The Declining Importance of Race in America
Back in the 1950s, most Americans believed that there were three main races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. They were identified with geographical regions. These races were thought to be similar to breeds of dogs or horses. Back in the 1950s, the vast majority of Americans believed that Caucasoids were a superior breed of human being. Caucasoids were thought to be better looking, better athletes, better soldiers, more intelligent, more disciplined, more moral, etc., etc. The main basis for this belief was that by the 1950s, the “white race,” the Caucasoids, had dominated the entire planet for more than 200 years.
Anti-miscegenation laws that prohibited interracial marriage were thought to be necessary to prevent the dilution of the Caucasoid breed by, especially, the Negroid breed. Many of these laws dated from colonial times. They were common in many states, not just in the slave states. Although some states repealed these laws after the Civil War, these laws were not challenged in court until after the Second World War.
“Prior to the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Perez v. Sharp (1948), no court in the United States had ever struck down a ban on interracial marriage. In 1967, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Loving v. Virginia that anti- miscegenation laws are unconstitutional.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti- miscegenation_laws_in_the_United_States. See map.
Currently, the idea of the races as breeds of human beings has become untenable. A major reason is the discovery of DNA and our much greater knowledge of human descent. We know now that the human species originated only in Africa and then spread around the world. Every human being has black ancestors. All of us are of mixed “race.” Most of us are part Neanderthal, another species entirely. Race seems to come down to nothing but skin color. The new racism is “whites” versus “people of color.”
The difference between classic racism, racism based on breeds of human beings, and the new racism can be illustrated by the following example. With classic racism, if we meet a person with white skin, and then discover that the person has a black grandparent, we deny that that person is white. He or she is a black person passing as white. He or she is a quadroon. Under the past anti-miscegenation laws of many states, it would have been illegal for that person to marry another white person.
Under the new racism of “whites” versus “people of color,” the existence of the black grandparent makes no difference to the “race” of a person with white skin. That person is white because he or she has white skin. He or she enjoys “white privilege.” He or she is not stopped by cops or followed through department stores.
The new racism of “whites” versus “people of color” seems to me a step towards the elimination of all racism. Differences in skin color are a fragile basis for assertions of “racial” superiority. Why not hair color or eye color? And there are too many examples, even in America, of people with darker skin excelling at one thing or another. Nigerian- Americans are the most educated ethnic group in the United States. Indian-Americans from India are the richest ethnic group in the United States.
It is hard to be a racist if there are no “races” in the classic sense of breeds of human beings. Instances of “racism” are more likely to be cultural clashes of one or sort of another, disagreements over religion, or economics, or politics.
To see that race is not important as it once was, ask any young person whether they would rather be a wealthy “person of color” or a poor White, a good looking “person of color” or an ugly White, a smart “person of color” or a dumb White, or an educated “person of color” or an uneducated White. In the 1950s, almost all Caucasoids would have chosen the White options. Back then, it was thought by most Caucasoids that it was better to be a poor, ugly, dumb, uneducated Caucasoid than to be a Negroid of any sort. Now that Caucasoids and Negroids no long exist as separate breeds of human beings, most young Americans would rather be a “person of color” who is rich, or good looking, or smart, or educated, than be a person with white skin and be poor, or ugly, or dumb, or uneducated.
For most young Americans the color of of one’s skin is becoming less and less important. The new racism of “whites” versus “people of color” will fade away and be replaced by more manageable differences of ethnicity, wealth, and social class.
Affirmative Action Puzzles
The New York Philharmonic has not discriminated in hiring in at least three decades. All auditions are blind. The auditioning players cannot be seen by the judges. As a result, the orchestra is almost forty percent women and thirty percent Asian. There is only one black musician in the orchestra, the principal clarinetist. Is this an ethical problem? Should we have more black musicians in the orchestra even if they are not the best available musicians?
Seventy percent of the players in the National Football League are African- American males while only seven percent of the US population are African- American males. Is this an ethical problem? Should we have more white players in the national football league even if they are not the best available football players.
At Harvard Law School, the percentage of non-Jewish white males in the 2016
entering class was less than seventeen percent. Non-Jewish white males comprise more than thirty-four percent of the US population. Is this a problem?
Affirmative Action Answers
The cases of the New York Philharmonic and the National Football League do not seem to me to present ethical problems so long as there is no discrimination in the selection process, that is, the musicians and players selected are actually the best available musicians and players. The reason is that the criteria for selection are very narrow and it is clear at the time of selection which person is the best player or musician.
If we feel that it would be better if more members of the New York Philharmonic were black or more players in the National Football League were white, we need to change earlier patterns of education or lifestyle rather than intervene at the very top of the profession.
The Harvard Law School example is different. In America, law schools are traditionally places where people are trained for general leadership in an American society held together by its legal system. This means that the criteria for selection are necessarily more uncertain than they are for choosing a musician or a football player. Who knows which applicant will best perform as a leader in American society? Because no one knows, there is more of an argument that the ethnic, gender, class, and racial makeup of the entering class should reflect actual percentages in the general society. This argument is even stronger for entrance to Harvard College, where the best criteria for selection are even more uncertain.