Prejudiced Politics

Election spurs 'hundreds' of race threats, crimes

"Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting "Assassinate Obama." Black figures hung from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars. Incidents around the country referring to President-elect Barack Obama are dampening the postelection glow of racial progress and harmony, highlighting the stubborn racism that remains in America."

So much for “hope for change,” right? In a country that’s dedicated a Civil War and an entire Civil Rights Movement to eradicating racism, one would think prejudice, or an unjustifiable negative feeling or emotional response toward a group and toward its individual members, is a thing of the past. Caused by stereotypes, cognitions about the personal attributes of a group of people, prejudice is explained in three different ways.

One of these ways, known as the Economic Perspective contends that groups develop prejudice and discriminate against others when they compete for natural and symbolic resources, including power, jobs, and status.

“Potok, who is white, said he believes there is ‘a large subset of white people in this country who feel that they are losing everything they know, that the country their forefathers built has somehow been stolen from them.’"

Clearly, economic motives are at work here. Many racist people think that Obama’s election is a sign of control over America passing away from tradition, into new, unworthy hands. White elitists exhibiting in-group favoritism align themselves with traditional white leaders and do not identify at all with the black race. Thus, they view the transfer of power to a black man as a personal loss of power as members of their own group.

In addition to the symbolic resource of power, literal economic resources are a source of competition as well. Many people argue that Obama gives too many resources, like money, to the poor. Realistic group conflict theory predicts that prejudice should increase under times of poverty. This was observed in the case of lynching in the 20th Century: whenever the price of cotton went down, the number of lynchings rose. With a suffering economy, current times predict an increase in prejudice. This offers a strong explanation for the discrimination occurring today.

Realistic group conflict theory also predicts that prejudice and discrimination should be strongest among groups that have the most to lose from another group’s economic advancement. Some of Obama’s wealthy opponents argue against his plan to “level the playing field” among the rich and the poor. The rich have a great deal to lose if Obama raises taxes to help support the needy. Therefore, their sentiments against the poor should be strong.

The best we can do is hope that goals that can only be solved by working together will encourage cooperation among both groups. With an ailing economy, a suffering environment and a messy war overseas, superordinate goals certainly abound. Hopefully these will become unifying forces among the diverse groups that make up America.

References:  Social Psychology & Human Nature, Baumeister