Do you mean when, for example, universities award (or deny) admission to students based on immutable characteristics, instead of merit?
Racism is possible in people of all races, but racism held by those in power (mostly the whites) is a lot more consequential on those not in power. That is why it is receiving more attention now.
“Systemic racism” means more than explicit codified-into-law racism, which we might call “structural”. Structural implies written into law or otherwise explicitly stated. But the term “systemic racism” is a little trickier. It refers to any aspect of the system, including those things that are implemented as a matter of free choice by those in power when the law allows such a free choice. One example could be a difference in how discretionary sentences are applied to backs vs. whites. There is no explicit structural reason why there should be any difference. But if, as a matter of fact, those in power whose prerogative is to make such discretionary decisions just happen to make them in a biased manner, the result can properly be called systemic racism, even though it is not structural. The term “institutional racism” is generally used as a synonym for “systemic racism” and is also expressed as non-codified biases that are, as a matter of empirical fact, race-related as revealed by the statistics.
If it is structural, it must be codified. In other words, the claim means that those who do not act in a racist fashion are in violation of the rules and structure of the institution. When it comes to municipal police departments, the overwhelming number of police do not act in a racist fashion. If the structure is systemically racist, they should be fired for not abiding by the system and structure.
In the United States, there is no “free choice” to act in a racist way. It is illegal. This is undeniable.
This would require statutory differences in how sentencing is applied, but if a judge regularly applies sentences differently by race, this would be identifiable and it would be illegal. Systemic racism is illegal in the United States. If you know of such a judge, report it to the DoJ.
Again, if you know of someone doing this, report it to the DoJ. It is illegal.
Again, this is illegal.
OK, how do you remove systemic racism? What rules of law we have that affect blacks only? Lets remove those.
There is no law that prevents a judge from issuing racially-biased discretionary sentences. The judge, of course, will deny that racism plays any part in his decisions. Statistics alone are not enough to convict a judge of anything illegal. If he sentences blacks to slightly longer terms he can always say he was acting within his discretion. He does not need to justify his decisions to anyone. And so racism can persist in the system even when overt racism is illegal.LeafByNiggle:
In the United States, there is no “free choice” to act in a racist way. It is illegal. This is undeniable.
No, there is no law that identifies any statistics on a judge’s ruling as being racist.LeafByNiggle:
This would require statutory differences in how sentencing is applied, but if a judge regularly applies sentences differently by race, this would be identifiable and it would be illegal.
As I said, it is not in the laws. It is in those aspects of the system that are up to free choice, of which there are many.LeafByNiggle:
OK, how do you remove systemic racism? What rules of law we have that affect blacks only? Lets remove those.
I would follow the advice of our bishops:
This would require a really deep examination to tease out the cause. It might be systemic racism or it might not be.
Well, perhaps you should take it up with them.
Interesting…
No, I really mean, I do not understand what they want to say.
I just gave one possible way in which systemic racism could exist in the absence of any racist laws, like the Jim Crow laws, to refute JonNC’s claim that systemic racism is impossible because it is illegal. I did not mean to imply that the example I gave was the common form or even a form of present-day systemic racism. Any of the things you mentioned could also be a cause, but they are all systemic too because they are a characteristic of the system in which we live, as opposed to a personal fault in all the people who are treated unjustly. Yet that personal fault route seems to be the most common route taken by those who deny that systemic racism exists.LeafByNiggle:
This would require a really deep examination to tease out the cause. It might be systemic racism or it might not be.
For example, maybe it is because poor people are more likely to have public defenders. Perhaps if we looked at the cases in this way, we would find that was the cause.
I disagree. You see, what you explain I believe does happen. Yes people can be racist. Due to this, some people will be subject of harsh punishment due to racism. But you have to taken in to prove racism was the cause, and that the punishment was due to the severity of it. This is not a one simple solution.
Now we get into the difference between individual cases and statistics. When looking at a single case, one can always say that the circumstances were different from some other case, and that might adequately explain that one case. But when you get into statistics, especially when those statistics are extreme, it becomes impossible to justify those statistics on the basis of individual case differences.LeafByNiggle:
I disagree. You see, what you explain I believe does happen. Yes people can be racist. Due to this, some people will be subject of harsh punishment due to racism. But you have to taken in to prove racism was the cause, and that the punishment was due to the severity of it. This is not a one simple solution.
That was 76 years ago.
No, my point is that “systemic racism” is one of those phrases that seems to answer something but does not. It is like the word homophobia which covers why anyone would disagree with the activist agenda while at the same time tarring the dissenter.
You gave an imaginary example in support of a theoretical systemic racism.