[Peace-discuss] Fwd: Fw: A Long History of Racial Preferences< ForWhites

[Alfred Kagan]

>X-Originating-IP: [68.19.25.6]
>X-Originating-Email: [ajirad at hotmail.com]
>From: "Ajira Darch" <ajirad at hotmail.com>
>To: akagan at uiuc.edu
>Cc: nkhoma at libis.udsm.ac.tz
>Subject: Fwd: Fw: A Long History of Racial Preferences< ForWhites
>Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:38:46 +0100
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Oct 2003 21:38:48.0139 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[612AD9B0:01C39689]
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.6 required=5.0
>	tests=BAYES_30,GUARANTEED_STUFF,HTML_20_30
>	version=2.54
>X-Spam-Level: *
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.54 (1.174.2.17-2003-05-11-exp)
>
>
>
>
>A Long History of Racial Preferences: For Whites
>
>By Larry Adelman
>
>
>
>Many middle-class white people, especially those of us who grew up in the
>
>suburbs, like to think that we got to where we are today by virtue of our
>
>merit - hard work, intelligence, pluck, and maybe a little luck. And while
>
>we may be sympathetic to the plight of others, we close down when we 
>hear the words
>
>"affirmative action" or "racial preferences." We worked hard, we made it on
>
>our own, the thinking goes, why don't 'they'? After all, it's been almost 40
>
>years now since the Civil Rights Act was passed.
>
>
>
>What we don't readily acknowledge is that racial preferences have a long,
>
>institutional history in this country - a white history. Here are a few ways
>
>in which government programs and practices have channeled wealth and
>
>opportunities to white people at the expense of others.
>
>
>
>Early Racial Preferences
>
>We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its
>
>scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began
>
>in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original
>
>source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and
>
>Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their 
>support and their
>
>policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new
>
>rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.
>
>
>
>White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army.
>
>The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee,
>
>Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make
>
>room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, 
>giving away millions
>
>of acres - for free - of what had been Indian Territory west of the
>
>Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land 
>area of the United
>
>States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under
>
>Homestead Act provisions.
>
>
>
>The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become
>
>naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not
>
>others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some
>
>cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in
>
>California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by 
>preventing Asian
>
>immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land.
>
>Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups.
>
>Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the
>
>McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in 
>immigration remained until
>
>1965.
>
>
>
>In the South, the federal government never followed through on General
>
>Sherman's Civil War plan to divide up plantations and give each freed slave
>
>"40 acres and a mule" as reparations. Only once was monetary compensation
>
>made for slavery, in Washington, D.C. There, government officials 
>paid up to $300
>
>per slave upon emancipation - not to the slaves, but to local slaveholders as
>
>compensation for loss of property.
>
>
>
>When slavery ended, its legacy lived on not only in the impoverished
>
>condition of Black people but in the wealth and prosperity that accrued to
>
>white slave-owners and their descendents. Economists who try to place a
>
>dollar value on how much white Americans have profited from 200 
>years of unpaid
>
>slave labor, including interest, begin their estimates at $1 trillion.
>
>
>
>Jim Crow laws, instituted in the late 19th and early 20th century and not
>
>overturned in many states until the 1960s, reserved the best jobs,
>
>neighborhoods, schools and hospitals for white people.
>
>
>
>The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation
>
>Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted
>
>during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to
>
>shape life opportunities and chances today.
>
>
>
>The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions
>
>of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act
>
>specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic
>
>servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As
>
>low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for 
>their retirement.
>
>They couldn't pass wealth on to their children. Just the opposite. Their
>
>children had to support them.
>
>
>
>Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new
>
>right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective
>
>bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle
>
>class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to 
>exclude non-whites
>
>and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and 
>benefits such
>
>as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained
>
>nearly all-white well into the 1970s. In 1972, for example, every 
>single one of the
>
>3,000 members of Los Angeles Steam Fitters Local #250 was still white.
>
>
>
>But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing
>
>Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white
>
>families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for
>
>millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home 
>for the first time.
>
>The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly
>
>tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso 
>facto deemed
>
>a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as
>
>"redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120
>
>billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites. Of the 350,000 new
>
>homes built with federal support in northern California between 1946 
>and 1960, fewer
>
>than 100 went to African Americans.
>
>
>
>These government programs made possible the new segregated white suburbs
>
>that sprang up around the country after World War II. Government subsidies
>
>for municipal services helped develop and enhance these suburbs 
>further, in turn
>
>fueling commercial investments. Freeways tied the new suburbs to central
>
>business districts, but they often cut through and destroyed the vitality of
>
>non-white neighborhoods in the central city.
>
>
>
>Today, Black and Latino mortgage applicants are still 60% more likely than
>
>whites to be turned down for a loan, even after controlling for employment,
>
>financial, and neighborhood factors. According to the Census, whites are
>
>more likely to be segregated than any other group. As recently as 1993, 86%
>
>of suburban whites still lived in neighborhoods with a black 
>population of less
>
>than 1%.
>
>
>
>Reaping the Rewards of Racial Preference
>
>One result of the generations of preferential treatment for whites is that a
>
>typical white family today has on average eight times the assets, or net
>
>worth, of a typical African American family, according to New York
>
>University economist Edward Wolff. Even when families of the same income are
>
>compared, white families have more than twice the wealth of Black 
>families. Much of
>
>that wealth difference can be attributed to the value of one's home, 
>and how much
>
>one inherited from parents.
>
>
>
>But a family's net worth is not simply the finish line, it's also the
>
>starting point for the next generation. Those with wealth pass their assets
>
>on to their children - by financing a college education, lending a hand
>
>during hard times, or assisting with the down payment for a home. 
>Some economists
>
>estimate that up to 80 percent of lifetime wealth accumulation depends on
>
>these intergenerational transfers. White advantage is passed down, 
>from parent to
>
>child to grand-child. As a result, the racial wealth gap - and the head
>
>start enjoyed by whites - appears to have grown since the civil rights days.
>
>
>
>In 1865, just after Emancipation, it is not surprising that African
>
>Americans owned only 0.5 percent of the total worth of the United States.
>
>But by 1990, a full 135 years after the abolition of slavery, Black 
>Americans still
>
>possessed only a meager 1 percent of national wealth. As legal scholar john
>
>powell (sic) says in the documentary series Race The Power of an Illusion,
>
>"The slick thing about whiteness is that whites are getting the spoils of a
>
>racist system even if they are not personally racist."
>
>
>
>But rather than recognize how "racial preferences" have tilted the playing
>
>field and given us a head start in life, many whites continue to believe
>
>that race does not affect our lives. Instead, we chastise others for not
>
>achieving what we have; we even invert the situation and accuse non-whites
>
>of using "the race card" to advance themselves.
>
>
>
>Or we suggest that differential outcomes may simply result from differences
>
>in "natural" ability or motivation. However, sociologist Dalton Conley's
>
>research shows that when we compare the performance of families across
>
>racial lines who make not just the same income, but also hold similar net
>
>worth, a very interesting thing happens: many of the racial 
>disparities in education,
>
>graduation rates, welfare usage and other outcomes disappear. The
>
>"performance gap" between whites and nonwhites is a product not of nature,
>
>but unequal circumstances.
>
>
>
>Colorblind" policies that treat everyone the same, no exceptions for
>
>minorities, are often counter-posed against affirmative action. But
>
>colorblindness today merely bolsters the unfair advantages that color-coded
>
>practices have enabled white Americans to long accumulate. Isn't it 
>a little late in the
>
>game to suddenly decide that race shouldn't matter?
>
>Please read. Kermit- please forward to James... thanks.
>
>
>
>Larry Adelman is executive producer of RACE - The Power of an Illusion and
>
>co-director of California Newsreel.
>
>
>
>Ajira Nkhoma-Darch
>
>Currently in the USA
>
>1-  the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth
>2-  all things through, for and with love
>3-  follow your heart
>
>You will hear thunder and think of me,
>And think: she wanted storms. The rim
>Of the sky will be the colour of hard crimson,
>And your heart, as always, will be on fire.
>Everyday, wherever we are, it will all be true,
>when, for eternity, I come to you
>And hasten to the heights that I have longed for,
>knowing my heart and soul will be safe with you...
>
>
>
>Get a free connection, half-price modem and one month FREE, when you 
>sign up for <http://g.msn.com/8HMAENUK/2731??PS=>BT Broadband today!


-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20031021/d644c60c/attachment.html