Slate's Bizbox
the chat room: Real-time discussions with Slate writers.

Race Cards and Level Playing FieldsRichard Thompson Ford takes readers' questions about real and percieved forms of bias.


Posted Thursday, Jan. 24, 2008, at 4:38 PM ET

Slate contributor Richard Thompson Ford was online at Washingtonpost.com on Jan. 24 to discuss his new book, The Race Card: How Bluffing About Bias Makes Race Relations Worse, and offered ways to separate valid claims of prejudice from mere bellyaching. An unedited transcript of the chat follows.

Richard Thompson Ford: Hello, I'm Rich Ford, thanks to everyone for your interest in my book, The Race Card, and for taking the time to submit your questions today.

_______________________

Albuquerque, N.M.: Professor Ford, I found your article in Slate about the lack of racism implicit in the Bush administration's response to Katrina and New Orleans to be very interesting. Let's say (heaven forbid) that Katrina had hit West Palm Beach; do you really think the administration's response would have exhibited the same indifference and lack of engagement that we saw in New Orleans? Would those residents of West Palm Beach still be living in the same formaldehyde-infused mobile homes that the people in New Orleans have been stuck in? Would there be the same massive level of indifference from the federal government towards those people?

Richard Thompson Ford: No, I don't think the reaction would have been the same. But I'm not convinced the reason for the difference is racism. Instead, I think it's politics. In a part of the book we could excerpt, I argue that the Bush response was a combination of ideological opposition to social programs, which left FEMA ill prepared for a disaster of this scale, and indifference to a population that didn't vote for him and would be unlikely to swing elections to Republicans in the future. This has predictable racial consequences, but I do think it's distinct from racism in the classic sense that Kayne West evoked when he said Bush doesn't care about black people. My larger point is that a racial injustice occurred even without a racist to blame for it—hence the title of that Chapter of the book, "Racism Without Racists."

_______________________

Shaker Heights, Ohio: I read excerpts from your book, and I am amazed you are using examples of upper-echelon rich people as support for your thesis deploring the use of the so-called race card. What about ordinary people who endure overt bigotry in hiring and promotion? Why have you fallen into the lexiconic trap of using that ridiculous phrase? I was born into this world black and female. Navigating America is not and has not ever been a card game, and I am tired of the media and others reducing racial attitudes ingrained in the majority culture to a lazy catch phrase. You obviously are capitalizing on it to make money, not engender thoughtful discussion. Shame on you.

Richard Thompson Ford: I can see you're angry, but let me explain why I wrote this book. For me the term "The Race Card" evokes the cynical, aggressive, adversarial use of and reaction to accusations of bias. So my point is to explore the "lexiconic trap" as you put it, of the phrase—why is it so commonly used and what social conflicts does it reflect. I do in fact discuss at length the plight of ordinary people who suffer racial injustices—both those caused by bigots and those caused by social forces, the legacy of past discrimination, indifference, and misunderstandings. You may think the examples in the excerpts aren't representative—fair enough. But they do reflect a social phenomenon and a rhetorical use of claims of bias—by both left and right and by people of all races, that demands examination. I think we can do better in addressing the many racial injustices that remain if we break out of the familiar adversarial cycle of fingerpointing, defensive reaction and digging in of heels that has come to characterize race relations today. As for your speculation as to my motivations—first of all, you don't know much about publishing if you think writing books on social issues is a way to get rich, and honestly, you could register your objections without unfounded and gratuitous ad hominem attacks. Thanks for thoughtful question, but for the last bit, shame on you.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: Thanks for taking my question(s). How do you define "racism"? Do you see a difference between unconscious reactions and assumptions, as opposed to acts of deliberate malice? If you think the former is a type of racism, how do you propose fostering discussion about internal prejudices without people immediately recoiling for fear of being accused of racism?

Richard Thompson Ford: How we should define racism is a question at the heart of the book. I devote a chapter to it, exploring the legal definitions of unlawful discrimination (there are several—not just one) and also the common social understandings of racism. I also talk about unconscious bias and some of the methods used to uncover it, such as the Implicit Association Test. It's hard to talk about unconscious bias right now because people still immediately hear the word "bias" as a moral accusation. But these studies show us that bias is probably pervasive in society, and that people can't help but make the negative associations with race that the media and our history has conditioned us to make—in fact, even most blacks seems to exhibit them. I'd like to see more discussion of how we can fix the social conditions that lead people to make negative association and less moralistic accusation. This isn't to say there are no more old school bigots—but I do think that most of the racial problems in our society are now caused, not by virulent racists, but by old habits, entrenched patterns of behavior and the legacy of past racism— and decent people may be involved in perpetuating these evils even though they don't mean anyone ill.

VIEW AS SINGLE PAGE
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Richard Thompson Ford, a Stanford University law professor, is published regularly on the topics of civil rights, constitutional law, race relations, and antidiscrimination law. He is the author of Racial Culture: A Critique.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
A Grand Tour
David Broder | While the stars align for Obama, McCain is looking like the odd-man-out on foreign policy.
Annette Heuser: A Honeymoon
PLUS » Achenblog: The New Capitalism Socialism