Since outright hatred and discrimination of people because of their race is no longer socially acceptable in our post Civil-Rights era, many argue racism no longer exists. But sociologists suggest that racism simply changed, becoming more implicit and indirect.
Eduardo Bonilla-Silva argues that the new racism entails individuals saying and doing things that perpetuate racial stereotypes and inequalities, but they do so in such a way that the offender is able to deny being explicitly racist. One of the many types of new racist strategies Bonilla-Silva highlights is the use of racially charged code speak, or using indirect racial rhetoric and semantic moves to express an ideology that serves to reinforce white dominance over minorities.
The Daily Show’s Larry Wilmore illustrates the code speak implicit in presidential candidate Newt Gingrich’s suggestion that we combat poverty by hiring poor children to clean the restrooms at their schools. In the clip below, Wilmore notes that “it’s 2011, and you can’t just call Black people lazy,” and then points out Gingrich’s racial code speak. He notes Gingrich’s statement about “neighborhoods where they may not have that experience [of working]” is “code for inner-city, which is code for urban, which is code for Black.” Gingrich’s statement about poor children having “no habit of showing up [to work] on Monday” is “code for shiftless, which is code for lazy, which is code for black.” Wilmore then plays more of Gingrich’s speech where the presidential candidate cites statistics about Black unemployment, thereby making his implicit racial assumptions explicit:
.
The clip also points out how racial ideology engages very different explanations for the causes of poverty depending on the race of those affected. Wilmore notes, “when Black people are poor it’s their fault because they are lazy and on welfare, but down in poor Appalachia it’s not your fault; it’s China’s fault, or India’s fault, or all the money we’re spending on Black people on welfare.”
When John Stewart asks why this is important, Wilmore points out how the causes of poverty “matter to the solutions,” thereby pointing out Gingrich’s implicit prejudices of nonwhite inferiority with his proposal that Black poverty could be eliminated by hiring children to clean toilets (and Gingrich reaffirmed his support for this idea at a GOP primary debate last week, to wild crowd applause). Similarly, Rick Santorum is now defending himself after saying, “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money,” ignoring the fact that most recipients of government aid are White and the vast majority of Blacks are employed and do pay taxes to support the social safety net citizens of all races use. In both cases, the message is clear: African Americans are deficient, with no work ethic, and the solution to poverty is entirely at the individual level, with no need for larger structural changes.
—————————-
Jason Eastman is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Coastal Carolina University who researches how culture and identity influence social inequalities.
If you would like to write a post for Sociological Images, please see our Guidelines for Guest Bloggers.
Comments 112
Jadey — January 23, 2012
I never cease to be frustrated by Sociological Images' lack of commitment to providing transcripts for their video content, for people who rely on screenreaders, who have cognitive or perceptual difficulties parsing such information, whose technological set-ups do not meet the requirements for handling video, or who don't live in the country where the video clip is restricted to. Seriously. I have yet to see a mention on this site of an awareness that this is an issue, that it compromises Sociological Images as an informative and social justice-minded space on the Internet, and what the SI admins are doing to attempt to rectify this problem.
pduggie — January 23, 2012
Jonah Goldberg wrote on the issue of 'codewords':
"Juan Williams stirred the pot by asking Newt Gingrich about his comments on food stamps, child labor, and all that. I thought Juan got a little too righteous and sweeping in his characterization, but I also think conservatives offended by the question are off-base. It was fair game, and Newt won the exchange in all the ways that mattered, i.e. with the Republican voters in the audience and watching at home.
But the mainstream press won't let it go. They insist there are dog whistles, troubling implications, racial overtones, etc., to Gingrich's comments. I think that's all for the most part a crock (as I argued here last December [http://tinyurl.com/6qpm6ed]).
Moreover, if what Gingrich says is out of bounds, if he can't say what he thinks out loud without all this nonsense, how are we ever going to have this "national conversation about race" liberals keep clamoring for?
As I've written a million times now, the pattern goes like this. Liberals insist that we must talk openly and honestly about race. A conservative says something open and honest about race. Liberals scream "Racist!" and try to destroy him for saying what liberals hoped he would say. The same goes for gays these days. In the ABC debate, Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopolous made it seem like they were eager to deal with the thorny issues raised by homosexuality in America. But what was obvious to everyone was that all they were really interested in was trapping one of the candidates into saying something that the media could go hysterical about.
On Work
Look, there are a lot of issues, biases, and misinterpretations swirling around whenever white Republicans talk about the travails of inner-city blacks. Indeed, one of the most annoying criticisms I get is that I can't write or say anything about the plight of inner-city blacks because of my race or background. I think that's unpersuasive for too many reasons to recount here. It's also more often than not a pretty naked attempt to police unwelcome perspectives. I mean, nobody ever tells white liberals they can't talk about race. Why? Because white liberals say whatever black liberals want to hear for the most part.
But let's not get into all of that. Suffice it to say there's room for a lot of different theories and interpretations out there. But I think people haven't really figured out that one big reason people appreciate Gingrich's talk about the importance of work is this: Conservatives really like work. Liberals really like "jobs."
That's a subtle distinction for some, but I think it's a major cultural and sociological divide. Conservatives don't see too much nobility in poverty (though they don't necessarily see shame in it either). Liberals treat poverty like it is a sacrament of some kind. Conservatives emphasize habits of the heart. Liberals emphasize material conditions. Liberals exalt labor unions, whose purpose is to maximize the number of jobs offered but curtail as much as possible the amount of work required to get a paycheck. Conservatives think jobs should be allotted based entirely on merit. Liberals think jobs should be allotted based, at least in part, on considerations of need, race, and gender.
When Gingrich talks about the glories of work, it resonates with conservative audiences on a host of levels that have absolutely nothing to do with race. Indeed, for me and I think a lot of conservatives, the reason we find the racial aspects of the argument compelling is that we have a serious and humane concern for the plight of inner-city blacks. I don't know many conservatives who don't believe in their bones that if poor blacks from broken homes could just have the same work ethic and values as, say, immigrant Koreans, they would be significantly better off (and they feel the same way about poor whites from broken homes!). A liberal hears that and thinks it's simply racist. But that's not how it is intended. And this isn't to say there aren't other factors at play, but conservatives side with Booker T. Washington while liberals side with W.E.B. Du Bois. It breaks my heart that Republicans haven't been better at embracing the Washingtonian tradition.
That's not to say there hasn't been progress. Herman Cain represents the Booker T. Washington tradition and that's one reason why he's such a natural fit in the Republican party. And so does Clarence Thomas. There's a wonderful scene in Thomas's memoirs. When he was just a little kid growing up in abject poverty (his mother could barely put food on the table), he and his brother were left homeless by a fire. His grandfather agreed to take them in. He told Thomas, then seven years old and hardly living the good life, that his "damn vacation is over." Thomas's grandfather believed in backbreaking work. "Never let the sun catch you in bed." I have never met a conservative who doesn't eat that stuff up.
Yes, of course, there are plenty of hardworking liberals and slothful conservatives. My only point is that the rhetoric of conservatism has frequencies that liberals have a hard time hearing. What they think is a dog-whistle about race is in fact clarion call about the virtues of work, for blacks and whites alike."
Leslee Bottomley Beldotti — January 23, 2012
Heh. I was raised by a white, middle class retired couple (my grandparents) who didn't work, and who had friends who were also retired and therefore, didn't work. During my entire childhood, I never saw ANY adult have "habits of working."
So I guess by Newt's definition, I should be lazy, shiftless and black?
Anonymous — January 23, 2012
Does Newt even think? Because this sounds like a poorly veiled plan to re-establish the racial caste system that was typical of the Jim Crow era. "Have the black children clean the toilets at school?" One, that is firing working adults (likely to be black or Hispanic) from paying jobs. I'm sure the kid who's dad or mom is the custodian has the experience of "showing up on Monday." Second, it's sort of child slavery (which I don't doubt Newt would have no problem implementing, so long as it wasn't white children). But you know, colored children aren't worthy of the same rights white children are. @@ Finally, the idea just reads as a ploy to me: get the black people off welfare, but heaven forbid don't allow them into high ranking, well paying jobs! Kids are at school to learn (whether they do or not is beside the point for this discussion). He's talking about taking away time from reading, math, and science to teach "cleaning up after others." It's saying "you don't have to be a pimp or prostitute....but you sure as fuck don't deserve to be a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher, a mechanic, or anything else that involves education or a learned skill." It's disturbing that he picked on the teenage unemployment rate over something more relevant. Teenagers aren't usually the ones raising children and going to work every day. People don't expect white teenagers to have 9 to 5 jobs, or necessarily jobs at all, because they are expected to be in school. Even without the fact that Newt is completely ignoring that most poor black people ARE the working poor (because he's never seen a black person in a minimum wage job? Seriously?), he shows a serious lack of faith that black children can be taught and are equal in potential capabilities to white children. If he actually wanted to improve the situation of the black poor, he'd focus on trying to bring inner-city schools up to par, to be comparable to public schools in more affluent areas. He wouldn't just shout "there are always toilets to be cleaned!"
Ricky — January 23, 2012
Simple projection. If you are a racist and bigot, then you will find the same in everyone else, even if it is in "coded" language.
Gynomite’s Reading Room! « Gynomite! — January 23, 2012
[...] The racially coded language of the presidential candidates, over at Sociological Images. [...]
Song — January 23, 2012
The "habit of showing up to work on monday" phrasing bugs the hell out of me, all questions of racism aside. When I think "kid" and "monday" in the same sentence, the only place I expect them to be "showing up" is SCHOOL. That IS their job, at that age!
Fargofan1 — January 23, 2012
In Time magazine (1/30/12), columnist Joe Klein says this idea actually came from him, in 1991, "although I put a slightly different twist on it." The twist was Klein wanted all high schoolers to clean the schools, not just the poor students.
Newt Racism « mccurleyhardesty — January 24, 2012
[...] Here is an interesting article (and video from The Daily Show) about the controversial comments by Newt Gingrich. What do you think? Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Filed under Uncategorized ← Strange Fruit by Billie Holiday [...]
Newt Racism | mccurleyhardesty1 — January 24, 2012
[...] Here is an interesting article (and video from The Daily Show) about the controversial comments by Newt Gingrich. What do you think? Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
Newt Racism « mccurleyhardesty2 — January 24, 2012
[...] Here is an interesting article (and video from The Daily Show) about the controversial comments by Newt Gingrich. What do you think? Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
Newt Racism | mccurleyhardesty3 — January 24, 2012
[...] Here is an interesting article (and video from The Daily Show) about the controversial comments by Newt Gingrich. What do you think? Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
Newt Racism « mccurleyhardesty4 — January 24, 2012
[...] Here is an interesting article (and video from The Daily Show) about the controversial comments by Newt Gingrich. What do you think? Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
Umlud — January 24, 2012
And now more than 40 Catholic leaders and theologians are calling Newt and Santorum on it, too:
http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/newsroom/press/catholic-leaders-challenge-gingrich-and-santorum-on-divisive-rhetoric-around-race-and-poverty/
Stickler — January 24, 2012
I'd like to see the names of well-known people spelled correctly on this blog. Such errors might make people question your content's validity.
darksidecat — January 24, 2012
I wish that for once, we could discuss racialized classism directed against poor people of color without scapegoating poor white people and pretending like classism against them is non-existent.
"...but down in poor Appalachia it’s not your fault; it’s China’s fault, or
India’s fault, or all the money we’re spending on Black people on
welfare."
Um, hello, this is a classist narrative. Poor rural people being depicted as foolish, ignorant, and uniquely racist (when, de facto, they aren't more racist than urban and suburban wealthy white people, though they do, as all white people, have their fair share of racism). Since when are rural poor white people depicted positively either? They are "trailer trash" "white trash" "rednecks" and "inbred", people who scam disability benefits, etc. If you put the term "poor white" into youtube or google, it automatically recommends "trash" and "trash trailer".
There are racialized classist narratives, and dynamics of racism in poor people, etc. and those are certainly worth discussing. But I'm sick and tired of classism and ignorance of classism being given a pass in these discussions whenever it is targeted at rural or white poor people. It is classist to scapegoat poor white people and deny the classism against them to try and criticize rich person's racist, classist comments.
Anonymous — January 25, 2012
In the backwoods of Upstate New York (where I live) the racism is far more explicit &, believe me, redneck inbreeding has not eliminated the ability to understand racist innuendo. And of course, Obama, masquerading as a Black Man & perceived as such by the White Power 'Elite', is the real target of Gingrich's gibes. Each & every remark cited above is merely an Harmonic of all the old school racism still so common amongst disenfranchised whites. No one has gotten the message across that you don't have to be black to be treated like an 'N-Word'. We're all slaves on the Tea Party Plantation.
Closing the week 4 - Featuring Competing Utopias — C L O S E R — January 29, 2012
[...] Newt Racism: The Racially Coded Language of Presidential Candidates » Sociological Images Since outright hatred and discrimination of people because of their race is no longer socially acceptable in our post Civil-Rights era, many argue racism no longer exists. But sociologists suggest that racism simply changed, becoming more implicit and indirect. [...]
Return of the ‘Welfare Queen’ « The Czech — February 2, 2012
[...] Jason Eastman at Sociological Images [...]
Attitudes About Race | Erin V Echols — February 27, 2012
[...] (or even “positive stereotypes”) of various racial/ethnic groups in movies,sports, politics, comedy, toys, advertisements, costumes [...]
Antique World Map 1700 – Where Would Conservative Republicans Be Without Distortions and Deflections « « Spreading Barack Obama Spreading Barack Obama — May 18, 2012
[...] are happy to exploit that segment of conservatives – in sometimes coded language, sometimes not so coded , to get votes. Baldwin is for” small government”. Well, so am I, that is why [...]
Racism Makes A Comeback After Obama Re-Election! | Sinuous Magazine — November 7, 2012
[...] that he has won his second term, but it’s actually a relief. I’m sick and tired of the coded language aka “new [...]
Empire Builders rally round Stephen Henderson’s Free Press editorial | Which pill did you swallow? If you ask nicely, we may be able to help — March 18, 2013
[...] was searching around for clear examples of coded-language and found Newt Racism: The Racially Coded Language of Presidential Candidates by Jason Eastman, that focused on last year’s election campaign and Newt Gingriches’ [...]
Empire Builders rally round Stephen Henderson’s Free Press editorial — Detroit Evolution — March 20, 2013
[...] was searching around for clear examples of coded-language and found Newt Racism: The Racially Coded Language of Presidential Candidates by Jason Eastman, that focused on last year’s election campaign and Newt Gingriches’ word usage. [...]
Thug Notes: What’s in the subtext? — October 21, 2013
[…] recently read a wonderful summary of Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s definition of coded racism that describes it […]
ThugNotes Subtext: Coded Racism? | Digital Race — November 15, 2013
[…] recently read a wonderful summary of Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s definition of coded racism that describes it […]
That Coke Ad & What it Means to be American | SociologyInFocus — February 19, 2014
[…] this article that discusses racially coded language. Explain what racially coded language is and how […]
sklepy golfowe — November 10, 2018
First Warsaw Golf & Country Membership to pierwsze
pole golfowe powstałe w powojennej Polsce.