A Musing for the Starting Point to Dismantle Systemic Racism

James Baldwin once mused that “Not everything that is faced can be changed. But nothing can be changed until it is faced.” The research is rich in documenting that and associated matters are social constructs (e.g. Heiphetz, Spelke, and Banaji, 2014; Miles & Brown, 2003; Omi and Winant, 2015; Searle, 1995). These social constructs are intergenerationally manifest through what Omi and Winant (2015) explain as racial projects. As they argue, “Racial projects are efforts to shape the ways in which human identities and social structures are racially signified, and the reciprocal ways that racial meaning becomes embedded in social structures” (Omi & Winant, 2015, p.13, emphasis added). And the emphasized portions of this statement represent “the language of race” (Omi & Winant, 2015, p.13) by which racial projects are internalized by individuals and maintained intergenerationally (Crossman, 2016; Jackson III, 2012; Ryan & Deci, 2017). The “language of race” is a pervasive mechanism by which “the extension of racial meaning to a previously racially unclassified relationship, social practice, or group” (Omi & Winant, 2015).

Among the components of racial projects and the processes of lie the heart of what is needed to dismantle the norms of race including racism (Miles & Brown, 2003). Moreover, this ‘meat of dismantling’ provides the basis and framework of this proposal. Toward operationalizing this exploration for dismantling race and racism there must be a comprehensive exploration of each of these components and processes. In other words, there must be research to gain knowledge of the nature of the efforts that shape the components of racial projects; research to gain knowledge of the named components of racial projects, take research into how ‘human identities (are) racially signified’ for example.

Feagin (2010; 2014) and Feagin and Ducey (2019) exemplify racial significations as social phenomena that have historically disenfranchised Black folks through what they call the white racial frame. A system of oppression that maintains white privilege and the embedded favorability for white folks by racial capitalism; societal institutions; policies; norms; and practices (Alexander, 2012; Calathes, 2017; Rahman, 2020). The context of the white racial frame (the frame), for example, is encountered through the perception of entities and translated as societal norms. Those societal norms manifest as physical artifacts and narratives that in-turn trigger a choice to react to the frame as a normative belief (Bicchieri & Muldoon, 2014; Feagin, 2010; Feagin, 2014), typically in conflict with disenfranchised members’ individual identities, values, attitudes, and beliefs.

And Lawler (2014) explains that such social phenomena, such as societal norms, play a significant part in the identity development of both the disenfranchised and the disenfranchising agents, usually exhibited because of unconsciously influenced reasoning processes. Many other authors (Edwards, 2007; Heitzeg, 2015; Hughey & Byrd, 2013; Jacobson, 2015; Kupchik & Catlaw, 2015; Wood, 2014) have conveyed content that adds context and dimension to this phrase, however, as a representation for the many disenfranchising policies and practices throughout American history (Alexander, 2012; Winfield, 2007).

As Feagin (2010) conveys, concerning associations with race, conflicting norms consist of the expression of “racial stereotypes, racial narratives and interpretations, racial images and language accents, racialized emotions; and inclinations to discriminate” (p.60) act as maintaining mechanisms of racist policies and practices. This brief presentation of the white racial frame exemplifies a portion of an exploration or research into the ‘…human identities…’ component of a racial project as a representation of the proposed activities of what would be considered the first stage of the proposed dismantling mission. Similarly, DiAngelo (2018) speaks to an example of a social institution that includes challenges to white folks and black folks simply talking about race related subjects and responsibilities. As she makes clear, openly discussing the sociohistoric disenfranchisement of race is essential between culturally different folks.

Another exploration consists of continuous research, learning, and conveyance gained knowledge of the natures of “the language of race,” internalization, and the intergenerational maintenance of race and racism as processes. Given what is learned processes of a dismantling mission would be development of strategies and tactics to engage oppressive practitioners, institutions, and policies toward disrupting racism. To effectively inculcate strategies and tactics intergenerationally through as many individuals, development of courses and curricula for intermediate through post-secondary pedagogy on racism. Just as important is the simultaneous engaging in legislative policy changes. The goal being to eliminate laws that disproportionately maintain policies such as these that criminalize black folks and principles that maintain phenomena such as racial capitalism, and the new Jim Crow (Alexander, 2012, e.g. the school-to-prison pipeline). And the last area for this dismantling mission would be the implementation of the determined tactics mused thus far and going forward.

REFERENCES

Alexander, M. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness (Revised ed.). New York: The New Press.

Crossman, A. (2014). Dual consciousness. Retrieved from http://sociology.about.com/od/D_Index/g/Dual-Consciousness.htm

DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for white people to talk about racism. Boston: Beacon Press.

Heiphetz, L., Spelke, E., & Banaji, M. (2014). The Formation of Belief-Based Social Preferences. Social Cognition, 32(1), 22–47.

Hughey, M. W., & Byrd, W. C. (2013). The souls of white folk beyond formation and structure: bound to identity. Ethnic & Racial Studies, 36(6), 974–981. doi:10.1080/01419870.2013.753153

Hull, S. H., & Seeley, C. L. (2010). High School to Postsecondary Education: Challenges of Transition. Mathematics Teacher, 103(6), 442–445.

Jackson III, B. (2012). Black identity development: Influences of culture and social oppression. In C. Wijeyesinghe & B. Jackson III (Eds.), New perspectives on racial identity development: Integrating emerging frameworks (Second ed., pp. 251). New York and London: New York University Press.

Jacobson, G. (2015). Racial Formation Theory and Systemic Racism in Hip-Hop Fans’ Perceptions. Sociological Forum, 30(3), 832–851. doi:10.1111/socf.12186

Kupchik, A., & Catlaw, T. J. (2015). Discipline and Participation: The Long-Term Effects of Suspension and School Security on the Political and Civic Engagement of Youth. Youth & Society, 47(1), 95–124. doi:10.1177/0044118x14544675

Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2015). Racial formation in the United States (Third ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York and London: The Guilford Press.

Winfield, A. (2007). Eugenics and education in America: Institutionalized racism and the implications of history, ideology, and memory. New York; Washington DC/Baltimore; Bern; Frankfurt am Main; Berlin; Brussels; Vienna; and Oxford: Peter Lang.

Wood, B. E. (2014). Researching the everyday: young people’s experiences and expressions of citizenship. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 27(2), 214–232. doi:10.1080/09518398.2012.737047