1. 1

2. 2

8. 8
Name the race or ethnicity
of the subjects in the following images

9. 9
Mexican. No, wait more like “Hispanic,”
or is it “Latino?” Can’t decide?

10. 10
How about African American? Or just
African?

11. 11
Is there a little Asian here? Hard to tell
isn’t it?

12. 12
Athlete. Pick a race. Now don’t stereotype!
All right, you get the picture (literally).

13. 13

14. Race is mostly a modern idea.
People’s were previously sorted
by class, religion and even
language.
14

15. •The term Race refers to physical
characteristics that others deem socially
significant.
•This could be skin color, hair shape or eye
shape. These are insignificant
characteristics which, nonetheless, are
apparent.
•Note that while race refers to said physical
characteristics it is NOT biologically
determined. 15

16. States Farley (2005):
An ethnic group is “a group of people who
are generally regarded by themselves or
others as a distinct group, with such
recognition based on social or cultural
characteristics such as nationality, language,
and religion.”
16

17. In the United States, a few examples of
ethnic groups would be Jewish Americans,
Italian Americans, and Hispanics.
17

18. Stereotypes:
An unreliable generalization about members of a
group that do not recognize individual
differences within the group.
Giddens
Think of some stereotypes about such minority groups
as Hispanics, Asians, American Indians, African
Americans or Jewish Americans.
18

19. Prejudice: Prejudice is an attitude toward an entire
category of people, often an ethnic or racial minority.
Discrimination: Discrimination is the action of
prejudice—it is the practice of deliberately treating one
group or individual differently than another.
19
Prejudice and Discrimination

20. Racism:
The extremely negative attitude, the
prejudice, based upon somewhat obvious
physical distinctions.
A racist is a person who believes that
some individuals are superior, or inferior,
to others as a result of racial differences.
Giddens
20

21. 1. The culturally symbolic antagonism
between white and black. EXAMPLE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k
E84dHl5Nr0 2 min vid
2. The invention and diffusion of the
concept of race.
3. The exploitative relations that
Europeans established with nonwhite
peoples. 21
Racism has flourished for three primary
reasons:

22. Institutional Racism or
Institutional Discrimination:
Any arrangement or practice within a
social institution or its related
organizations that tends to favor one
racial or ethnic group over another.
It may be conscious and deliberate or
subtle and unintended.
Farley, 2005
22

23. Ethnocentrism:
The tendency to assume that
one’s own culture and way of
life are superior to all others.
This can happen on a local
level or on a national level.
23

24. Hitler Youth
24

25. There is no genetic basis for
race—no one characteristic or
trait distinguishes one group
of people from another.
25

26. As such, then race is a social construct.
States Omni and Winant (in Konradi
and Schmidt 2004:179):
Race is “a concept which signifies and
symbolizes social conflicts and interests
by referring to different types of human
bodies.”
26

27. It might be best to take a constructionist view
of race and understand it as a social
construction.
Thus it is to be understood as structural rather
than as an individual feature of society. (ibid:
180)
27

28. 28

29. Slavery pre-dates race. So
there is no logical
connection based upon
historical evidence for racial
dominance.
That is, a past of slavery is
no reason for one race to be
subordinate to another.
29

30. The idea of freedom and race
were born together in the U.S.
While some believed in
equality, this was an economy
largely based upon slavery.
30

31. “… that all men are created equal.”
31

32. 32

33. As the race concept evolved it
justified the extermination of
Native Americans, the
exclusion of Asian
immigrants and the taking of
Mexican lands.
33

34. A controversial study by
Herrnstein and Murray on the
superiority of the white race,
written in 1994.
34

35. Charles Murray
Richard Herrnstein

38. Researchers Herrnstein and Murray (1994) did a
study that claimed that minority groups and
those in lower SES had lower IQs, and that this
was about 40 percent genetically based.
Do you recall the concept of “social Darwinism?”
38

39. The eight major claims of the study are:
1 General intelligence exists.
2 At least half of the variation in intelligence is genetically transmitted.
3 Intelligence has become more necessary in the work world than before.
4 Colleges have shifted their entrance priorities away from inherited wealth
to those based upon merit.
5 Society is now dominated by a “cognitive elite.”
6 As the elite forms a social group it reproduces itself through marriage.
7 As well, poor people tend to marry those alike passing on their “modest”
abilities to their children.
8 Because of this genetically passed on intelligence we should see the poor
as having higher crime rates and drug abuse.
39

40. Assertion (1) Intelligence is a single, unitary
phenomenon consisting of a "core human
mental ability." This "general intelligence"
underlies all forms of "complex mental work."
40

41. Response: People may be smart in some
respects, in some contexts, and at some tasks,
but not in others. Some may have a facility for
numbers, others for words…The kind of
intelligence facilitating high performance in one
arena does not necessarily have the same
payoff in another. …[R]anking on a single
intelligence continuum cannot explain much
about their social and economic outcomes.
41

42. Assertion (2) Standardized intelligence tests
provide a precise measure of general
intelligence, making it possible to rank
individuals on a linear scale according to their
intelligence quotient.
42

43. Response: There are many kinds of cognitive
abilities and many kinds of social endeavors as well,
each favoring a somewhat different set of skills and
talents. IQ scores, therefore, tell us little about
people's overall practical competence, nor do they
dictate social and economic destinies.
43

44. Assertion (3) Intelligence is "substantially
inherited," with genes accounting for at least 40
percent and as much as 80 percent of the
variation among individuals in cognitive
ability.
44

45. Response: The Bell Curve, according to many
critics, overestimates the genetic basis and
heritability of IQ and underestimates the
influence of the social environment. [..] While
they claim the heritability of IQ may be as
much as 80 percent, other research, drawing on
a wider range of studies, suggests a much
lower figure, somewhere between 30 and 50
percent.
45

46. Assertion (4) People at birth are either blessed
or doomed with a level of intelligence that is
largely unalterable. Social and educational
interventions cannot appreciably raise the
cognitive ability of persons born with low
IQs….Though it is not impossible to boost IQ,
they admit, it is impractical because of
insufficient knowledge and limitations in "the
available repertoire of social interventions."
46

47. Response: The problem is not that nothing can
be done, but that an "inexpensive, reliable
method of raising IQ is not available."
This is a political, not a scientific, judgment,
however
47

48. The ordinary routine of neutral reviewers [peer
review] having a month or two to go over the
book with care did not occur. Another
handpicked group was flown to Washington at
the expense of the American Enterprise Institute
and given a weekend-long personal briefing on
the book's contents by Murray himself … just
before publication. The result was what you'd
expect: The first wave of publicity was either
credulous or angry, but short on evidence,
because nobody had had time to digest and
evaluate the book carefully.
48

49. For a more complete critique of the work of
Murray and Herrnstein, see the following link:
Critique of the Bell Curve study
(NOTE: You must already be logged in to
Hartnell’s EBSCOhost for link to work.)
49

50. In the concluding remarks:
"It is time for America once
again to try living with
inequality, as life is lived...."
50

52.  Just suppose that blacks, and browns, and reds,
and yellows, and whites, had different IQs.
What should we do?
 Do you ever think of treating a C student
worse than an A student? How about
disabilities?
 Keep thinking…
52

53.  Imagine taking the Star Ship Enterprise to a
planet far, far away. The population has an IQ
that is 20 points lower than your species' does.
They read, make music, have science. Will you
treat them as inferiors? Would you take
advantage of them for their resources?
 What if they had an average IQ 20 point higher
than ours. How would that impact the
relationship?
53

54. This is a related to the pseudo-
science of eugenics—the idea that a
more “pure” race can be bread.
(The German Nazis stated that
they got most of their ideas for
eugenics from the United States.) I
keep forgetting not everyone
knows this story. Learn more here:
http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/human-testing-the-
eugenics-movement-and-irbs-724
54

55. Steven Jay Gould states in
the film on race that
modern humans have not
been around long enough
to have evolved into
separate races.
55

56. Most traits are inherited
independently of one
another. The genes for skin
color have nothing to do
with genes for hair texture,
eye shape, blood type,
musical talent, or athletic
ability.
56

57. So what interests sociologists
is not so much race per se,
but the significance some
people place on traits such
as skin color and hair shape.
57

58. Most variation is within, not
between “races.”
Of the small amount of total
human genetic variation, 85%
exists within any local
population, be they Italians,
Kurds, Koreans, etc.
Two random Koreans are
likely to be as genetically
different as a Korean and an
Italian.
58

59. Races are NOT characterized by clear-cut and
fixed differences. Apparent differences are
vague at best.
Take a walk from central Africa to Norway.
Differences are gradual, not punctuated.
(Yes, the Inuit is an exception. A diet high in
vitamin D is a common, if not perfect,
explanation.)
59

60. Race is not biological, but racism is
still real. Out of a desire for
exploitation, a need to justify that
exploitation and perhaps a
collective desire for self-worth,
races impact one another in the
competition for resources.
All manner of justification is used
for racial stereotyping, but mostly
it is the manufacture of
opportunity.
60

61. 61

62. Racial formation is the process
which “defines both who the
racial groups in a society are and
how the meaning of race is
understood.”
(Omni and Winant in Farley, 2005:7)
Perhaps, then, this is just a formal
term for the social construction
of race.
62

63. In fact, “the process of defining
and, over time, redefining
racial groups is always driven
by political interests.”
(Farley, 2005:7)
63

64. Thus, if you are a biologist, race
does not exist.
But if you are a sociologist, it
most certainly does.
64

65.  Individual racism
 Institutional racism
65

66. Individual or “ideological” racism is what we
normally think of when we think of racism at
all.
This is the term used for the belief that some
races “are biologically, intellectually or
culturally inferior to others.” (Ibid:13)
66

67. But it is institutional racism that persists today
as a powerful social force, even if an
unintentional one. It is rooted in American
history and persists today.
67

68. Institutional racism and
institutional discrimination are
arrangements or practices in
social institutions and their
related organizations that tend
to favor one racial or ethnic
group … over another.” (Ibid:
15)
68

69.  Measuring standard test scores from
children of greatly varied SES backgrounds.
 Proportionality by ethnicity of employees in
the least preferred jobs.
 Current recruitment techniques and quotas
by the military (recently emphasizing
Hispanics).
 Redlining housing districts.
 Environmental racism. (slide follows)
69

70. 70

71. The difference, then, between
individual and institutional racism is
not a difference in intent or of
visibility. Both the individual act of
racism and the racist institutional
policy may occur without the
presence of conscious bigotry and
both may be masked intentionally or
innocently. (Knowles and Prewitt in
Konradi and Schmidt, 2004:181)
71

72. 72

73.  A majority is not by numbers.
 A majority is by power.
73

74. Minority and Majority groups:
A minority group is subordinate to a majority group.
This is not determined by numbers but rather by
POWER.
A majority group is dominant by virtue of how much
power it has over a minority group.
A good example of this would be South Africa and its
white rule of apartheid.
74

75. 75

76. 76

77. Among his many academic achievements was his
sociological study of a black community
entitled “The Philadelphia Negro,” the first
such study of its kind.
77

86. Assimilation
Pluralism and
Separatism
86

87. Assimilation is the process “whereby groups
with distinctive identities become culturally
and socially fused.” (Marger in Hughes and
Kroehler, 2007:159)
87

88. Pluralism is a situation by which diverse
groups coexist side by side and mutually
accommodate themselves to their
differences while maintaining boundries.
Ethnic differences are maintained and only
some resources are shared while others are
not.
88

89. Separatism is the establishment of, or
attempt to establish, entirely separate
societies made up of distinct racial, ethnic,
or other groups that formerly existed within
one society.
Farley, 2005
89Marcus Garvey (1887-1940)

90. 90

91. 91

92. Just had to share this so I stuck it here until I find
a proper place. Stunning.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/10h8gx/the-
only-unfair-thing-ever
92

93. DIANE SAWYER (Primetime Show). A twenty
minute collection of videos of racial
discrimination in play. C 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyL5EcAw
B9c
93
Discovered by alert student leslie mosqueda

94. 94

95. 95
1964
2014

96. 96

97. 97

98. 98

99. 99

100. 100

101. 101

102. 102

103. 103

104. 104

105. 105

106. 106

127. 127

128. “HUMILIATION”

129. 129

130. 130

131. 131

132. 132

133. 133

134. 134

135. 135
From the Haldeman diaries, viz NYT

136. 136

137. 137

138. 138
Dr. Huey Percy Newton (February
17, 1942 – August 22, 1989) was
an African-American political activist
and revolutionary who, along with
Bobby Seale, co-founded the Black
Panther Party in 1966. He
continued to pursue an education,
eventually earning a Ph.D. in social
philosophy. In 1989 he was shot
and killed in Oakland, California.

139. 139

140. 140

141. 141