WHAT IF THERE WAS A WORLD WITHOUT RACISM?

I want to believe there is agreement among reasonable people that racism continues to exist in America.  In my opinion, racism is unacceptable, fosters divisions, begets stereotypes, engenders social conflict, enflames hate, fuels violence, marginalizes individuals, relegates groups to inferior livelihoods, impedes education, promotes ignorance, and erodes civility, respect and dialogue.  A precocious 16- year-old asked the Australian Human Rights Commission - “Why do people think that something as permanent as race, something we have no choice in, can make us better than another person?”  Richard Vasquez in his Chicano: A Novel writes “Mientras se duermen, todos son iguales” (While asleep, all men are equal). 

What I have found is prejudice and racism are often used.  Although related, these terms are not synonymous, often misunderstood and can be confusing to most people. Arlin Cuncic in her Feb. 2, 2022, article “The Psychology of Racism” defines prejudice as “a negative preconception or attitude toward members of a group based on shared characteristics such as race, ethnicity, sex, sexuality, age, religion, language, class or culture.”  It is learned early in life “implicitly affecting attitudes and behaviors later in life.” Prejudice can be racial, but it also can be sexist, ageist, ableist or even used to label people by social class.  It can be positive or negative and unlikely to impact people as negatively as racism. 

According to Merriam-Webster, “racism” is the belief race is a fundamental determinant of a person’s traits and abilities. This creates a hierarchy where certain races are superior to others. Racism is the “systemic oppression” of a racial group so that another group has a social, economic, and political advantage and power.  Racism is deep-rooted in American history, our daily lives, norms, and discourse.  Ms. Cuncic believes the actual history of racism attests to White people having and continuing to be afforded benefits in society because of a system that was set up for their benefit.  Toni Morrison is quoted as having said “In this country American means white.  Everybody else has to hyphenate.” I can attest to that. Regrettably, racism is insidious and impedes attainment of a just, equal and fair society.

10 Causes of Racism   (www.humanrightscareers.com › root-causes-of-racism)

The Root causes are described as - 

1.     Self-interest -

Many experts believe this is the root cause of racist beliefs.

2.      Scientific racism -

While many might say that ignorance breeds racism, some of history’s most intelligent minds supported racist beliefs. It was “science” that justified many racist beliefs, like mixed-race children had more health problems and shorter lifespans.

3.     Maintaining the status quo -

Maintaining a status quo is often justified as “keeping the peace” or maintaining law and order among violent races.

4.     Discriminatory policies -

Policies that discriminate by race and keep people in poverty reinforce racist beliefs, laws and housing and zoning policies.

5.      “Good” people don’t challenge racism -

One of the main reasons racist ideas continue to flourish is “good” people don’t speak out against it.

6.      Media representation -

How the media represents and/or misrepresents race has a big impact on how society views race.

7.      Living in an echo chamber -

Only interacting with people who share the same beliefs is a root cause of racism for individuals.

8.     Failing to recognize racism in oneself -

People often fall into the trap that as long as someone isn’t wearing a white hood or using racial slurs, they can’t be racist.

9.      Quick judgments -

People are very quick to judge others based on appearance, clothing, speech, and other physical traits.

10.   Casting blame -

For many people, blaming others is a reflex. You can hear it in statements like, “Illegal immigrants are stealing our jobs!” Society always looks for a scapegoat.

Today, because most blatant acts of racism and discrimination are generally frowned upon, it can be vexing understanding how racism continues to affect our contemporary culture, values, organizations, systems, laws, politics, etc.  It’s not necessarily the explicit act of discrimination that is problematic, but subtle, nuanced and often duplicitous comments or actions that shrouds a person’s true feelings and attitudes toward race. This recently was borne out in a public setting by non-White elected officials referring disparagingly to a White colleague’s Black child and disparagingly commenting about immigrants from a specific region of Mexico.  Although I have never met a self-proclaimed racist, I have encountered individuals who freely use racial epithets to describe others who are racially different than themselves, or show prejudice toward an individual because of race, thus unduly influencing an outcome.

 Nearly 60 years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nobel Peace prize winner and Civil Rights Leader, shared his vision of how people should be judged.  Dr. King said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”  He defined character as a person’s core values of honesty and integrity, respecting others, taking responsibility for one’s actions, being fair and just, and being someone who promotes love and compassion.  Dr. Gregg Henriques, James Madison University Professor of Psychology, maintains that “content of character” also encompasses core virtues such as wisdom, humility, courage, justice, temperance and human dignity.  All too regularly today, race, color, national origin, age, sexual orientation and physical appearance are the litmus test for determining “content of character.”

In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law.  The Act prohibited discrimination in public places, provided for the integration of schools and other public facilities, and made employment discrimination illegal. It was the most sweeping civil rights legislation since Reconstruction and was just another attempt in American history to level the playing field for minorities and women.  The Act met with strong White opposition and assertions of favoring less qualified individuals, embracing reverse discrimination, and undermining time-honored Merit Systems.  The Civil Rights Act did afford minorities and women opportunities heretofore unavailable.  The Act did heighten awareness of racism, promote equal opportunity, and hold organizations accountable for discriminatory practices.  It did not end racism in America. 

Educator Beverly Daniel Tatum likens racism to a “smog” that we breathe in almost every day of our lives.  We absorb racialized messages about the world that come from our parents, our teachers, our classmates, our colleagues and our media.  Regardless of how much individuals want to believe that they are not racist (or that they’re antiracist), the racialized biases and prejudices we’ve absorbed show up in both conscious and unconscious ways.  She goes on to note that ignoring racism doesn’t make it go away.  Rather, it perpetuates it, effectively shutting down the possibility of moving forward by not having candid conversations about racism and possible solutions.

After nearly 60 years of debating the merits of equal opportunity, affirmative action, social justice and moral obligations, I believe little progress has been made to achieve equality in America. Some even believe racism and hatred have been let out of the proverbial closet and is now running rampant throughout America.  Rather than valuing and embracing diversity in culture, beliefs, lifestyles, politics and personal philosophies, the best we can hope for is a commitment to ongoing dialogue about values, virtues, ideas, actions and behaviors for judging people by the “content of their character”, opening up opportunities for all, and accepting the fact that we inhabit one Earth and are interconnected and essential parts of one race, “The Human Race.”

“Our ability to reach unity in diversity will be the beauty and the test of our civilization.”  - Mahatma Gandhi

Public Service at the Crossroad

“We have to get used to the idea that at the most important crossroads in our life there are no signs.” ~Ernest Hemingway

Last year the National Academy of Public Administration reported that “Over the next decade, all sectors of society must work together to address the critical issues of protecting and advancing democracy, strengthening social and economic development, ensuring environmental sustainability, and managing technological changes.”  They go on to stress that this will require all levels of government to “improve their operations so that they can tackle problems in new ways and earn the public’s trust.”  This necessitates building a highly-skilled, agile, and responsive public sector workforce. 

Unfortunately, despite numerous attempts at building such a workforce, developing new management strategies and allocating time and resources to solve problems like poverty, discrimination, homelessness, and crime, they not only persist, they have worsened.  Covid-19 is here to stay; ideological differences and political polarization threaten our democracy; racial tensions endure; incivility seems to be the new norm; and marginalization engenders frustration, anger, misunderstanding, distrust, inequities, and social unrest.  According to Professor Gerald Caiden, in The Civilizing Mission of Public Administration” citizens are, “Convinced that government is more of a problem than a solution; that the public sector without the pressure of market forces is somewhat parasitic; and that public servants are excessively bureaucratic, incompetent, wasteful, unproductive and inefficient.” I happen to disagree with this widely held perception.   The reality is there are many people who pursue public sector careers because of their passion for making a difference in the lives of others and the betterment of society.  Money alone, although desirable, is never enough.  Unfortunately, somewhere along the way their passion gets buried in the bureaucratic culture and “the spark goes out without becoming the flame.” 

If government ever hopes to attract young, intelligent dreamers desirous of making a difference in the lives of people, it needs to invigorate the organization’s culture, tackle the malaise, and change the toxic perception people have of public service and public employees by building trusting, transparent relationships with communities, youth, students, seniors, and residents and other stakeholders.  The timing for doing so may be perfect.  As we emerge from this lingering pandemic, the public sector is experiencing increased retirements and turnover; increased workload demands, hybrid work schedules, technological innovations and greater transparency because of social media.  There now is available a better educated and more diverse candidate pool to select from, train and develop. However, progressive leadership, reenergized public sector culture, adequate time and resources, and greater community engagement are pre-requisites for success.

Hollie Russon Gilman, in techcrunch.com, April 2018, believes that millennials could be the answer.  Add to Millenials, Gen Z and we have an untapped resource of women and men for whom “meaning” is a huge driver for them.  Millennials seem to want their job to be meaningful and to work for an organization they can respect.  Pay, prestige, and job security are not all that matters to them.  Mintzberg et al, 1998:23 report “60% of millennials said, a ‘sense of purpose’ is part of the reason they chose to work for their company.”  Music to my ears!  

Nonetheless, there is a growing number of skeptics, including politicians and past U.S. presidents, who believe the solution to public sector malaise is less government and more privatization.  In their opinion, the private sector can do the work better, cheaper, and more efficiently.  The private sector will reduce, if not, eliminate bureaucratic red tape; implement strategic planning and performance management; and base job security and promotions strictly on merit.  Unfortunately, solely imposing the private sector model on the public sector has proven to be misguided, ineffective, ill-suited for serving a socio-economically diverse citizenry; and may clash with the public sector’s vision, mission, values, and even code of ethics.  Professor Caiden has found, if left unchecked, privatization can result in malfeasance (unlawful acts), nonfeasance (failure to act) and misfeasance (unethical acts).  This does not preclude the possibility of partnering with the private sector and NGOs to deliver services expeditiously, effectively and efficiently.

We are at an important crossroad in public administration.  We need to determine better ways to fulfill government’s responsibility for:

· Enacting laws that embrace the principle of the “rule of law” and are equally and fairly enforced;

· Maintaining order and security for all while ensuring public safety and protecting citizens’ human rights;

· Promoting the general welfare and well-being of all citizens;

· Protecting the environment and improving the quality of life for future generations.

No matter what means government takes to achieve this end, it will be subjected to criticism. Politicians need fodder to get elected and/or stay in office; mainstream media needs hyperbole to flourish; employees need to be recognized and rewarded for their services; labor needs something to challenge management; and taxpayers need a reason to complain.  More and more we see a beleaguered profession vilified, undervalued and burned out.  Why isn’t the public sector viewed as a calling to the highest service where one can learn, grow, develop, make a difference, and contribute to a better quality of life for everyone?

The public sector has an opportunity to change the paradigm to one of Openness, Compassion, Respect, Understanding, Critical Thinking, and Agility.  I believe this will go a long way to change the negative bureaucratic perception and distrust the public has of public servants.  Why did I choose these six qualities?  Let me briefly explain my reasoning.

· Openness is one of the five personality trains of the Big Five personality theory.  It indicates how open-minded a person is.  “They are imaginative, curious, and open minded.  Individuals who are low in openness to experience would rather not try things.  They are close-minded, literal and enjoy having a routine.”

· Compassion is when you relate TO someone’s situation and you want to help them.  You see someone in trouble, and you feel like pitching in.  “Whereas empathy is a feeling of awareness toward other people’s emotions and an attempt to understand how they feel.” It does not include doing something to help, but it does play a roll in defining the six qualities.  Plato tells us to “Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a harder battle.”

· Respect is one’s acceptance of somebody for who they are, even if they are different from you or you don’t agree with them.  Respect in relationships builds feelings of trust, safety, and wellbeing.  “Respect does not come naturally; it is something one learns.”

· Understanding means one has to discover, accept and connect with someone who thinks differently than you.  This too takes effort and time.  As the novelist and statesman Johann Wolfgang von Goethe said, “A person hears only what they understand.”  People often connect with those who are easiest to understand and agree with. When you feel misunderstood, you feel a mix of anger and sadness.  This can be a painful emotion.

· Critical Thinking is the ability to make an informed decision by evaluating several different sources of information objectively.  It involves analysis, creativity, problem-solving and empathy.  Grace Pisano in study.com involves three core skills: 1. Curiosity, 2. Skepticism, and 3. Humility.  I place a lot of weight on humility because as she defines it - “Finally, humility is the ability to admit that your opinions and ideas are wrong when faced with new convincing evidence that states otherwise.”  This can be very difficult to do especially for bureaucrats.

· As defined by Aaron De Smet, Principal, McKinsey and Company defines “Agility is the ability of an organization to renew itself, adapt, change quickly and succeed in a rapidly changing, ambiguous, turbulent environment.” He goes on to say that agility is not incompatible with organizational stability. It requires stability, flexibility and employee engagement.

I see these six qualities as critical to the success and sustainability of not only the public sector but also private and non-profit organizations.  Unfortunately, none of these can be adopted without a commitment to change, patience and perseverance. 

(O+C+R+U+CT+A) = A More Responsive and Effective Public Sector

The Importance of Trust

“Trust dies but mistrust blossoms.” ~Sophocles

How important is trust? In my opinion, it is extremely important. Trust is the glue that holds together everything we do: our relationships, decisions we make, and our expectations of parents, spouses, partners, leaders, bosses, teachers, coaches, doctors, children, clergy, etc.  Trust in a relationship, either personal or professional, is so important because it allows parties to feel safe and accepted. Trust also fosters greater self-confidence, self-reliance, personal engagement, risk-taking, and professional growth. 

We expect our families, children and friends to treat each other respectfully; demonstrate compassion and empathy; possess the courage to do the right things; and be accepting of differences of opinions, beliefs, values and lifestyles. We expect organizations, institutions, and businesses to do what they say they will do.  We expect executives, managers and supervisors to treat employees fairly and equitably. We expect our nation’s leaders to act in the best interest of all Americans – wealthy and poor, young and old, men and women, minority and non-minority, and the abled and disabled.  

What I have witnessed is trust, like many other core values, has been eroding.  Nearly 80% of Americans believe that we have too little trust in each other and nearly two-thirds said that the levels of mutual trust have been shrinking. Children have lost trust in their parents; employees have lost trust in their employers; policy makers have lost trust in their staff; citizens have lost trust in law enforcement; labor doesn’t trust management; voters don’t trust politicians; and Americans don’t even trust science.  Covid-19 is a left wing political conspiracy to alter our DNA and capture minds and souls.  The pandemic has destabilized our lives and lifestyles; disrupted how we do business and relate to one another; upended our educational system; created economic hardships; threatened individual freedoms; heightened anxieties; and further polarized Americans and U.S.  politics.  Whereas in the past we merely had skeptics and naysayers, we now have fully credentialed “anti-trust” protagonists.  They believe, as Benito Mussolini is quoted as saying, “It’s good to trust others but, not to do so is much better.”

It is important to recognize that trust is not given; it is earned.  Trust is not built overnight; it takes time, effort, character and perseverance.  One has to appreciate that trust is not cast in cement; it is very fragile.  David Horsager in Forbes Leadership Forum, Oct. 2012, notes that “Trust is like a forest.  It takes a long time to grow and can burn down with just a touch of carelessness.”  Once it is broken, it is heart wrenching and difficult to repair; but it is not irreparable.  As a cautionary note, do what you can to avoid disagreements turning into conflict.  If you find yourself in a conflict with someone, the likelihood is you will not trust the person very much anymore. 

What does this mean for the future of organizations as we emerge from this challenging pandemic?  How much will managers trust employees to work together to build collaborative inclusive working relationships, value diversity and promote a healthy work environment?  Will employees and employee unions trust management to communicate and be supportive, compassionate, fair, and transparent?  Will management be open to hybrid work environments, flex schedules and child care, or will they be focused on efficiency and rightsizing?  Trust is the anchor that holds relationships steady through turbulent times.  Trust is what binds leaders to their followers, and followers to the vision and mission of the organization.  Leaders who lack courage, are disingenuous, do not follow through, find fault, regularly blame, have hidden agendas, and are self-centered will create an untenable work culture that will kill trust and “allow mistrust to blossom.” 

Back in 2013, Glenn Llopis reported in Forbes that “Unfortunately, trust is in rare supply these days. People are having trouble trusting each other. Americans are suspicious of each other in their everyday encounters”. I recently asked a married couple, in their late 30’s with two children (4 and 1 years old), if they were taught by their parents to trust people. Both immediately said yes with one caveat: “Don’t trust strangers!” I then asked if they would teach their children to trust people, i.e. relatives, teachers, clergy, doctors, police, etc. and both quickly responded, “NO WAY!” I believe that absent trust the future of relationships at home, work and worldwide is in jeopardy

Elitism

“It’s lonely at the top.  But it’s comforting to look down upon every at the bottom.” 

~Larry Kersten, American Sociologist

BACKGROUND

As I was writing my last blog, “Prejudice, Bias and Microaggressions”, I kept asking myself are people really prejudiced and racist or are they just elitist, highbrow, pompous or a stuffed shirt?  Allegations of racism, sexism and many of the other isms are widely reported daily by the media.  Other than in the recent Presidential election where Democrats were described by Republicans as elitist politicians who are making self-serving policies and the “One Percenters”, there is not much banter about American elitism.  On the other hand, I have read and heard about elitism in the United Kingdom and the Russian Oligarchy.  As a matter of fact, the British Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission’s 2019 Report “suggests that Britain is deeply elitist.” Back in 2014, Professor Lindsey Macmillan, UCL Institute of Education, University of London, wrote “We need a better understanding of the routes through which those from more advantaged backgrounds access top careers.”

ELITISM

Elitism is the belief or notion that individuals who form an elite – a select group of people perceived as having an intrinsic, high intellect, wealth, special skills, or experience – are more likely to be constructive to society as a whole, and therefore deserve influence or authority greater than that of others.  (Wikipedia)  In “Elitism is a Problem: Being elite is the solution.” Connor Wood (2018) found that “Elitism is the defense of a high status group and its values, often with a sense of condescension or disparagement toward people who don’t share that high status.” He goes on to say that in America, elitism is feeling superior because of where you went to school, live, or even vacation.  “It’s using tokens of lifestyle, education, wealth and privilege to elevate your perceived value over other people.”

ELITIST

In an elitist society, people believe that a small group are entitled to special privileges, power and respect because they are perceived to have high intellect, extensive education and vast wealth, powerful contacts, prominent social status, exceptional talents, and/or because of a divine right. Throughout history, the elite “ruled by right” and favored a meritocracy, technocracy and plutocracy. Britain is a meritocracy where everyone with skill and imagination can aspire to reach the highest level.  The Soviet Union was a technocracy where government is controlled by the elite of technical experts.  According to Noam Chomsky, American Linguist/Political Activist, and Former President Jimmy Carter, the modern United States resembles a plutocracy with democratic forms, where a society is ruled or controlled by people of great wealth.

Most of the world considers America to be an anti-elitist society. People flock to America because it is the land of opportunity.  We pride ourselves in being a diverse society that appeals to ordinary people, and believes all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.   The fact of the matter is that America has an extensive history of not being pluralist, populist, or egalitarian enough.  The less affluent and marginalized do not have access to quality education, decent, safe and affordable housing, equal rights, good paying jobs, career advancement, affordable health care, much less membership to country clubs.   I guess this is why they are considered disadvantaged. Unfortunately, the chasm is widening and “hate and racism are spreading.” (Harvard T.H. Chan, School of Public Health, Feb. 13, 2019).

Other than the white-supremacist, nowhere did I find elitists described as racist, sexist or any other “ism”.  Why am I surprised since elitists know they’re far better than that?  

RACISM

The Oxford Dictionary defines racism as "The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.” Theories of racism encompass prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. 

If elitists are the super-humans but not racist, who are the racists?  Wornie Reed, Director of the Race and Social Policy Center at Virginia Tech, says “A racist person is a person who commits racist acts.” This is a person who harbors prejudice against or is antagonistic toward someone because of the person’s membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.  Underlying this prejudice is the belief that one’s own race is superior. Prejudice can manifest itself explicitly or implicitly.  I think we all have known or know individuals of all backgrounds, beliefs and walks of life who are racist.  Many have suffered and died because of racist acts.  Is this right?  Absolutely not!  Will this change?  Probably not!

ELITE

There is nothing wrong with striving to be elite.  Being elite entails having the same education at fancy universities, great occupations, wealth, etc., but using them for good rather that self-aggrandizement.  Connor Wood says it best, “In short being elite entails taking on the responsibilities of leadership, which include self-sacrifice, looking out for the common good, and being willing to make difficult decisions.  It’s the inverse image of snobbery.  Snobs and elitists care about themselves.” 

CONCLUSION

People are prejudiced and racist regardless of whether or not they are elitist or perceive themselves to be elitists.  The main argument for elitism is that the smartest and strongest people are the best qualified to lead and have power.  The main arguments against elitism are that it opposes equality, diversity and democracy.  I don’t think there is anything wrong with striving to be the best at what you aspire to.  Striving to be excellent or elite is merely a goal never an end.  There absolutely is no justification for being a racist.

Prejudice, Bias and Microaggressions: Fact or Fiction?

"Everyone is a prisoner of his own experiences. No one can eliminate prejudices just recognize them."  ~Edward R. Murrow

Background

Not too long ago I was contacted by a colleague and asked if I would be interested in participating in a podcast to discuss “Microaggression.” He was specifically interested in my sharing with the audience actual real life examples of microaggression within organizations. I realized I needed to learn more about microaggression before venturing off sharing examples or expressing any opinions.  So I declined the invitation and did my homework. 

Prejudice

In my opinion, it all begins with prejudice.  Simply stated prejudice is a strong inclination of the mind or preconceived opinion about something or someone without evidence. According to Wikipedia, prejudice is often used to refer to usually unfavorable evaluation of another person based on perceived race, ethnicity, gender, nationality, language, social standing, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, political affiliation, education or many other personal characteristics.  Oh, I should also list the college or university you align with especially if it’s USC or UCLA. Lord Francis Jeffrey (1783-1850) is quoted as saying “Beware prejudices.  They are like rats, and men’s minds are like traps; prejudices get in easily, but it is doubtful they ever get out.” This also includes women’s minds. I don’t believe that anyone, including myself, is free of prejudice or bias.

Bias   

The Oxford Languages Dictionary defines bias as a “prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.”    Bias is very similar but not as extreme as prejudice.  “Someone who is biased usually refuses to accept that there are other views than their own.” An “explicit bias” is one where individuals are aware of their prejudices and attitudes toward certain groups and the positive or negative preferences for a group are conscious. Overt racism and racist comments are examples of explicit biases. When a bias occurs outside of the perceiver’s awareness, it is called “unconscious or implicit bias” (onlinegrad.pepperdine.edu, July, 2019). An unconscious or implicit bias is covert and unspoken. Ruth Bader Ginsburg believed that an unconscious bias is one of the hardest things to get at.  Why? You can’t read people’s minds. 

A few examples of implicit bias include –

·         Putting an unconventional candidate through extra hoops.

·         Seeing women as too assertive.

·         Perceiving women who go on maternity leave no longer caring about their careers.

·         Asians are too small for public safety jobs.

·         Latinos are all about fun.

·         A Muslim wearing a hijab can’t be trusted.

Microaggression

Chester Pierce, an African American Harvard trained psychiatrist, in the 1960s was the first to describe microaggression as covert acts.  He defined microaggressions as “black-white racial interactions (that) are characterized by white put downs, done in automatic, preconscious, or unconscious fashion.”   Compared to what he called “macroaggressions” (lynching, beatings, and cross burnings), microaggressions are stressful for a recipient “given their ubiquity and deniability.” Columbia University’s Dr. Derald Wing Sue (Edutopia, March 25, 2019) describes microaggressions as one outgrowth of “implicit bias.”  They are “prejudices that leak out in many interpersonal situations and decision points; they are experienced as “slights, insults, indignities, and denigrating messages.”  Whether intentional or unintentional, microaggressions communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative attitudes toward stigmatized or culturally marginalized groups.  The hidden messages are that the person is a lesser human being; suggest the person does not fit in with the majority group; can be intimidating fostering personal insecurities; and/or relegates the person to inferior status and treatment. 

Examples of microaggressions I have personally encountered or have been told by others they have experienced are:

·         “So, like, what are you?”  No really, what are you?”

·          “You don’t look Latina.”

·         “You don’t sound like a Mexican.”

·          “You’re really cute for an Asian.”

·         “You’re really smart for a Latina.”

·         “You look too young to be competing for this position.”

·          “Do you really think you have the experience and energy to do this job?”

·         “Do you really want your daughter selected as a firefighter?”

·          “Oh, he’s just a diversity hire.”

On Buzzfeed Reader there was a ‘Oh Sorry, Wrong Person’ post, December, 2013, "When I started grad school, the intro class was taught by two white women and I was one of two Mexican-Americans in the cohort. They constantly called me Maria, the other girl's name. My name is Alejandra and we look nothing alike."

Fact or Fiction

Jason Rantz, 770 KTTH Conservative Radio, May 2015, posits that microaggression is merely “an excuse to be offended, feel victimized.”  The targeted person sees these as slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages “based solely upon their marginalized group membership.”  He argues that these concepts are a progressive’s social contrivances developed to merely make excuses for one’s own failures and fosters a perpetual victim.  “It’s a theme activists use to blame their woes on racism, sexism, classism, white privilege, white power, ableism, and everything else, though not anything they did themselves.” 

There are those who believe these groups are being much too sensitive.  “Just admit it, people of color are lazy and/or incompetent and just need to work hard.”  Implicit biases and microaggressions can be a way of avoiding subterfuge being labeled a racist when being openly racist in America is presumed unacceptable.  However, I question, if today that’s even a concern for many Americans.

Conclusion

Do I believe that everyone has a prejudice, is biased, and has expressed a microaggression whether consciously or unconsciously?  The answer is yes.  Do I believe that everyone is a racist and/or knowingly means to discriminate against and marginalize people?  The answer is no.  Do I believe there are blatant discrimination, racism and marginalization in the United States, organizations, educational institutions and businesses?  The answer is yes. 

Prejudice, bias and microaggression are attitudes that must be kept in check and never ignored.  If left unchecked, marginalization of people creates a toxic social environment that affects everyone.  Marginalization can happen to anyone, but most often happens to groups fighting uphill battles.  Beth Castle, Inhersight, 2019, states that marginalization in the workplace is especially problematic because it “is both a barrier to advancement and happiness and it’s emblematic of a work environment that’s exclusive and discriminatory.” 

It is important to keep this in mind as we work together to rebuild our post Covid-19 economy and a stronger, more united America.