Is Systemic or Institutional Racism still a thing?

Even the hard right would have to agree there was at one time overt systemic racism with Jim Crow, Red Lining, etc. that held back the social and economic progress of African Americans.

Laws were overturned and laws put in place to even the playing field, but is it? The white right says yes, its all good, they can't get ahead because their daddy didn't marry their mom. The left says there is currently covert systemic racism that lives on in the criminal justice system, home loans, hiring, academics and housing.

 

I'm open to the systemic racism argument. I've just never heard a compelling case for it in 2021. Mostly I've heard "because redlining in the 1930's" or some such.

 

Affirmative action and government loans based on race are a good example.

 

The most racist political party by far is the dem party. Actually, there wasn't a voting choice for me in the poll since I trend to the middle.

 

Do a google search on redlining in 2021 and I think you'll see that it is still going on. Yes, laws were passed outlawing it, but countless lawsuits have been filed and won since the practice was 'abolished'.

 

I

Well I Google what I found is that banks market to wealthy neighborhoods as opposed to poor neighborhoods. Which....is commensense marketing when you are offering services that are a fit for people with expendable income. Is that the racial red lining you speak of?

 

Yes they are. ANY legislation that uses race as the foundation is, by definition, systemic, institutional racism.

 

There is no such thing as "covert systemic racism". Systemic racism is, by definition, racism that is codified into "the system". The system is well documented and publicly accessible, therefore cannot be covert.

Racist white cops abusing the color of law and their qualified immunity to beat down black people with impunity is not systemic racism. If it were, you would be able to find justification for their actions codified into the system.

I voted 'yes' in the poll, because there are absolutely examples of racism codified into the system. AA, tax incentives for minority owned business, etc, are all examples. Every person should be treated equally under the law. Any government penalty or benefit that is available to one group and not another based upon their race is systemic racism.

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-new-initiative-combat-redlining

Further down in the article details a current case - the redlining practices found and the actions against Trustmark National Bank

 

You realize that just means it's not systemic, its law breaking of the system?

 

A little introspection is in order.....you're a right-winger.

You're rationalizing. There are many "systems"; financial, academic, criminal justice, real estate.....and being racially biased covertly avoids legality issues for the most part. You are attempting to keep these out of your definition and redefine systemic racism as attempts at giving equity to a race that has not been given equal access for the last one hundred years since Emancipation. In other words you feel that an entire group of people who had rights taken away, were prevented from accumulating wealth through no fault of their own are not deserving in any help in catching up because that would be racist?

 

Is that racially redlining? Or did the banks choose to not invest resources into poor neighborhoods with high rental rate /low ownership rates? And because those neighborhoods are minority majority ....they were accused of red lining?.

I live in a predominately white, high poverty zip code. Grocery stores, banking services and shopping in general is non existent in my zip. I get very little direct mail while my Co- workers who live in more affluent areas, get all sorts of offers from banks, carpeting Stores, shops....I actually ask them to bring in their junk mail so I can pilfer through it for good deals..

Do you think businesses have the right to target affluent zip codes for marketing or resource investment? Or are they obligated to waste their money and resources?

 

Absolutely.

 

That poster isn't rationalizing. That type is only concerned with keeping their automatic privilege so any efforts to balance our clearly racist and sexist society causes them to clutch their pearls. They have no way of identifying or processing racism because that unspoken "rule" keeps them on top and everyone else beneath them or they are the one doing the tiered "equality". Why would they want to acknowledge it?

 

The correct word is perspective not introspection...A little perspective should not be in order for you. You're far left so by your political perspective, most political ideologies are to the right of you.

BTW, when definitions are devised, they're absolute definitions and not definitions based on perspective. For example, one can't use the phrase 'in close proximity' in the definition of Tijuana, Mexico, for example, even though one might live in San Diego, California.

EDIT: And I'm a centrist. In other words, I'm equally enthusiastic with some aspects of capitalism and disgusted with some aspects of capitalism. I use the absolute definition for righty and lefty while you use the perspective (and not absolute) definition for righty and lefty.

 

So, no introspection.
Your statements are all right-wing tropes like: "the most racist political party by far is the dem party", Democrats "all are socialist", "Blacks as a whole expect reparations and won't work for successes", "Black leaders and influencers are all socialist". Those are not "centrist" positions and wrong.

In my city a Black woman had her home appraised twice and she thought both estimates were too low, so she removed family pictures and African art for a third appraisal and had a white male friend stand in as her brother to greet the appraiser and the estimate was double the other two. This may sound like anecdotal evidence, but it is actually the trend as shown here.

 

Oh I absolutely believes that happens. Real Estate is a fun section of the economy to gauge how the market measures race. White areas are more expensive than Black areas, even if the income levels and property are equivalent, because White people want to live in white areas, and Black people want to live in white areas, but virtually no one but recent immigrants and other Blacks will move into Black areas. Price is a function of demand and that's how White areas are pricier than Black areas, all other things being equal.

But that's not systemic racism, that's individuals voting with their dollars.

 

The dem party is obsessed with racism.

 

You either didn't read or understand the citation.

And yet another right-wing comment.

 

I really don't care what a far-left radical thinks.

 

yes, some blacks favor blacks, some whites favor whites, most people don't care about skin color, but we have all seen it

 

Your citation seemed to confirm what I said.

In any case, not systemic racism.

 

Another case of ideology overwhelming reason.
The woman got double the estimate when the seller was thought white. Same house, same predominantly black neighborhood and you don't see a racial bias? If you do, why are you blowing it off? It is basically shorting black home sellers because of their race and the systemic part was in the citation.....

The new study finds that the racial composition of a neighborhood was an even "stronger determinant" of a home's appraised value in 2015 than it was in 1980, to Black homeowners’ increasing disadvantage.
Rather than explaining the racial inequity as a vestige of historic segregation, the study finds more culpability in a method used to calculate appraisals today, the “sales comparison approach,” which determines a home’s appraised value by looking at the prices of other similar homes that were recently sold from the same neighborhood.
But what makes this method problematic, according to the study, is that it basically grandfathers in racist home pricing that existed before fair housing legislation.

In other words, if an appraiser is calculating the value of a home in a Black neighborhood by comparing it to houses recently sold around it, then chances are she is comparing it to other Black-owned houses that, because of the legacy of segregation, have handicapped values in the market compared to similar homes in white communities appraised at higher prices. The unfairly valued prices of homes in Black neighborhoods before the 1970s thus serves as the baseline for how homes are appraised and priced today.

 

You clearly didn't read what I posted in #17. I absolutely agreed that race is a factor in the real estate market. You seem to be trying to reiterate what you already posted as if I didn't understand your post on real estate appraisals. I did and agreed with it. But you started this thread about systemic racism and that has nothing to do with the racial disparities in the real estate market. Black homes are worth less on the market because the market for homes in black neighborhoods is a lot softer than white neighborhoods, everyone wants to move to white neighborhoods, and few want to move to black ones. That's not rocket science or systemic racism, it's a function of the real estate market.

 

You obviously didn't understand it or just in denial. Racial disparity is baked into the system of home appraisals, an artifact of historic redlining, making it a racially systemic problem of the home appraisal industry, as demonstrated by my example. A racist view that whites want to live with whites and blacks with blacks and black houses are worth less is nonsense.