Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America

During Jim Crow, the myth of the Black rapist was a powerful story invoked to keep Black people subjected. In the New Racism period, new story lines have emerged to do the same thing. The major stories of this era include the phrases that provide the subheadings for this section.

“The Past Is the Past”

Since it fits well with the minimization of discrimination frame, “the past is the past” storyline is central to color-blind racism. The majority of both surveyed groups used this phrase (or its equivalent) when discussing affirmative action or government programs aimed at helping Black people. Some students stated that past actions don’t justify current programs to rectify them; one, Emily, worried about affirmative action overcorrecting and making white people victims of discrimination. The adults surveyed often stated that affirmative action was good for a while but then became bad. One, Jennifer, stated more plainly that affirmative action would not change the past. A younger part-time salesperson, Kate, said she did not think Black people in the same economic position as white people deserved extra help. Some even expressed outright anger at the idea of reparations.

Rhetorically, the author asks what is ideological about the story. It’s true that the past is the past, but the idea of the past gets to be defined and distorted by white people. Some argued the past meant merely slavery while others referred to slavery and Jim Crow. In the latter case, everyone surveyed was either alive during Jim Crow or a single generation from it, making it not so distant. Secondly, the effects of historic discrimination have greatly reduced the ability of Black people to accumulate wealth. Some studies suggest it would take hundreds of years for Black people to catch up with white people. And finally, believing the past is the past helps white people reinforce their opposition to race-based welfare or compensatory programs. Thus, the myth that the past is the past serves to reduce the trauma of history and the present realities.

“I Didn’t Own Any Slaves”

The “I didn’t own any slaves” story was told less often than the “the past is the past” one was but was often used in conjunction with it, frequently in discussions of affirmative action. For example, one student, Carol, said her generation did not inflict any pain on Black people, so any payment should come from the generation that did inflict the pain, but of course all the slaveowners from the past are dead. Another student actually used such phrasing to recover after a bout of incoherence. The adults surveyed used the story line in similar ways. Dina, an employment manager in her 30s, noted being offended at Black teenagers implying they deserve something because their ancestors were slaves when she had nothing do with it. Such storylines help white people stand on moral high ground while objecting to compensatory policies for Black people.

But again, the author asks, “What is ideological about this story line?” (217) It is true most white people did not participate directly in slavery, but the story ignores the fact that pro-white policies that existed after slavery (and still exist today) have had a positive multiplier effect on those deemed white.

“If Jews, Italians, and Irish Have Made It, How Come Blacks Have Not?”

The above popular story line was less commonly used by both sets of those surveyed, but more than a third of students agreed with the story line when it was asked in the survey. One student who did use it, Kim, inserted the fact that she was Jewish to invoke the idea that Jews have survived and thrived without complaints about what happened in the past. Overall, the adults were more likely to use this story line. Henrietta, a trans teacher in her 50s, noted she was once reverse discriminated against and added that the Irish, Italians, Polish, and Jews were all immigrants who lived in bad conditions but worked their ways out of poverty. However, these stories conflate the voluntary immigrants with the involuntary ones, and, as Stephen Steinberg pointed out in The Ethnic Myth, most immigrants were able to get a foothold on education or small amounts of capital, whereas Black people have been routinely denied access to the same industrial jobs that were offered to millions of immigrants. While all groups have started at the bottom, not all groups have had the bottom thrust upon them.

“I Did Not Get a Job (or a Promotion), or Was Not Admitted to a College, Because of a Minority”

This story line is extremely useful to white people, as it allows them to pretend they didn’t get something they wanted for a reason other than not being qualified for it. However, there are practically no actual cases of reverse discrimination filed in the court system let alone proven. Nevertheless, the story line persists and needs no precise information to be useful. Indeed, nearly a quarter of the students and a third of the adults interviewed used this story line. One student, Bob, referred to a friend of his brother who was denied law school admittance because, according to him, a less-deserving Black candidate was admitted. Bob swore this was a fact, which is a common tactic in such stories. The person is a friend of a friend and completely unnamed and yet proves Bob’s point that admissions ought to be based purely on merits. Kara, another student, sought to prove reverse discrimination was real and inserted the story line about a “slacker” Black classmate of hers who got into Notre Dame where she was waitlisted (221). She provided no corroborating evidence, of course.

Similarly, the adults offered stories about vague friends of friends being denied employment even when they tested better (without ever explaining what kind of test was required) or about people being told they were in the top three candidates but being denied a job simply because they were not minorities. One carpet installer in his 20s, Tony, used a very unusual version of the story to suggest than his girlfriend was denied a public health aid because she was white. Again, the stories were all equally vague. 

Testimonies are a more powerful story type than story lines are. To examine the similarities and narrative form as well their rhetorical functions, Bonilla-Silva grouped common testimonies into three categories, each identified by the subheadings below.

Stories of Interactions with Blacks

White people routinely offered two types of stories of interactions with Black people: a negative one used to justify a belief and a positive one used to signify that the speaker has good relationships with or views about Black People.

Negative Interactions with Blacks

Mickey, a student, told a story about a friend of his who was attacked while trying to buy marijuana in a rough neighborhood not far from his own. This allowed Mickey to safely testify later in his interview that Black people are “more aggressive” than white people. Leslie, another student, recounted a story about a time a Black child punched the principal of her school and that Black girls threatened to beat her up because she told on them for stealing $60 from her. The school was mixed (though mostly white), and she used the incident to argue that bussing students to integrate schools is not a good policy. Other students told stories of being accused of being racists by Black students, who they felt were overly sensitive.

Adults responded with similar negative stories. Bill, a retired teacher, remembered a Black church driving out a restaurant from his neighborhood because the restaurant became filled with Black people who ate too much food, making the business unprofitable. Bill used this story to validate his own beliefs that Black people are cheap overeaters who steal.

Positive Interactions with Blacks

The number of testimonies offering positive interactions was about equal to the number offering negative ones. But the positive ones had a goal of presenting the speaker in a positive light. Mary, a student, admitted her family was racist and described that she had a Black roommate one year who became one of her best friends. Of course, she doesn’t keep in touch with the student anymore, but she feels like they broke down racial barriers in their conversations, though Mary only commented about what she learned about the hair of Black women. Another student described the marriage between his cousin and a Black man, a man he learned to see as a “pretty neat person” who she should not “be made to feel saddened” for marrying (231). Yet in other questions this same student talked about the different smells of people of different races, despite the maturity he projected from his positive interaction with his cousin’s husband.

The adults offered a wider range of interactions but used the stories for the same purposes. John II, a semiretired house designer, described being saved by a Black officer in World War II. He used the term “colored” to describe him and discussed being more comfortable with white people and said he was against interracial marriage. To John II, Black and white people can be good to each other in war but should not live the same lives after war.

Stories of Disclosure of Knowledge of Someone Close Who is Racist

A number of students and adults disclosed information about someone close to them being racist. The narrative form of this information resembles a church confession because the speakers often spoke as though expected to be forgiven for their admissions. Indeed, the stories often have religious connotations as they involve seeking absolution because of the influence of a woman (like Mother Mary). They even use the formula of the trinity: confession, example, and self-absolution. For example, Emily, a student, described her father as a racist, and recalled a time she said something she had learned from him to her Black friend; Emily’s mother taught her that it was not okay to say that story. Similarly, adults (though they used this response type less than students) also used the trinity formula. One younger adult, a draft-dodger named Scott, recalled his dad not allowing him to bring home a Black friend, but Scott noted that was his dad, not him. He learned to respect people of all races from his mother, a devoted Catholic. Scott, however, had some of the most highly radicalized views on all topics. Others recounted stories of the jokes their racist grandmas would tell—jokes the speaker noted were personally offensive.

While these stories could be dismissed as simply, well, stories, Bonilla-Silva posits they have too much in common and occurred at too similar of points in his interviews to be coincidences. Instead, they seem to be what might be labeled defensive beliefs, especially since white racial progressives never used the trinity formula when describing racist family members.

Other Personal Stories

The final group of personal testimonies was less prevalent and more unique to individual tellers. The two that appeared most commonly were stories about someone close being involved with a minority or of someone having Black friends in the distant past. The “Someone Close to Me Married or Dated a Minority” version is a kindred spirit to the “Some of my best friends are…” framings described in Chapter 5. Bonilla-Silva does not extract generalizations from these stories and includes just two examples. The first is from Trudy, a late-20s salesperson, who noted her husband had a Black friend married to a white man. This allows her to say her view against interracial marriage while also noting she does not have a problem going to her husband’s friend’s house. The other version, the “I Used to Have Very Good Black Friends” testimony, came from people who could not say truthfully in the present that some of their best friends are Black. Here, Bonilla-Silva presents the example of Lucy, a part-time cook in her late 60s, who described not being friends with her Black coworkers then amended her answer later on to talk about a close friend she used to have who was Black and who—wouldn’t you know—had her life saved by Lucy’s suggestion that she should go back to school. This story awkwardly allows Lucy to pretend she is not racist, though her story is, as Bonilla-Silva notes, ripe with Jim Crow-style paternalism.