Steve, "systemic racism" came up in this convo. Have you written about that?
I find the usage of that term to often seem, well, lazy and fuzzy. It's not that there is nothing one might put in that box, but I've never seen the examples justify the degree of centrality and ubiquity ascribed to it, so it often seems like a conveniently for…
Steve, "systemic racism" came up in this convo. Have you written about that?
I find the usage of that term to often seem, well, lazy and fuzzy. It's not that there is nothing one might put in that box, but I've never seen the examples justify the degree of centrality and ubiquity ascribed to it, so it often seems like a conveniently formless and mostly invisible bogeyman. It's impossible to assign a magnitude to it, or to measure it, or tell if it's increasing or decreasing. It explains everything by explaining nothing. People will give a definition sometimes, but then use the term in ways inconsistent with that.
Or it's used like Kendi's concept of racism - any different outcome can only be explained by discrimination and (systemic) racism, because to admit that not all people make the same use of a given opportunity would be to offend the gods of strict egalitarianism. It's "the system's" fault!
But if you have found more meaning to the term, I would listen. Or if you have your own deconstruction it would be interesting to compare.
"Steve, "systemic racism" came up in this convo. Have you written about that?"
No, I've never written specifically about it. I think people who are arguing in good faith use terms like "systemic racism," to describe the complex interactions of racism-like things that impact black people or perceptions of black people. Racism that isn't attributable to overt anti-black sentiment or even individual actions, but kind of underlying societal norms.
One of my favourite examples of this is the music and film industry. Black people are overwhelmingly more likely to be portrayed as criminals and thugs and gangsters in the films and on TV. The only music where it's appropriate to talk about drug abuse and crime and murder is "black" music. Advertisers and corporate sponsors don't put their money behind this kind of rhetoric for people of any other skin colour. But it ingrains those stereotypes about black people ever more deeply into the public psyche. It's hard to measure that effect statistically, but anybody who claims it doesn't have an effect isn't a serious person.
But yeah, I don't use the term unless the person I'm talking to uses it, and especially not in my writing, because it's almost uselessly vague. And the people who *aren't* arguing in good faith use it precisely because of that vagueness. It allows them to complain without being specific.
One of the music genera that I frequently listen to is the blues. Some of the older stuff has overtly cringeworthy subject matter. "Good morning little schoolgirl" and songs with reference to backdoor midnight creping. But at the same time "she was just seventeen, and you know just what I mean" and "Hey Joe" crossed color lines. I also listen to old-time music, a blend of white and black, with murder ballads like "Pretty Polly" and "The Banks of the Ohio." The Motown music of my teens was and is much loved across the races. Law breaking stuff, "Copperhead Road" and the drug music of the 70s was white bands. Music seems far more universal than movies to me and for that I am thankful.
I think that the Chess Brothers era of "race music" divided from "white music" was more about money than musical taste, though I may have a more liberal view of music than many. SiriusXM and Spotify are Godsends for good music not found on your local top 40 FM dial.
Top 40 was always a wasteland except for a few precious years in late 60s / early 70s. The Guess Who are still good. “No Time,” “ American Woman.” Those parallel fifths in the vocals were like synthesizers.
I'm a big fan of Ry Cooder. On his album "Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down" in "John Lee Hooker for President" he channels John Lee Hooker perfectly. Everything on the album is profound in the way he can sing about social issues without venom which I consider to be activism done right. https://open.spotify.com/album/3IVWmaFJtcx2awW1QPV8GD
One point of clarification: are you saying that you think systemic racism only involves Blacks? Or was that just an example?
> "Black people are overwhelmingly more likely to be portrayed as criminals and thugs and gangsters in the films and on TV. "
Gotcha.
I wonder how quantitatively true that is in recent films and TV? (Ie: while I accept that your example likely has been true historically, would it still be true today - to what quantitative degree would that form of systemic racism still be operative in recent films).
For example, if one were to go through Netflix or Amazon originals and catalog their films, to what degree would that still be true? It would be interesting if some academic wanted to assess this. (Although I suspect that it would likely be easier to publish if the answer was 'to a large degree'; if it was found to no longer have much weight, that might not fit The Narrative)
I think there could be questions of whether to count crime dramas set in urban areas. Would it be racist if some of the cops/detectives are Black and a good portion of the criminals are Black, or would that reflect reality in, say, Baltimore or Philly or whereever the film/TV series was set?
However, if science fiction or a films about rural life or sports or something were clearly showing Blacks overwhemingly as the bad guys or the thugs, that should definitely count. And I honestly don't know what the result would be.
"One point of clarification: are you saying that you think systemic racism only involves Blacks?"
No, definitely not. There are clear examples of systemic racism against white people and even moreso, Asian people today. But I do think that, given America's history, the people most affected by "systemic racism" are most likely to be black.
But a) I'd say the discrimination in the case of non-black people hasn't been as severe, b) impact takes time to accrue and the discrimination has obviously targeted black people for longer, and c) there are more examples of positive discrimination for white people than for black people to act as a counterbalance.
The example of this that always makes me chuckle is that affirmative action, almost universally seen as positive discrimination for black people (which indeed it is) has still benefited white women more than any other group (https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/).
As for films, yeah, it's tricky. I don't have data to support this, but if anything, I feel as if there are more films coming out at the moment that portray black people as criminals or on the fringes, because it jibes nicely with the "America is indelibly racist and life as a black person is always and everywhere a battle for survival" narrative.
Even "positive" depictions of black people being needlessly harassed by the police often show us looking angry and embattled, wearing hoodies and sagging jeans because that's just how black people dress and shouldn't be viewed as a sign of criminality by the police.
I'm still infuriated by the "gritty" reboot of the Fresh Prince of Bel Air. That took a funny, universally positive representation of black people and turned it into a violence and drug fuelled piece of oppression porn.
Steve, "systemic racism" came up in this convo. Have you written about that?
I find the usage of that term to often seem, well, lazy and fuzzy. It's not that there is nothing one might put in that box, but I've never seen the examples justify the degree of centrality and ubiquity ascribed to it, so it often seems like a conveniently formless and mostly invisible bogeyman. It's impossible to assign a magnitude to it, or to measure it, or tell if it's increasing or decreasing. It explains everything by explaining nothing. People will give a definition sometimes, but then use the term in ways inconsistent with that.
Or it's used like Kendi's concept of racism - any different outcome can only be explained by discrimination and (systemic) racism, because to admit that not all people make the same use of a given opportunity would be to offend the gods of strict egalitarianism. It's "the system's" fault!
But if you have found more meaning to the term, I would listen. Or if you have your own deconstruction it would be interesting to compare.
"Steve, "systemic racism" came up in this convo. Have you written about that?"
No, I've never written specifically about it. I think people who are arguing in good faith use terms like "systemic racism," to describe the complex interactions of racism-like things that impact black people or perceptions of black people. Racism that isn't attributable to overt anti-black sentiment or even individual actions, but kind of underlying societal norms.
One of my favourite examples of this is the music and film industry. Black people are overwhelmingly more likely to be portrayed as criminals and thugs and gangsters in the films and on TV. The only music where it's appropriate to talk about drug abuse and crime and murder is "black" music. Advertisers and corporate sponsors don't put their money behind this kind of rhetoric for people of any other skin colour. But it ingrains those stereotypes about black people ever more deeply into the public psyche. It's hard to measure that effect statistically, but anybody who claims it doesn't have an effect isn't a serious person.
But yeah, I don't use the term unless the person I'm talking to uses it, and especially not in my writing, because it's almost uselessly vague. And the people who *aren't* arguing in good faith use it precisely because of that vagueness. It allows them to complain without being specific.
One of the music genera that I frequently listen to is the blues. Some of the older stuff has overtly cringeworthy subject matter. "Good morning little schoolgirl" and songs with reference to backdoor midnight creping. But at the same time "she was just seventeen, and you know just what I mean" and "Hey Joe" crossed color lines. I also listen to old-time music, a blend of white and black, with murder ballads like "Pretty Polly" and "The Banks of the Ohio." The Motown music of my teens was and is much loved across the races. Law breaking stuff, "Copperhead Road" and the drug music of the 70s was white bands. Music seems far more universal than movies to me and for that I am thankful.
I think that the Chess Brothers era of "race music" divided from "white music" was more about money than musical taste, though I may have a more liberal view of music than many. SiriusXM and Spotify are Godsends for good music not found on your local top 40 FM dial.
Dock of the Bay still gives me chills
Light My Fire
The Age of Aquarius
I played that just two days ago, first time in 50 years.
We’ve lost so much...
Top 40 was always a wasteland except for a few precious years in late 60s / early 70s. The Guess Who are still good. “No Time,” “ American Woman.” Those parallel fifths in the vocals were like synthesizers.
I'm a big fan of Ry Cooder. On his album "Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down" in "John Lee Hooker for President" he channels John Lee Hooker perfectly. Everything on the album is profound in the way he can sing about social issues without venom which I consider to be activism done right. https://open.spotify.com/album/3IVWmaFJtcx2awW1QPV8GD
Thanks for your thoughts on the matter.
One point of clarification: are you saying that you think systemic racism only involves Blacks? Or was that just an example?
> "Black people are overwhelmingly more likely to be portrayed as criminals and thugs and gangsters in the films and on TV. "
Gotcha.
I wonder how quantitatively true that is in recent films and TV? (Ie: while I accept that your example likely has been true historically, would it still be true today - to what quantitative degree would that form of systemic racism still be operative in recent films).
For example, if one were to go through Netflix or Amazon originals and catalog their films, to what degree would that still be true? It would be interesting if some academic wanted to assess this. (Although I suspect that it would likely be easier to publish if the answer was 'to a large degree'; if it was found to no longer have much weight, that might not fit The Narrative)
I think there could be questions of whether to count crime dramas set in urban areas. Would it be racist if some of the cops/detectives are Black and a good portion of the criminals are Black, or would that reflect reality in, say, Baltimore or Philly or whereever the film/TV series was set?
However, if science fiction or a films about rural life or sports or something were clearly showing Blacks overwhemingly as the bad guys or the thugs, that should definitely count. And I honestly don't know what the result would be.
"One point of clarification: are you saying that you think systemic racism only involves Blacks?"
No, definitely not. There are clear examples of systemic racism against white people and even moreso, Asian people today. But I do think that, given America's history, the people most affected by "systemic racism" are most likely to be black.
But a) I'd say the discrimination in the case of non-black people hasn't been as severe, b) impact takes time to accrue and the discrimination has obviously targeted black people for longer, and c) there are more examples of positive discrimination for white people than for black people to act as a counterbalance.
The example of this that always makes me chuckle is that affirmative action, almost universally seen as positive discrimination for black people (which indeed it is) has still benefited white women more than any other group (https://time.com/4884132/affirmative-action-civil-rights-white-women/).
As for films, yeah, it's tricky. I don't have data to support this, but if anything, I feel as if there are more films coming out at the moment that portray black people as criminals or on the fringes, because it jibes nicely with the "America is indelibly racist and life as a black person is always and everywhere a battle for survival" narrative.
Even "positive" depictions of black people being needlessly harassed by the police often show us looking angry and embattled, wearing hoodies and sagging jeans because that's just how black people dress and shouldn't be viewed as a sign of criminality by the police.
I'm still infuriated by the "gritty" reboot of the Fresh Prince of Bel Air. That took a funny, universally positive representation of black people and turned it into a violence and drug fuelled piece of oppression porn.