An Argument for What Racism Is: A Brief

The term “racism,” in association with questions of democracy and individual opportunity, has risen into the primary weltanschauung, or perceived ways of the world, of the American political and social psyches as represented by the September 12, 2019 Democratic Debate, political organizations, political media, and large foundations (e.g. Black Lives Matter; Morning Joe/MSNBC; W.T. Grant Foundation; Central Indiana Community Foundation). Given this weltanschauung, the basis for this reflection is born in association with how the perceptions and political activations of young adult Black men may be affected. Said another way, when presented with the term “racism,” how does engagement with that term affect how social constructs influence young adult Black men’s’ perceptions and subsequent engagement with the “political” (Miller, 1980)? As Miller (1980) conveys,

The meaning of "political" is not just a problem for semantics. It is a question that political scientists must confront at the outset of inquiry, for inquiry in any science "can properly begin only after one has specified in some way, vaguely and naively, as it may be, the kind of thing he intends to investigate. (p.56)

Miller (1980) explains a consideration of a distinction to keep in-mind as one analyzes how one individual comes to understand and perceive a subject or object (i.e. the conception of political; politics, politic; etc.) term is potentially different from another. In a recent study, young adult Black men were found to process meaning and perceptions of ‘politics’ or related term to be a fluid combination of their and understandings of three societal phenomena: 1) the capacity and motivation to help others reciprocally; 2) said ‘help’ is drawn most closely through an association with others of similar cultural experiences, referred to as their ‘community’; and 3) whereas there is a shared social experience among ‘the community’ that has presented exclusionary practices for which some level of resistance is revealed (Crayton, 2019). Given the third phenomenon and the purpose for this article, racism represents the exclusionary practices that shall be considered further. To reify, from a political perspective, the three phenomena are simultaneous and fluid in the meaning and decision-making processes of ‘racism’ for the young adult Black men (YABM) of the study from which this article shall draw from.

Miles and Brown (2003) advise that such analyses should first be clear that a consistent understanding of the term racism, and its intended nature and associations should be established. Ryan and Deci (2017), speaking to bases for individual motivations and perceptions advise that “pervasive cultural norms or economic structures present ‘invisible’ or implicit values, constraints, and affordances, (are) then reflected in more proximal social conditions and conveyed by socializing agents” (p.562).

Thought of from another perspective, speaking from a perspective of satisfaction of basic psychological needs, they are advising that values, constraints, and concordances toward acting are associated with encounters with social conditions including engagement with social structures, and socializing agents of institutions (Omi & Winant, 2015; Ryan & Deci, 2017). But what if the specific pervasive or its’ proximal social conditions are represented merely when a YABM associates either of these encounters as prompted by the term “racism” through language or another social construct?

The balance of the article consist of the following subsections: What is Racism; Racism is an ideology; The racism weltanschauung as coherent and incoherent phenomena; Methods; Findings; Discussion; and Conclusion. The What is Racism? subsection will present a basis for what racism is and what it is not in relation to the purpose of the article. The content establishes a position from which the article has engaged the relationship between the term and conception of racism and perceptions by YABM. A premise for the balance of the articles purpose and argument. The next subsection, Racism is an ideology, initiates the heart of the argument for how the YABM of the study has represented a process through which he comes to make meaning and decisions, including what prompts his perceptions.

The racism weltanschauung as coherent and incoherent phenomena presents an explanation for the relationships among ‘the ways of the world’ related to racism. Specifically, a presentation of the significance for how the prejudices and exclusionary practices of the weltenschauung effect the participant YABM. And to finalize the article, the familiar subsections including a Methods; Findings; Discussion; and Conclusion are presented. The general overall purpose is to use the reflections of the participants to provide a basis from which to exemplify the argument for a mutual understanding of racism. Generally, that racism should be understood as an ideology, while also gaining additional knowledge about how these young men come to perceive ‘the political’ when it comes to the phenomena of racism.

What is Racism?

Racism is not some static conception reflecting merely xenophobic feelings or hierarchical mindsets among individuals (Miles & Brown, 2003). Miles and Brown (2003) provide a basis from which to analyze engagement with the term, racism. They advise that such analyses should incorporate approaches that consider the participating individual’s basic psychological needs (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Specifically, an incorporation of what is exhibited to be the YABMs respective ideological perspectives, incorporating said needs and identities, and “[individually based] specific representational characteristics that must exist to warrant description as racism” (Miles & Brown, 2003, p.103) toward coming to perceive social constructs and processes. In a recent study, participating YABMs when referring to ‘the political’ did not use the term ‘racism’ when associating reflected responses to questions about that which is understood as political in nature (Crayton, 2019; Miles & Brown, 2003). However, implications of the conception were prevalent throughout the YABMs’ respective reflective responses.

The characteristic of perceiving preconceived notions as primary influencers upon those reflective responses and perceptions of political activations in a recent study reveal evidence of further representational characteristics of ‘racism’ as pervasive and proximal social influencers of YABMs’ perceptions (Crayton, 2019). Those influencers revealed through elaboration upon preconceived notions was used explicitly or via synonymous terminology among YABM participants in association with being perceived by folks as criminals merely based from some form of xenophobic or phenotypic observations of other folks (Awokoya, 2012; Heitzeg, 2015; Hibbing, Smith, Alford, 2014). Although the term racism was not used explicitly in association with what was conveyed as the influence of these preconceived notions due to the YABMs perceived race, these associations reveal that these characteristics must be considered in more detail in any analysis of individual perceptions (Miles & Brown, 2003).

Miles and Brown (2003) would quickly warn that this common understanding in association with ‘race’, or associated terms, should not stand alone as one embarks upon attempting to understand the nature of the term as a social construct. For example, the more explicit elaborations upon preconceived notions in association were expressed in racial terms became evident through two general conditions, while generally describing themselves and as there were descriptions offered to further explain meaning for use of an associated term (Crayton, 2019). Ryan and Deci (2017) and Omi and Winant (2015) would associate such conditional assignments with the development and incorporation of an individual’s identity and characteristic political activations thereof. The examination going forward will involve analyses specifically that reflects: 1) individual ideology; 2) individual interpretations of “less coherent assembly of stereotypes, images, attributions, and explanations that are constructed and employed to negotiate everyday life,” and that 3) “racism refracts in thought certain observed regularities, and constructs a casual interpretation that can be presented as consistent with those regularities and that constitutes a solution to perceived problems” (Miles & Brown, 2003, pp.104-105).

Racism is an ideology.

Heywood (2003) explains various versions and evolutions of the term, ideology. For the purposes of this article, ideology is through the Gramscian sense. The nature of ideology, for the purposes of this article, are most closely associated with the following concept and weltanschauung:

Gramsci ([1935] 1971) argued that the capitalist class system is upheld not simply by unequal economic and political power, but by what he termed the ‘hegemony’ of bourgeois ideas and theories. Hegemony means leadership or domination, and in the sense of ideological hegemony it refers to the capacity of bourgeois ideas to displace rival views and become, in effect, the commonsense of the age…. This bourgeois hegemony, Gramsci insisted, could only be challenged at the political and intellectual level, which means through the establishment of a rival ‘proletarian hegemony’, based on socialist principles, values and theories. (Heywood, 2003, p.7)

As exemplified by Heywood (2003) here, the portion of the weltanschauung (hegemony) that relates to ‘racism’, it is ideological in nature and practice (Miles & Brown, 2006). It consists of an individual’s beliefs, values, attitudes, and cultural influences and the meaning and decision-making processes by which the YABM react to the world – a racism ideology (Duckitt & Sibley, 2010; Hibbing, Smith, & Alford, 2014; Miles & Brown, 2003). In terms of the nature of racism being a noun and ideological in nature, DiAngelo (2018) argues that it is not “really possible to grow up in the United States or spend any significant time here – or any other culture with a history of Western colonization – without developing opinions on racism. And white people’s opinions on racism tend to be strong” (pp.1-2). The association between thinking ideologically is prevalent throughout sociological literature in terms of individual political thinking (Ball, Dagger, O'Neill, 2014; Duckitt & Sibley, 2010).

Miles and Brown (2003) argue definitively that racism should be conceptualized and understood as an ideology rather than some static function of human understanding or function. Why? Primarily, because as a social construct, its nature is a signifier of ‘racism’ “is not independent of other social features and it is ‘not a static phenomenon’ (and that its’ conceptualization is) continuous, yet fluid phenomenon” (p.6). As conveyed, substantiate their argument by advising that the social construct and conceptualization of racism is not some set xenophobic or phenotypic identifier, rather a collective of social phenomena adopted as a way of making meaning in individual decision-making processes. Moreover, Miles and Brown (2003) argue that racism is a social construct that is adopted as a causal characteristic of the weltanschauung, albeit based on false understandings and the Walker (2019) version of DuBois’ (1897) double consciousness.

Walker’s (2019) version is an elaborated form of DuBois’ original conception in that it includes the dynamic phenomena of power as a critical proportion to that exclusionary feeling that double consciousness imbues upon the YABM a characteristic of the weltanschauung.

Miles and Brown (2003) represent this weltanschauung when stating that its’ basis represents human beings and social relations, in a distorted manner while never denying that, qua ideology, racism can be simultaneously deeply embedded in the contemporary Weltanschauung and the focus of the struggle on the part of those who challenge its hegemony. (p.9)

In other words, for the YABM, the ideology or belief processes built through historical, cultural, political, representational and economic experiences for perceiving and reacting to the current social conditions consist of exclusionary phenomena that produce forces of resistance for him. Brave and Sylva (2007) and Scott (1992) exemplify the literature in conveying that forms of resistance are common when interacting with hegemonic conditions that present some form of conflict for an individual. Lukes (2005) advises, moreover, that hegemonic social conditions consist of varying levels of power that oppose societal resistance, either individual or as a collective. Walker (2019) argues for an extension of an understanding of the effects of double consciousness as a social influence that appears as power over individual YABMs. They represent their distinction from DuBois’ double consciousness through an introduction of elements of power. As they state,

For an identity group, X, to claim double consciousness, they must be an oppressed group with an oppressor, Y. If Y does not have power (be that political, social, or economical) over X, X cannot claim double consciousness. This is because Y’s prejudice and power gives them the capability to cause tangible consequences for X. So, whites (as Y) would not have a claim to double consciousness even though a definition of whiteness would exist. (p.122)

Walkers’ (2019) elaboration of DuBois’ conception of double consciousness would require evidence that some tangible consequence results from a decision made by the YABM. Lukes (2005) elaborates on such characteristics of ideological processing and decision-making in term s of power. Carmichael (2018) would cosign in that at a point in his musings he exclaimed that “racism is not a question of attitude; it's a question of power” (Carmichael, 2018, p.1). For Lukes (2005), a consideration of power is revealed through a form of domination over folks in terms of affecting folks’ decision-making processes. He adds that characteristics of an influence of power has three dimensions that evidence institutional power as part of the individual decision-making process.

Ideologically, the YABMs of the study exhibited characteristics of this double consciousness as an influencer of their respective thinking and political activations. These ideological thinking processes reflected another characteristic of the YABMs perceptions labeled racialisation (Miles & Brown, 2003). This conception of racialisation is identified as part of the causal thinking processes by which the YABMs categorize the understanding of racial related social constructs has him thinking in terms of associating himself with being “other” as a part of his identity (Artiles, 2011; Eberhardt, 2019; Miles & Brown, 2003). When experiences include exclusionary practices associated with being ‘othered’ by some agent or product of the weltanschauung, it accentuates the thought processes, including the initiating perception of the phenomena.

It is here where the matter complicates further in that coming to understand racism as an ideology is equivocated with the conceptualization and ideologies of nationalism, or, belonging to a ‘nation’ like the Cherokee or Blackfoot nations of native Americans (Miles & Brown, 2003). It is this equivocation to an individual feeling a sense of belonging to a group of folks who share “historical, cultural, political and other distinguishing factors of a ‘nation’ are ultimately subsumed under the idea of ‘race’” (Miles & Brown, 2003, p.10) and the associations assigned to the term. The historical, cultural, and political associations of the YABMs serving as bases for certain perceptions and satisfaction of basic psychological needs (Ryan & Deci, 2017).

The historical, cultural, and political associations include ‘race’ as an idiom adopted by the YABM to exemplify resistance or inner conflict produced through the double consciousness (Brave & Sylva, 2007; Scott, 1992). The resistance presents throughout the reflective responses of the YABM study participants as a result of a sense of belonging to a ‘nation’ that is presumed to be ‘other than’ a dominant ‘nation’ exacerbated through conditions such as whiteness as presented in the weltanschauung of American society as reflected upon by the YABMs of the study (Crayton, 2019; Duncan & McCoy, 2007; Heitzeg, 2015; Lukes, 2005). Coming to mind, then, is the cooccurring reemergence of white nationalism in the same weltanschauung. The coemergence of the concerns with racism and exhibitions of white nationalism becomes another point-for-consideration perhaps for another study.

Miles and Brown (2003) further explain that this racialisation weltanschauung “presupposes a process of racialisation but is differentiated from that process by its explicitly negative evaluative component” (p.104). Artiles (2011) links such categorizations of difference to the educational system by which the YABMs are ‘conditioned through the negative aspects of ‘othering’, for example. The process then reveals additional characteristics of individual thinking that exposes constructs that destabilizes his causal bases for acting to satisfy his own basic psychological needs for those that are dictated through the conditioning of pervasive and proximal (i.e. exclusionary practices and policies) social constructs (Walker, 2019).

The three dimensions process includes the presentation of the social influence into the decision-making process in the first place; evidence for an agenda that sets up a causal decision; and ultimately altering one’s decision as a ‘tangible consequence’ of a conditioned understanding of the social constructs (Lukes, 2005; Walker, 2019). Whereas ‘tangible consequences’ are represented by the YABMs’ respective identities and behavioral processes that effect his respective ideological perspective and making sense of his world experience (Miles & Brown, 2003; Ryan & Deci, 2017). Specifically, when the economic, political and culturally representational aspects of his meaning and decision-making processes are affected by exclusionary practices of racism. Those consequences could be due to both founded (i.e. factual; positive; coherent) and non-founded (i.e. nonfactual; negative; incoherent) in nature, but influential upon a YABM nonetheless (Miles & Brown, 2003).

The racism weltanschauung as coherent and incoherent phenomena.

The ideology of racism holds both coherent and incoherent characteristics that provide knowledge for the participants’ negotiating life (Miles & Brown, 2003). Whereas the coherent portion of the nature of racism as ideology is based from the causal relationships of the process of meaning and decision-making. And the incoherent portion of the meaning and decision- making process for a YABM consists of the prejudices and exclusionary social practices based from the “assembly of stereotypes, images, attributions, and explanations that are constructed and employed to negotiate everyday life” (Miles & Brown, 2003), p.104). As further consideration of social practices go, then, so also the consideration of institutions closely follows (Hodgson, 2006).

Institutions are dynamically intertwined entities within a societal weltanschauung (Hodgson, 2006; Searle, 1995). Hodgson (2006) establish that “institutions are the kinds of structures that matter most in the social realm: they make up the stuff of social life (and defined) as systems of established and prevalent social rules that structure social interactions” (p.2). And it is habit that acts as a mechanism by which institutions, its agents, rules and practices realize influence over individuals (Hodgson, 2006). For example, when an individual conveys that there has been a racist act, that equates to some exclusionary practice, such as reference to some somatic or some attributed characteristic (positive or negative in intent) to a group, because of its basis in some physical association in identifying the ‘other’, as products of the institution of racism.

A commonality of experiencing an exclusionary practice becomes habituated (i.e. acquisition of habit) and therefore maintaining the institution because of ‘automated’ reactions to said racist practice. Contributing further to their explanation for the nature of racism as institution, Miles and Brown (2003) include that “racism is embodied in exclusionary practices or in a formally non-racialised discourse” while also signifying “exclusionary practices that result in disadvantage for racialised groups cannot be assumed to be determined wholly or in part by racism” (p.112).

A final characteristic of coming to understand racism as an ideology of individuals and its coherency is that it allows for an assignment of, perception of, and reaction to experienced regularities that have seemed to be acceptable resolution to perceived problems of a YABM (Miles & Brown, 2003). They elaborate upon what they are arguing through including regularities as a descriptor for causal behavior, by associating the nature of the mechanism consisting of the class assignment of the individual. In other words, social class also plays into the processes as well. As presented a short time ago, speaking to social class (i.e. economic, political, and representational) indicates that there is tangible consequence at-play for YABMs whereas there are recognized regularities and potentially habituated problem-solving exercise that he employs.

Contributing to the approach and interpretations of the YABMs’ respective perceptions of a given encounter with racism and the associated habituated response. Although there may be a habituated response, elements of resistance are ever potentially presented in the processes like those prompted by feelings of Walker’s (2019) double consciousness, that would also play into his perceptions and response. As Miles and Brown (2003) suggest, those potential resistant responses would involve a historically comparable experience; his specific “class interests and strategies, different strategies (learned) of resistance, and different material and cultural contexts” (p.171). Each simultaneously contributing to the meaning making, decision-making, perceptions of, and responses to social constructs like those presented by racism.