Naïveté explanation of racism
The Naïveté explanation of racism proposes that many White Americans do not harbor deep-seated racial prejudices, but instead may express simplistic or naïve views about African Americans. This perspective, articulated by political scientist Paul Sniderman, suggests that when people are questioned more deeply about their beliefs on equality, they often reveal a commitment to liberal values, including the belief in equality and the potential for government as a force for social change. Sniderman's research indicates that a significant portion of White Americans recognize the importance of equality for African Americans, though conflicts over racial policies often arise from differing views on governmental roles rather than outright racism.
He argues that the actual effect of prejudice on political choices is modest and that many individuals are concerned about fairness in social programs. Sniderman believes that to achieve true equality, the focus should shift from racial to social justice, advocating for assistance to all low-income families rather than race-specific policies. This approach could foster a unifying platform that transcends racial divisions and encourages cooperation for broader social improvement. Overall, the Naïveté explanation of racism invites a reevaluation of how racial attitudes are framed and the potential for change in societal views.
On this Page
Naïveté explanation of racism
Paul Sniderman, professor of political science at Stanford University, concluded that most White Americans are not racists. Although Americans may sometimes express a simple-minded, naïve, prejudiced view of Black people, this disappears when researchers delve more deeply into their true beliefs concerning equality. Sniderman’s views are outlined in his book Reaching beyond Race (1997), which he cowrote with political scientist Edward G. Carmines. Sniderman discovered that about as many White Americans believe in equality for African Americans as are opposed to the concept. His surveys led him to conclude that modern conflicts over racial policies are driven as much by a White person’s view of what the government should try to do as by any deep prejudice or racial hatred of African Americans. Sniderman found that many Americans, White and Black, share the basic values of liberalism: a belief in the equality of all human beings, a belief that government can be a positive force for social change, and a deep commitment to helping those in society who are disadvantaged. His surveys showed that it is a mistake to believe that before equality can be achieved, White values, based on prejudice, must be changed. It is not the prejudice of White individuals that prevents change, he argued, because many White individuals no longer express or hold racist views of Black inferiority. Sniderman characterized the overall impact of racial prejudice on political choices made by White individuals as very “modest.”
Instead, Sniderman concluded, the programs advocated by civil rights groups are the biggest obstacles to equality because they seem to be opposed to another basic American value: fairness. Programs dedicated to creating equal opportunity, such as affirmative action, are seen as condoning unequal treatment under the law. Race-conscious policies aimed at overcoming prejudice blame people living now for crimes committed many years and generations ago. Many White Americans who are not prejudiced against African Americans see this as unfair. Similarly, laws outlawing hate speech bother many White Americans who see them as preventing free discussion and free speech.
Surveys of racial attitudes conducted by Sniderman showed an increase, even since 1993, in the number of White Americans who bear goodwill toward Black people. He found two forces at work in White America: a diminishing core of citizens who hate Black individuals fully and completely and a growing number who wish to see improvement in the quality of lives led by African Americans.
Sniderman suggested that it is no longer necessary to change the “hearts and minds” of White Americans to bring about full equality. However, the terms of the debate should be changed. Political leaders who support programs aimed at helping impoverished Black families should broaden their views to include help for all low-income families. They should base their appeals for help on the moral principle of fairness, which states that all people who need help should get it, regardless of race. According to Sniderman, a platform calling for social justice, rather than racial justice, would end racial divisions in the United States and bring about a true biracial coalition that would change the nation forever.
Sniderman authored and coauthored several other works concerning race and society, including When Ways of Life Collide: Multiculturalism and Its Discontents in the Netherlands (2007), Black Pride and Black Prejudice (2002), and The Scar of Race (1995).
Bibliography
DeSante, Christopher D. “Working Twice as Hard to Get Half as Far: Race, Work Ethic, and America’s Deserving Poor.” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 57, no. 2, 2013, pp. 342–56, doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12006. Accessed 2 Dec. 2024.
Kenton, Will. "What Is Affirmative Action? How It Works and Example." Investopedia, 28 July 2024, www.investopedia.com/terms/a/affirmative-action.asp. Accessed 2 Dec. 2024.
Kivisto, Peter, and Paul R. Croll. Race and Ethnicity: The Basics. Routledge, 2012.
"Naiveté Is No Excuse for Racism." HuffPost, 18 Aug. 2017, www.huffpost.com/entry/naiveté-is-no-excuse‗b‗5994e7e4e4b00dd984e37c46. Accessed 2 Dec. 2024.
Schuman, Howard, et al. Racial Attitudes in America: Trends and Interpretations. Rev. ed., Harvard UP, 1997.
Sniderman, Paul M., and Edward G. Carmines. Reaching beyond Race. Harvard UP, 1997.
Urquidez, Alberto G. (Re-)Defining Racism: A Philosophical Analysis. Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.