necessarily depend on access to important decision-making positions in the polity and economy, those two institptions in which power lies most heavily. To what extent have African Americans begun to move into such positions?

PouTI CAL Powrn The gains made by African Americans in the realm of politics in the past four decades have been largely a product of increased electoral participation. Although an increasing number of blacks had begun to register and vote in the South during the 1940s, legal impediments as well as threats of violence still discouraged most from trying to exercise the ballot. As Gunnar Myrdal explained, "It is no test of the franchise that some Negroes are permitted to vote in a given community, for what is permitted to a few would never be permitted to the many" (1944:489). With the advent of the' civil rights movement in the 1960s, however, enormous gains were achieved in black voter registration in the South, aided by the civil rights legislation of 1964 and 1965. In only eight years, between 1964 and 1972, more than two mil- lion blacks were newly registered in the southern states.

In the North, the expansion of black electoral power was not a product of the civil rights movement but rather of the demographic changes that had occurred dur- ing the three decades from 1940 to 1970. The transformed racial composition of cit- ies of the Northeast and Midwest accounted more for the rise in black electoral power than any increase in black voting or concessions of power by whites. As the central cities became increasingly black and the suburbs increas ingly white, blacks in the central cities found themselves with the numerical power to influence the out- come of local elections.

The upshot of increased political participation in the South and altered urban demographics in the North was a sharp rise in the number of black elected officials, particularly at the local and state government levels. Whereas in 1970 some fifteen hundred blacks had been elected to political office, that number had swelled to over nine thousand by the early 2000s (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004b). Today, the election of black officials at state and local levels of government is no longer exceptional. And, increasingly, black officials are elected in primarily white constituencies. In 2007, about 30 percent of the nation's 622 black state legislators represented pre- dominantly white districts (Swarns, 2008).

Moreover, the black presence in national politics has become very apparent. The black vote is an important swing factor in many elections as well as a significant

CHAPTER 7 AF RICAN AMERI CANS 191

electoral force in its own right. And, black political power has risen as black political participation has increased. Participation has continued to rise so that today there are only marginal differences in black and white voting rates. In fact, black voters propor- tionately outnumbered white voters in the 2012 presidential election (File, 2013).

The rising black presence in national politics has continued in the early years of the new century. Although the presence of African Americans in high-ranking cabi- net and advisory positions of presidential administrations had been evident in Clinton and Bush administrations, the election of Barack Obama to the presidency marked a culminating point in national politics for African Americans. The 2008 and 2012 presidential elections are indicative of a profoundly changed American electorate, seemingly no longer strongly driven by racial/ethnic identity. Consider that only fifty years earlier, fewer than 40 percent of Americans had said that they were willing to vote for a black person as president. In 1999, 97 percent of whites said they were willing to do so, but until Obama's election, those sentiments had never really been tested (Newport et al., 1999).

EcoNOM IC Powrn The increasing presence of African Americans in positions of politi- cal power has not been duplicated in the corporate world. Relatively few African Americans serve on the board of directors or in top -level executive posts of the larg- est corporations, and these few are often token rather than bona fide decision- making appointments .

Corporate management is an area of authority in U.S. society that is not amena - ble to change through the electoral process; African Americans and other ethnic mi- norities, therefore, are dependent on the inclinations of the corporate elite to grant them a share of power. Although they are still disproportionately underrepresented, an encouraging pattern is emerging in which blacks continue to increase their pres- ence in executive and managerial positions (Stodghill, 2007). In 2012, thirteen For- rune 500 corporations were headed by an African American CEO, compared to only rwo in 1999 (Domhoff and Zweigenhaft, 2012).

PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION

The modern period of black-white relations has seen profound changes in patterns of racial prejudice and discrimination. Whereas some form of biological racism was a so lidly entrenched ideology in all parts of the nation well into the 1930s, by the 1960s a majority of Americans had rejected the notion of innate black inferiority. This shift in attitude accompanied the demolition of the legitimated system of racial segregation in which overt and direct forms of discrimination, both individual and institutional, were approved and defended by the state. But as these traditional forms of discrimination were abolished, they were replaced by covert and indirect forms, which are less amenable to alleviation.

Before the civil rights movement of the 1960s, discrimination against African _\mericans in much of the United States was de jure, that is, legitimized and enforced

y local, state, and even the federal government. Where it was not enforced by law, it "·a s upheld by well-understood customs. Today, however, prescribed discrimination

as given way to de facto forms, which are the result not of direct antiblack measures ut of institutional arrangements, demographic trends, and housing patterns.

..

192 PART II ETH N ICITY IN T HE UN IT ED ST ATES

RESIDENTIAL D ISCRIMINATION

The most evident, persistent, and consequential forms of racial discrimination in American society are found in the area of housing. Moreover, the patterns of dis- crimination here are direct and deliberate to a far greater extent than in the areas of work and education, which are largely structural. The effects of lingering racial dis- crimination in employment, for example, are debatable. Employers may continue to discriminate against blacks, but the extent and impact of those actions as well as their intent are difficult to precisely ascertain. Legal measures, in any case, have made them uncommon. In education, too, although urban school systems are as seg- regated today as they were before the 1954 Supreme Court decision barring segre- gated schools, these patterns are maintained more by residential segregation and the past drawing of racially distinct school districts than by the conscious design of whites. Discrimination in housing, by contrast, is clearer, and its intent is not easily disguised. It is well recognized that less progress in breaking down racial'barriers has been made in this sphere of social life than in any other (Brown et al., 2003; Massey and Denton, 1993).

Because the patterns are so clear-cut, focusing on housing is essential in looking at current forms of discrimination leveled at African Americans. However, there are additional important reasons for concentrating more intently on residential discrimi- nation. Its ripple effects touch every other area of social life (Farley et al., 1979; Holzer, 2001; Massey, 2004; Massey and Denton, 1993; Sigelman et al., 1996; Steger, 1973 ). Where people live determines in largest part the schools they attend (and thereby the quality of their education); the jobs they have access to (and thus their occupational destiny); the benefits they receive from public institutions like hos- pitals, recreational facilities, and transportation systems (and, as a result, their health and well-being); and the commercial establishments they have access to (and thus their style of life) . Moreover, the society's residential arrangements determine the es- sential character of interethnic relations. With continued segregation in housing, whites and blacks are prevented from interacting at a personal level, thus reinforcing racial attitudes and perpetuating structural pluralism. Though it is difficult to select one element of the system of American ethnic relations and call it the "key" to the maintenance of conflict and misunderstanding, residential segregation is unquestion- ably among the most fundamental. It would hardly be an exaggeration to proclaim that the present pattern of housing in the United States is the chief obstacle to prog- ress in all other aspects of race and ethnic relations.

THE FoRMATION OF BLACK GHETTOS Wide-scale residential segregation has been a contin- ., uous fact of urban life in the United States since blacks began to move to cities in

large numbers in the early twentieth century. As with European immigrants before them, they were concentrated in urban ghettos, but unlike those of the European groups, black ghettos did not progressively break up with each succeeding genera- tion (Hershberg et al., 1979; Kantrowitz, 1973, 1979; Massey and Denton, 1987, 1993; Roof, 1978, 1979; Spear, 1967; Taeuber, 1975).

Black-white residential segregation patterns changed little throughout most of the remainder of the century despite greater government activity in promoting deseg- regation, the development of more liberal social attitudes, and the emergence of

100 -

90 -

80 -

70 -

. Q)

0 60 - ()

(f)

c -~ 50 - OJ ~ gi 40 -

(f)

30 -

20 -

10 -

FIG UR E 7.7 I

C H APTE R 7 A FRI CAN AME RI CANS 193

-

-

-

Detroit Chicago New York Los Miami Boston Atlanta Phoenix Angeles

10 1990 020101

BLACK -WHITE RESID ENTIAL SEGREGATION IN SELECTED L ARGE

METROPOLTTAN AREAS, 1990 AND 2010 *The segregation score or index of dissimilarity is a measure of the extent of residential segregation between two groups. It indicates the percentage of one group that would have to move to achieve total integration; that is, a population mix that corresponds to each group's proportion of the pop- ulation of a designated area. For example, if a metro area were made up of 80 percent whites and 20 percent blacks, the two groups would be represented in each neighborhood in that same pro- portion. The index can range from 100, indicating total segregation, to 0, indicating total integra- rio n. Thus, the higher the index, the greater the degree of segregation. o urce: Frey, 2010b.

more middle -class blacks with sufficient incomes to afford better housing (Farley, 19 85; Levitan et al., 1975; Massey and Denton, 1987, 1993; Orfield, 1985; Roof, 1979; Van Valey et al., 1977; White, 1987). Figure 7.7 shows the level of black- white residential segregation in eight of the largest U.S. metropolitan areas. As can be seen, segregation did decline somewhat during the two decades between 1990 and 2010. But the simple fact remains that most African Americans, regardless of their social class or the geographic area in which they live, continue to reside in pre- dominantly black neighborhoods. And this "residential color line," notes Thomas

hapiro, "is the key feature distinguishing African Americans from all other groups in the United States" (2004:141).

194 PART IT ETHN ICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

Migration to the suburbs, a movement followed heavily by whites since the end of World War II, has been replicated to some degree by blacks in recent years . In fact, as noted earlier, a slight majority of African Americans now live in suburbs rather than central cities (Frey, 2010). However, when blacks do move to suburban areas, often they again find themselves in racially segregated communities (Adelman, 2005; Charles, 2003; DeVita, 1996; Massey and Denton, 1987, 1993; Pattillo- McCoy, 1999).

RACE OR CLAss? Might these patterns be more a result of class than of race? That is, might the persistence of black residential segregation merely reflect the lower eco- nomic status of blacks generally? If this were so, we could expect to find blacks and whites of similar social class residing in racially mixed neighborhoods. But studies have shown that blacks of every economic and educational rank are more highly segregated from whites than are Hispanics and Asians (Iceland and Wilkes, 2006; Logan, 2011; Massey and Denton, 1993).

Class factors, however, do play a role in determining patterns of residential segregation. For one, middle-class blacks are more likely to live in less segregated neighborhoods (Adelman, 2005). Even in the most highly segregated urban areas, middle-class blacks are less segregated from whites than are poorer blacks. Also, the resistance of whites to black incursions is reduced when blacks are perceived as higher in social class. As Alba and his colleagues explain, "Whites are reluctant to accept blacks as neighbors~ but that reluctance is eased when the socioeconomic characteristics of African Americans are superior to those of whites themselves" (2000:557). Thus, there is evidence to support the notion that whites avoid black neighbors for reasons related more to class than to race (Alba et al., 2000; Harris, 1999; Iceland and Wilkes, 2006). However, stereotyping still plays a strong role in the makeup of neighborhoods and limits black choices. As Alba and his colleagues (2000) point out, because blacks are stereotyped as poor, and because whites are more willing to accept black neighbors who are perceived as superior to themselves in social class, blacks live in less affluent communities than do whites of the same socioeconomic status.

Might a part of the continuation of residential segregation be the preference of blacks themselves to remain in racially homogeneous areas? There is evidence that continued racial segregation in housing is in some measure voluntary (Patterson, 2006; Thernstrom and Thernstrom, 1997). But this observation must be carefully qualified. For more than two decades, studies have shown that most blacks favor res- idential integration and would prefer racially mixed neighborhoods (Krysan and Farley, 2002; Massey, 2001; Pattillo, 2005; Rawlings et al., 2004; Sigelman et al.,

-. 1996). Surveys show that whites, on the other hand, are willing to accept residential integration only if the number of blacks is minimal (Schuman et al., 1997). The pref- erence of blacks to live among coethnics, then, is motivated largely by a perception of racial prejudice on the part of whites and thus the tendency to avoid majority- white neighborhoods (Charles, 2003; Krysan and Farley, 2002). 6

6 Although there is agreement among analysts that blacks seem to prefer mostly black neighborhoods, the debate centers on the reasons for that preference: a strong desire to live among coethnics, apprehensions about white hostility, uneasiness about white cultural influences, or the view that integration yields few benefits.

CH APTER 7 AFR ICAN AMERICANS 195

T HE MAINTENANCE OF RESID ENTIAL SEGREGATION Despite the enactment of many state and federal antidiscrimination statutes since the 1940s, residential segregation is main- tained by a set of discriminatory practices, both individual and institutional. Past government policies created much of the framework for its current patterns. Begin- ning in the 1930s, the federal government encouraged home ownership among middle- and working-class people by establishing the Federal Housing Administra - tion (FHA) as well as other housing-related agencies. The idea was to furnish cheap financing by providing government-backed mortgage insurance. From the outset, the FHA officially discouraged integrated residential areas by refusing to guarantee loans for homes that were not in racially homogeneous areas, a policy that was not changed until 1962 (Abrams, 1966; Katznelson, 2005; Massey and Denton, 1993; Roediger, 2005).

The real estate system has been a key element in the perpetuation of segregated housing. Until the 1950s, real estate boards, almost entirely white in membership, followed a strict code that restrained the renting or selling of property in white areas to blacks. Using various techniques, white real estate agents would steer blacks to black areas and whites to white areas to enforce this code. Banks and other lending institutions cooperated in the system by "redlining," that is, designating certain areas within which real estate loans would not be made. Another device used by real estate brokers was "block-busting." By spreading word through a white neighborhood of an impending black influx, agents would frighten . whites into selling their homes cheaply. These homes were subsequently sold to blacks at inflated prices. In the pro- cess, all -white areas were transformed quickly into all-black areas.

Where such tactics were unsuccessful, zoning regulations were established, spec- ifying certain types of housing that could be erected in particular neighborhoods; these were designed to exclude low-income, mainly black, units. Restrictive cove- nants, agreements made by home owners not to sell to members of particular groups, were also used to bar blacks (and in some cases other minorities) from white residen- tial areas (Roediger, 2005). Until the Civil Rights Act of 1968 prohibited discrimina - tion in housing, such covenants had been widely applied and were even supported by law until 1948. When all else failed, violence and intimidation were frequently used to deter blacks from buying or renting in all-white neighborhoods.

Although these practices have been curtailed by antidiscriminatory legislation, ome are still evident (steering, redlining) whereas others have been replaced by

more subtle measures that support segregation (Massey, 2001; Massey and Denton, 1993; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2013; Yinger, 1996). The discrimination African Americans face in securing home mortgages, for exam- ple, is an important factor in sustaining segregated neighborhoods. Regardless of in- ome, lending institutions- banks and mortgage companies- are less inclined to

approve blacks than whites, especially when homes are located in suburban areas H eath et al., 2002; Shapiro, 2004 ). Despite antidiscriminatory statutes, such institu-

::ional forms of residential discrimination are difficult to detect and to effectively po- .ice. Ironically, black borrowers were disproportionately the victims of the housing -risis of the late 2000s . As banks were pressured to lend to people who ordinarily

·o uld not have qualified for a home mortgage, unsuspecting black and other minor- ~- families became easy prey for banks and other lenders. By selling these loans (so -

.:alled subprime mortgages) they reaped enormous profits from fees, knowing that

196 PART 11 ETH N IC ITY IN THE UN ITED ST ATES

eventually many of these families would be unable to meet the loan obligations and their homes would be foreclosed.

In sum, housing patterns between blacks and whites are, as has been repeatedly demonstrated, qualitatively different from those between other groups. Massey and Denton (1993) have described this uniquely disadvantaged black urban environment as "hypersegregation"- that is, segregation across several dimensions. No other eth- nic group, they show, experiences such multidimensional segregation. Although there has been a reduction in recent decades of the intensity of black-white residen - tial segregation (Farley, 2011), a majority of the African American population con- tinues to live in densely populated, segregated neighborhoods of America's largest urban areas (Iceland, 2009; Logan et al., 2004; Massey, 2001; Morin, 2013; Wilkes and Iceland, 2004). This environment shuts out most contact with whites except through participation in the labor force. Thus African Americans living within the largest urban black communities remain highly segregated and spatially isolated. Al- though racial discrimination in other institutional realms of American society has broken down to a great extent, it remains tenacious in residential patterns and con- tinues to render a severely negative impact on African Americans. 7

CHANGES IN RACIAL A TIITUDES

As the nature of racial discrimination has changed in the past several decades, so have the attitudes of whites toward blacks. Although there is much room for opti- mism regarding these attitudinal shifts, there are also indications that some racist be- liefs are still firmly, rooted in American thought, albeit in modified form. Moreover, there is ample evidence that blacks and whites do not see the same reality regarding the current state of race relations or the nature and causes of economic and social problems faced by African Americans.

Attitudinal changes during the past forty years have been measured by extensive and frequent surveys among blacks and whites. At the outset, it should be noted that survey data regarding attitudes must be accepted cautiously as representative of peo- ple's real beliefs and feelings. At best they are rough descriptions, not precise read- ings. Because they are designed to draw collective or general pictures, they will not necessarily reflect the nuanced views of individuals. Obviously, blacks and whites as collectivities are internally variegated, and views among individuals will differ on the basis of age, gender, education, and numerous other social variables. Moreover, as explained in Chapter 3, surveys, particularly those dealing with socially sensitive is- sues like race and ethnic relations, may reflect mainly what people believe inter- viewers want to hear or what they feel to be the most socially acceptable response,

-. not necessarily their true feelings. Finally, attitudes may appear inconsistent from item to item or from survey to survey. For example, public opinion studies over the years have shown a strong acceptance of integrated schools but an equally strong re- jection of school busing (Gilbert, 1988; Greeley and Sheatsley, 1974). Interpretations of such inconsistencies are often problematic. In this case, the antibusing sentiment

7 Marston and Van Valey (1979) argue that there are some positive effects of residentia l segregation for blacks, namely, that it creates and sustains an institutional structure that caters to blacks, induces ethnic group consciousness, and in some cities produces local political clout.

CHAPTER 7 AFRI CAN AM ERI CANS 197

may be an indication of covert racism, or it may indicate other, nonracist attitudes such as commitment to the neighborhood school, fear of the dangers of busing, or resentment over the inconvenience caused by busing (Greeley and Sheatsley, 1974 ). It may also reflect a particular view of what government should or should not do to accelerate racial equality (Sniderman and Piazza, 1993). With these caveats in mind, let's look at some specific patterns.

STEREOTYPES First, it is clear that negative stereotypes of blacks have diminished and that less support is given to blatant forms of prejudice (Brink and Harris, 1963, 1967; Campbell, 1971; Greeley and Sheatsley, 1974; Krysan, 2008; Pettigrew, 1975, 1981; Schuman et al., 1997; Schwartz, 1967; Sheatsley, 1966; Williams, 1977). Table 7.2 shows the decline in recent decades of two of the most historically unyielding black stereotypes.

It is true nonetheless that traditional negative stereotypes of blacks-poor, vio- lent, irresponsible-are still potent, if diminished (Feagin and Sikes, 1994; Saulny and Brown, 2009; Waters, 1999). Although Table 7.2 shows their decline, it also shows their persistence among a very substantial percentage of whites. Few African Americans do not at times become aware of the continued virulence of these stereo- types and of the reality of racial profiling. Even middle-class blacks commonly relate incidents of being the targets of watchful eyes of security guards in upscale stores or of police in predominantly white neighborhoods. The journalist Brent Staples ex- plains that although few Americans today subscribe to crude racist beliefs, black stereotypes have been embedded in the society's culture for centuries . "This makes it easy for people to see the world," he writes, "through 5cl profoundly bigoted lens without being aware they are doing so" (2012:SR10).

SocIAL DISTANCE White attitudes toward racial integration and various levels of social distance have also changed in the past five decades. Most whites now seem commit- ted (at least verbally) to integration in most social areas entailing secondary rela- tions. Only a tiny minority of whites nationwide object to contact with blacks on the job, in schools, or in public facilities.

But far less attitudinal change is noticeable when intimate contacts are involved. Few blacks today, regardless of social class, are likely to socialize with their white fellow employees outside the formal work setting (Sigelman et al., 1996). And, as we have seen, most whites are opposed to living in areas with a high percentage of blacks (Carroll, 2007b; Farley, 2011; Krysan and Faison, 2011; Pew Research Center, 2007a; Schuman et al., 1997) .

TABLE 7.2 WHITE AMERICANS' STEREOTYPES OF BLACKS (PER CENTAGE)

Stereotype

Whites work harder than blacks (yes)

Whites are more intelligent than blacks (yes)

Sou rce: Krysan and Faison (2011 ).

1990

57

1998

42

28

2008

38

26

..

198 PART II ET HN ICITY IN THE UNITED STATES

On the other hand, an overwhelming majority of whites no longer object to inter- racial dating and marriage. This represents a significant change in the past several dec- ades. In 1987, less than half of whites approved of black-white dating; in 2007, 83 percent approved. Although there is a marked discrepancy among different age cohorts-younger Americans are more tolerant than their parents and grandparents- even among those over sixty years of age there is a clear shift toward acceptance (Pew Research Center, 2007c).

Similarly, regarding marriages between blacks and whites, American attitudes have changed dramatically. In 1958, almost all whites (and blacks as well) disap- proved of interracial marriages; approval gradually rose over the next few decades , but well over half of whites still disapproved in 1983 . By 2013, only 16 percent dis - approved (Figure 7.8) .

ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS Although white attitudes concerning discrim~nation and inte- gration are apparently increasingly liberal, ambivalence arises when translation of those attitudes into concrete actions is suggested. This is evident in various ambits of social life, including politics, jobs, housing, and education. Whites agree that blacks should have equal rights and privileges in all these areas but are less commit- ted to approving measures necessary to guarantee them (Pettigrew, 1979; Pew Research Center, 2007c; Schuman et al., 1997; Tuch and Hughes, 2011).

An obvious inconsistency between attitude and action lies in the realm of hous- ing. Although most whites favor racially integrated neighborhoods, white prefer- ences for the degree of integration are quite different from those of blacks. Whereas blacks seem to prefer a relatively even racial mix, whites prefer a mix in which whites are in the majorl.ty (Farley, 2011; Gallup Organization, 2003; Schuman et al., 1997; Sigelman et al., 1996). In a sense, there is a circular movement in which prejudice

100

90

80

70

60 c

...... •-• ,,.._ ,,,.,,."'

.-----·-- .... ... -· .------ ------ -----· ---- -· ... ---· 2 50 <ll

()__ 40

30

20

10

0-+--~---~---~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~~~-~~~ '69 '71 '73 '75 '77 '79 '81 '83 '85 '87 '89 '91 '93 '95 '97 '99 '01 '03 '05 '07 '09 '11 '13

1-- Whites --•-· Non-Hispanic blacks I FIGURE 7.8 I APPROVAL OF BLACK-WHITE MARRIAGES Source: Newport (2013b). Copyright© 2013 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. The content is used with permission; however, Gallup retains all rights of republication.

C H APT E R 7 A FRI CAN AM ERICA NS 199

feeds on segregation, and vice versa. Increased contact seems to moderate racial prej- udice, especially if the groups are of the same social class. As mentioned earlier, a key reason for whites' fears of black penetration of their neighborhoods is the lower so- cial class of blacks, not necessarily negative racial attitudes alone (Alba et al., 2000; Farley et al., 1979; Iceland and Wilkes, 2006). Whites are concerned that their neigh- bors will be poorer and will have lifestyles very much at odds with their own. Al- though blacks moving into white neighborhoods are generally similar to their white .. neighbors in socioeconomic status, fixed negative images of blacks (as "poor," "lazy, " "squalid") often prevent whites from perceiving the class distinctions among them- hence the continued resistance to integrated residential areas. Without social contact, prejudicial attitudes and images persist, in turn leading to intransigence on matters of neighborhood desegregation.

Some go further than merely pointing out the reluctance of whites to link atti- tudes with actions toward blacks or the inability to differentiate class and race, main- taining that white attitudes themselves have not really changed as radically as they appear. In the view of Picca and Feagin (2007), for example, although expressions of racism are no longer as commonly overt as in the past, they have only "gone back- stage," that is, confined to private settings where whites interact with other whites, especia lly friends and relatives. Whites, they suggest, have learned different racial performances, depending on the social setting.

D OMINATI VE AN D AVERS IVE R ACISM Pertinent to this issue is the distinction between dom- inative and aversive racism. With dominative racism, actions are taken to oppress racia l minorities and keep them subservient. Aversive rqcism, by contrast, is charac- terized by inaction wherein racial minorities are simply ignored and avoided when possible; relations at best become "polite, correct and cold in whatever dealings are necessary between the races " (Kovel, 1970:54). Continued residential segregation provides the backdrop for such aversive discrimination in various areas of social life. Although obvious and blatant forms of discrimination are no longer prevalent, more benign black-white relations are in large mea sure founded on intergroup avoid- ance (Pettigrew, 1980).

Aversive racism is more difficult to detect and to deal with since it is not overt but subtle in expression and often unconscious and unintentional (Bonilla-Silva, 2003; Dovidio, 2001; Dovidio and Gaertner, 1998). In such cases, people will deny their prejudice and may express politically correct racial views, but when called upon to support substantive change (racially mixed housing or some form of affirmative action, for example), they will balk.

Others have suggested similar forms of contemporary racism, subtle and not sharply focused as the blatant racial discrimination of the past. Lawrence Bobo (2004) refers to " laissez faire racism" as a combination of several factors: a continu- ation of negative stereotyping of blacks, blaming blacks themselves for the persistent black-white socioeconomic gap, and resistance to policy changes that address the gap. Similarly, some refer to "color-blind racism" as the tendency for white Ameri- cans to maintain that the United States, in the post- civil rights era, is now a merito- cratic society in which color no longer matters (Bonilla-Silva and Dietrich, 2011; Forman, 2004). Hence, whatever shortcomings remain for blacks are the result of in dividual effort, obviating the need for compensatory measures like affirmative

200 PART II ETH NICITY IN TH E UN IT ED STATE S

action. These subtle forms of racial discrimination lead to what Tyrone Forman calls racial apathy on the part of whites, that is, a lack of concern over racial inequalities. The election of a black president, moreover, has solidified the belief among whites that issues of racial inequality are no longer pertinent.

In his classic work dealing with black-white relations in the United States, the Swedish social scientist Gunnar Myrdal (1944) described the disjuncture between white attitudes and actions vis-a-vis blacks as "an American dilemma." The di- lemma, according to Myrdal, is the conflict between, on the one hand, adherence to the "American Creed," entailing a belief in equality and Christian precepts, and on the other, group prejudice and discrimination based on material and status interests. The dilemma remains evident today in many ways.

CONTRASTING VIEWS OF PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS

Whites and blacks do not share a common view of the problems facing African Americans. Whites today tend to view blacks as better off economically and socially than blacks view themselves; they also see the extent and pace of racial change in the United States as far greater and more rapid than do blacks. Most whites believe Afri- can Americans enjoy equal opportunities in education, jobs, housing, and access to credit; African Americans have very different views. Moreover, whites see the cur- rent state of black-white relations more positively than blacks do. Nonetheless, Afri- can Americans today have an increasingly optimistic view of future conditions and relations, a trend that may have been spurred in large measure by the election of a black presiden,t (Carroll, 2006, 2007b; Gallup Organization, 2001b, 2003, 2010a; Jones, 2004, 2008; Pew Research Center, 2010a, 2010b; Saad, 2007a, 2007b; Smith, 2000).

BLA CK AND WHITE VI EWS OF R ACIAL PROGRESS Surveys indicate that whereas whites see problems of racial inequality as more of a "mopping up," with basic changes having been made, blacks perceive deeply rooted discrimination continuing to affect their chances in work and education (Bobo, 2004; Dohorty, 2013; Gallup Organization, 2001b; Jones, 2006; Krysan, 2008; Pew Research Center, 2007c, 2010b; Roper Center, 2001; Smith, 2000; Washington Post-ABC News, 2012). Whites define racial progress mostly in political terms. If laws have been changed that previously denied blacks access to critical institutions, then it is assumed that an equal opportu- nity structure has been created and that blacks are equipped to take advantage of those opportunities. Most blacks, in contrast, do not see simply a few remnants of the past that need attention but a well-entrenched system that continues to block their socioeconomic advancement. Table 7.3 shows the wide gap in black and white views of African American discrimination. Note also the absence of change in these views in more than a decade, despite Barack Obama's election and reelection.

Also, blacks see a justice system that treats blacks differently than whites. The gap between whites and blacks in their perception of how blacks are dealt with by the police in their communities remains particularly wide (Pew Research Center, 2010b; Washington Post-ABC News, 2012). A recent national survey revealed that whereas 68 percent of blacks say the American justice system is biased against blacks, only 25 percent of whites agree (Newport, 2013 ). And the hugely

CHAPTER 7 AFR ICAN AME RICANS 2 0 1

I PERCENTAGE SAYING "THERE Is MucH DISCRIMINATION

TABLE 7.3 AGAINST AFRICAN AMERICANS"

Whites

Blacks

So urce: Doherty (2013 ); Pew Research Center (2010b ).

2001

15

48

2013

16

46

disproportionate percentage of blacks who are incarcerated in America's prisons is seen by African Americans as stark evidence of a skewed criminal justice system.

D 1s CRIMJN ATJON VERsus INDIVIDUAL EFFORT Although whites generally recognize the disad- vantaged status of a large proportion of the black population, there are striking dif- fe rences in black and white explanations for that depressed condition. Most whites continue to view the problems as the result of blacks' own shortcomings, not social conditions or institutional forms of discrimination (Lipset, 1987; Schuman et al., 1997; Sniderman and Piazza, 1993). The majority, however, no longer attribute these deficiencies to biological inferiority (Schuman, 1982; Schwartz, 1967; Sniderman and Piazza, 1993). Most often, whites see black disadvantages as a product of "lack of ambition," "laziness," "irresponsibility," or "failure to take advantage of opportu- nities." The prevalent attitude is, "If we did it, so can they." Indeed, ~ome hold that the image of blacks as lacking ambition and being socially irresponsible is the most common negative black stereotype (Sniderman and Piazza, 1993). Blacks, by con- rrast, see their plight as deriving primarily from discrimination or a lack of the same opportunities as whites (Gallup Organization, 2003 ).

Structural forces that strongly affect people's place in the stratification system such as the society's changed occupational order or its basically altered demo -

graphic patterns) are not easily perceived. Thus social success or failure is apt to be interpreted as primarily the result of individual effort. Moreover, the belief that each member of society is personally responsible for his or her social lot is a basic compo- nent of the prevailing American ideology. The society's opportunity structure is pic- tured as open, proyiding equal chances for all to achieve material success or political power regardless of their class or ethnic origin. As a result, it seems only natural that whites would be more likely to attribute the lower social and economic achievement of blacks to individual and group characteristics than to the workings of a class and ethnic system that automatically favors the wellborn, especially those who are also white, and disadvantages the poor, especially those who are black. In addition, the more blatant forms of discrimination, which long held blacks in subservience- -Javery, the Jim Crow system- are easier to perceive and understand by whites than are the indirect and largely covert forms of structural discrimination that continue to render debilitating effects. Moreover, even at the individual level, discrimination in ~ess easily measured forms-poor service, racial slurs, fearful or defensive behavior,

ck of respect, racial profiling-is a commonplace experience for most blacks Feagin and Sikes, 1994; Morin and Cottman, 2001; Picca and Feagin, 2007) and

:enders a further injurious impact.

..

202 PART II ETH NICITY IN TH E UN IT ED STATE S

AFRICAN AMERICANS: ASSIMILATION OR PLURALISM?

Chapter 4 pointed out that assimilation and pluralism are processes and outcomes of interethnic relations that are not necessarily mutually exclusive for any particular group in a multiethnic society. Rather, a group may display aspects of both simulta- neously. In the case of African Americans, certain patterns of assimilation seem ap- parent even though inequalitarian pluralism has generally been more characteristic of their historical and even contemporary experience.

CULTURAL ASSIMILATION

Because the African cultural heritage was largely destroyed under slavery, blacks had little choice about the adoption of the dominant group's major cultural traits, espe- cially religion and language. 8 Some hold that in light of this historic~! fact, cultural assimilation has been as fully accomplished for blacks as for any American ethnic group (Gordon, 1964; Pinkney, 2000). However, although it is true that blacks have adopted the dominant group's major cultural forms, it is equally evident that an African American cultural variation has evolved in the United States, one that clearly sets blacks apart from Anglo-Americans and other ethnic groups (Hannerz, 1969; R. Taylor, 1979). African Americans have developed a linguistic style, have molded a unique version of Protestantism, and have created black art forms, espe- cially in music.

REVERSE A ss1MILATI OJ;'l As explained in Chapter 4, cultural assimilation is commonly a reciprocal process in which minority ethnic groups not only absorb the dominant culture but also transform it to some degree with their own contributions. This has clearly been the case for African America ns in recent decades. Indeed, the sociologist Orlando Patterson maintains that the black influence on the prevailing American culture is today not simply evident but pervasive (1997). Blacks, he suggests, domi- nate American popular culture- including music, dance, language, sports, and youths' fashion. "So powerful and unavoidable is the black popular influence," he writes, "that it is now not uncommon to find persons who, while remaining racists in personal relations and attitudes, nonetheless have surrendered their tastes , and their viewing and listening habits, to black entertainers, talk-show hosts and sitcom stars" (1995b:24). As a reflection of this cultural drift, until her retirement in 2012, Oprah Winfrey had been chosen as America's favorite TV personality for many years (Corso, 2010). "Blackness (or nonwhiteness)," notes journalist Leon Wynter, "now suffers less and less of a discount in the marketplace, while whiteness com- mands less and less of a premium" (2002:136) .

Ass1MILATI ON OF TH E FOR EIGN -B ORN As explained earlier, the American black population is increasingly diverse culturally, and assimilation of the growing foreign -born ele- ment must be analyzed apart from African Americans. Many in the immigrant

8 A long-standing debate among sociologists and historians concerns the degree to which blacks retained elements of their native African cultures under American slavery. Some, like Frazier (1949), assert that blacks were essentially stripped of African cultural ways; others, like Herskovitz (1941), maintain that remnants remained intact.

CHAPTER 7 AFRIC AN AM ERIC AN S 203

generation from West Africa and the Caribbean seek to maintain their ethnic identity and remain apart from the African American community. In some part this is in rec- ognition of the American ethnic hierarchy, in which African Americans are stigma- tized and in terms of status remain in the lower tier. Separation may also be based on the desire to maintain one's ethnic identity and culture. The reality of racial categori- zation in the United States, however, acts as a counterforce, drawing African- and Caribbean-born immigrants into the larger black population. Increasing intermar- .. riage with African Americans also has an integrating effect. Some foreign -born blacks eventually even come to identify themselves as "African American" (Halter, 2007). All of these responses can be seen as aspects of segmented assimilation.

STRUCTURAL ASSIMILATION

Structural assimilation at the secondary level has begun in earnest for African Amer- icans as they increasingly acquire better jobs, higher incomes, and more education, and enter into power positions. For the black underclass, however, secondary struc- tural assimilation has been stymied, and the prognosis for future movement in this direction is bleak. Even for the black middle class, of course, it is still only in the in- cipient stages .

Structural assimilation at the primary level- as measured by residential patterns, club memberships, friendship cliques, and intermarriage-remains low. Whites to - day do have more personal contact with blacks than they did in the past, but that contact continues to be minimal and casual. Residential integration is a very basic prerequisite to other aspects of primary and even secondary assimilation, but in this area, as we have seen, African Americans have not followed the usual path of Amer- ican ethnic groups. Though residential dispersion accompanied upward class mobil- ity for other groups, this has not occurred for African Americans, who continue to experience high levels of segregation despite advances in income, occupation, and education.

Interracial marriage- the most important indicator of primary structural assimilation- also remains at a relatively low- albeit growing- level. Intermarriage of whites with other ethnic minorities is rapidly increasing but this trend is not as trong in relatioll' to African Americans (Lee and Bean, 2010; Lee and Edmonston,

20 05; Qian and Lichter, 2007; Wang, 2012) . Blacks and whites may increasingly work, shop, vote, and attend school to -

gether, but the formal interrelations in these areas of social life do not extend very far into more personal relations as neighbors, church members, close friends, or mar- ita l partners. Clearly, the social boundaries that continue to thwart change are stron- ger for African Americans than for any other American ethnic group.

~\SSIMILA TION: AFRICAN AMERICANS AND OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS

Is the experience of African Americans so exceptional that they cannot be compared u ing the same analytical models and criteria applied to other ethnic groups? This - an issue of some debate in sociology. The question is essentially this: is the assimi-

ration, or "ethnic" model- so clearly applicable to white ethnic groups , examined in

204 PART II ETH NJCITY IN THE UNITED STATES

Chapters 10 and 11-relevant to African Americans, or are they best viewed in terms of some form of inequalitarian pluralism? Let's briefly examine the two sides of this issue.

THE AssIMILATION MODEL In the 1960s and 1970s, many analysts applied the assimila- tion model to African Americans, seeing their social evolution as generally compara- ble to that of white ethnic groups. In this view, African Americans until the 1960s were denied entry into the competitive mainstream but afterward had to contend with other ethnic groups for jobs, education, housing, and political power. Changed societal conditions and group cultural differences were acknowledged, but the most important difference between African Americans and other ethnic groups, in this view, was simply the time that African Americans had entered the competition: they were latecomers (Glazer, 1971; Glazer and Moynihan, 1970; Handlin, 1962; Kristol, 1970; Sowell, 1981). The process, therefore, might be longer and m~re painstaking, but eventually, African Americans, like other ethnic groups, would be assimilated into the mainstream of American society.

TH E lNEQUALITARIAN PLURALISTIC MODEL Some aspects of the assimilation model continue to be applied to African Americans. But a more prevalent view today regards the black experience as unique among American ethnic groups. Even exponents of the assimilation model have conceded that the path of societal integration followed by African Americans is exceptional vis -a-vis not only past immigrants but even new immigrant groups (Glazer, 1997).

In explaining the noticeably different patterns of assimilation of African Ameri- cans compared with other ethnic groups, emphasis is placed on the fundamentally di- vergent African American ethnic experience; no other group arrived so nearly completely as involuntary immigrants, none was subjected to two centuries of slavery, none experienced the depth and persistence of racial prejudice and discrimination, none was so totally divested of its native culture, and none was so indelibly marked.

Some social scientists in the 1960s and 1970s went further in distinguishing the African American experience, contending that it was best portrayed as "internal colonialism"- that is, characterized by features similar to those of nineteenth cen- tury European colonialism: blacks' entry into the society was forced, their indige- nous culture was destroyed, they were oppressed by the dominant group, and they were the target of a racist ideology (Blauner, 1969, 1972; Franklin and Resnik, 1973 ). Other ethnic groups did not face similar circumstances.

Those who see African Americans as singular among American ethnic groups argue that the vestiges of slavery have immeasurably handicapped them in their ef-

., forts to compete with whites. The abolition of slavery did not change established re- lations of dominance and subordination. Blacks continued to be relegated to the lowest occupational levels and were denied fundamental political rights well into the 1960s. Furthermore, the economic and political structures of American society, they argue, have changed so basically from what they were for entering European immigrant groups that comparisons with them are rendered vacuous. African Amer- icans simply cannot utilize economic and political institutions as European immi- grants earlier did to secure better jobs, housing, and political clout and, thus, to effectuate assimilation.

CH APTER 7 AFR ICAN AME RI CANS 20 5

AssIM ILATION AND VISIBILITY As noted in Chapter 4, visibility is usually a decisive factor in the rate and degree of structural assimilation for ethnic groups in multiethnic soci- eties . The greater the visibility, the slower and less intense is the assimilation process. This would seem to be of overriding importance in the case of African Americans.

Despite its abatement in the past two decades, the racial stigma of African Amer- icans remains an ever-present fact in the United States. As Hughes and Hughes put it more than six decades ago, "Few are the situations which both Negro and white Americans enter, side by side, unlabelled and undifferentiated . Even a monk or a hero must be named by his color unless he is white" (1952:28). Isaacs has poignantly expressed the significance of visibility as it affects the lives of black people m America:

For black Americans, more clearly perhaps than for any other group , the element of color and physical characteristics lies at the very center of the cluster that makes up their basic group identity. It is the one element around which everything else in their lives has been made to revolve, the heart of the identity crisis that is with them every hour of every da y and which they need more than anything else to resolve. (1989:66 )

The factor of racial visibility may decline in significance in the future, however, as the dividing lines of traditional racial and ethnic categories continue to fade. Even the perceived racial division between blacks and whites is no longer seen by many people as clearly as it had been in the past. When asked about President Obama's ra cial identity, only a bare majority of both black and white Americans agreed among themselves. Most blacks said Obama is "black," but more than one-third identified him as "mixed race." Among whites the pattern was reversed, with about half answering that he is "mixed race," whereas just a quar ter identified him as " black" (Pew Research Center, 2010b).

In sum, although the importance of ethnicity has diminished for most whites in American society, for blacks it continues to be a crucial social characteristic, influ- encing almost all aspects of social life. Though the relations between blacks and whites are no longer the almost exclusive focus of ethnic analysts and policy makers- as they had been for most of the twentieth century-they will likely remain the major issue of interethnic relations in the United States for many generations.

SUMMARY

• The black experience is unique among American ethnic groups. No other group entered the society so completely as involuntary immigrants, and no other group was subjected to such fully institutionalized degradation. The after effects of slavery continue to influence the patterns of black-white relations and the place of blacks in the social hierarchy.

• Black-white relations can be divided into three major periods. Slavery, lasting from the 1600s until 1865, was characterized by paternalistic domination in which blacks were totally subservient, by law in the South and by informal pro- cesses in the North. Following the brief interlude of Reconstruction after the Civil War, black-white relations entered the Jim Crow era. Although no longer slaves, blacks were forced back into a subservient economic role and, through legal and extralegal measures, were denied the vote as well as other basic civil

206 PAR T II ET H N IC ITY IN T HE UN ITE D ST ATE S

liberties. Moreover, a fully legitimized system of segregation was developed in the South, abetted by the application of a racist ideology. An era of fluid com- petition between blacks and whites commenced in the 1930s, and in the 1960s the Jim Crow system was demolished in the wake of the black civil rights movement.

• As a collectivity, blacks in the past five decades have made significant strides in income, occupation, and education. However, they continue to lag behind whites on all measures of socioeconomic status. Furthermore, the gains of the past fifty years have not been experienced in a balanced fashion within the Afri- can American community. One segment has taken its economic place in the working and middle classes, but the other segment is an underclass-chronically unemployed, undereducated, and acutely indigent. ,

• The economic problems of poor blacks have been explained as, in some part, a continuation of racial discrimination, but primarily as a function of the lack of relevant skills and education in a restructured American workforce.

• The levels of prejudice and discrimination against blacks have historically been more severe and persistent than those against any other ethnic group in Ameri- can society. White attitudes today are more tolerant than in the past, and dis- crimination is confined mostly to the structural variety. Housing, however, is an area that has not been as strongly affected by changes in black-white dynamics.

• Although African Americans have reached a high level of cultural assimilation and are in the incipient stages of secondary structural assimilation, primary structural a'ssimilation remains at a low level. Little black-white interaction oc- curs outside formal social settings such as work and education.

• Although some in the past maintained that African Americans were simply late- comers to the urban environment and would eventually display assimilation patterns much like those of white ethnic groups, most today see African Ameri- cans as a group whose historical experience and current conditions are so dis - tinctive that comparisons with white ethnic groups are baseless.

CRITICAL THIN KIN G

1. In what ways might the election and reelection of a self-identified African American as U.S . president affect the social and economic future of African Americans? How might having an African American in the White House affect white perceptions of and attitudes toward African Americans? How would you respond to someone who states that "since an African American is the U.S. President, African Americans can no longer make claims of racial discrimination?"

2. Explain how the relative lack of wealth of African Americans impedes their up- ward mobility, even among the black middle class, whose incomes might not be much different from whites' .

3. Middle-class white neighborhoods usually remain overwhelmingly white be- cause homeowners fear that if blacks move in they will bring poverty and its at- tendant problems. For black families to purchase homes in such neighborhoods , of course, would require that they would also be middle class. But white fears

CH APTER 7 AFRICAN AMER ICANS 20 7

rest on the stereotype of blacks as "poor." Explain this as a case of statistical discrimination, discussed in Chapter 3.

4 . As this chapter notes, the black population of the United States is becoming more varied in ethnicity. What social advantages (or disadvantages) might blacks from African and Latin American/Caribbean countries have over African Americans? Consider black immigrants in terms of the theory of segmented as- similation, discussed in Chapter 4.

PERSONAL/ PRACTICAL APPLICATION

1. This chapter explains that blacks and whites may have different ideas about the ideal racial makeup of their neighborhood. If you marry and have children, what factors would you consider in choosing a neighborhood in which to live and raise a family? Would race or ethnicity be one of those factors?

2. Despite a radically changed racial environment in the United States since the 1960s, many argue that race consciousness and social distance among blacks and whites remain strong. How evident is racial segregation in your university (dorms, eating areas, fraternities and sororities, and so on)?

..