There are so many different shades and intensities for racism.
It’s not practical to put people in only 2 baskets: Racist | Not Racist .
All of us are racist to some degree. However I hope we can all agree that the KKK member setting a black man on fire or the Nazi executing jews are “more racist” (if you’ll forgive my imprecise use of the term) than the man who cringes and feels slightly ashamed about it when his daughter brings her Indian boyfriend to dinner, or the person who compliments a black person for being “so articulate”.
Richter’s scale is logarithmic with base 10, which means a cat 2 is ten times more than cat 1, cat 3 is a hundred times more than cat 1, etc.
Feel free to use a different base if you prefer. doubling the racism for each level might be a better fit. Who knows.
For reference, this is what the Richter’s scale looks like:
[ol]
[li]Microearthquakes, not felt, or felt rarely. [/li][li]Felt slightly by some people. No damage to buildings.[/li][li]Often felt by people, but very rarely causes damage.[/li][li]Noticeable shaking of indoor objects and rattling noises. Felt by most people in the affected area. none to minimal damage. Some objects may fall off shelves or be knocked over.[/li][li]Can cause damage of varying severity to poorly constructed buildings. none to slight damage to all other buildings. Felt by everyone.[/li][li]Earthquake-resistant structures survive with slight to moderate damage. Poorly designed structures receive moderate to severe damage. [/li][li]Causes damage to most buildings, some to partially or completely collapse or receive severe damage. Well-designed structures are likely to receive damage. [/li][li]Major damage to buildings, structures likely to be destroyed. Will cause moderate to heavy damage to sturdy or earthquake-resistant buildings. [/li][li]At or near total destruction – severe damage or collapse to all buildings. Permanent changes in ground topography[/li][/ol]
Here is my racism scale for illustrative purposes. It is certain to be flawed since I just came up with it off the top of my head. I’ve gone down from 5 to 1 because it was easier.
One or more groups of people are sub-human and should be eradicated.
One or more groups of people are human, but inferior and can only be tolerated in their own “ethno-states”. No mixed marriages allowed. acknowledges self as racist. Unlikely to have any friends from inferior groups
Strong preference for certain groups, strong dislike of certain groups. Does not acknowledge self as racist. Think they just say it like it is, calling a spade a spade. Have one or more ethnic friends.
Slight preference for certain groups. Slight dislike of others. May or may not acknowledge unconscious racism. Likely to have diverse friends or family members. Does not associate or support overt racists outside their family.
No statistically meaningful preference for any group. Is aware of systemic and unconscious racism and tried to counter baser impulses.
In principle earthquakes are quantifiable. This one was 10 times as energetic as that one hence 1 point higher on the Richter scale. I don’t believe that you can quantify racism. You can certainly have an ordinal scale and I agree with your ordering, but I don’t see any sense in which your 2 is ten times as bad as your 1 v. 15 times as bad or 3 times as bad.
And one minor point. When you say “preference”, I assume you mean for something like job hiring and not dating/marrying. I don’t think that someone who says I’d prefer to date someone who is of race x is racist in the sense we usually use that word. It’s not much different than saying I’d prefer to date someone who is blonde.
I think your suggestion recognizes a real problem, but doesn’t go far enough.
You are correct to observe that the racist/not-racist binary is unhelpful. But part of what is unhelpful is that it suggests that people are racist, rather than ideas and behaviors. In fact, people are complicated, they change, and they believe and do lots of things, often contradictory things.
We are better off not labeling people as racists at all, and instead labeling actions and ideas as racist. In addition to more precisely specifying the target of criticism, identifying and criticizing ideas/behavior as racist rather than people as racist has the benefit of making some people less defensive, which is a mental posture more conducive to persuasion.
I believe we can still quantify things if we think inventively. For example, we could rate racism by how much money in damages their racist actions would be awarded by a jury (employment discrimination, housing discrimination, verbal intimidation, verbal assault, physical assault, murder, etc.)
You assume correctly.
A scale for ideas and actions eh? I’m intrigued. What would that look like in your imagination?
The problem I have with this idea is that I can see it being used to support the idea that there is an acceptable level of racism. People may feel that if we get racism down to Level 2, for example, we can say we’ve done enough.
The acceptable amount of racism is zero. Everyone should be working on reducing racism at every level. We should be working on reducing Level 5 racism to Level 4 - and we should be working on reducing Level 1 racism to Level 0.
Agree, but it is also important to not treat Level 1 racists like Level 5 racists. Otherwise you get a backlash where some people say, “If I’m going to be treated like the worst when I’m only a little bit bad, then I might as well go full bad” and that is going to hurt at the polls.
We want a crime-free society, by analogy - “the acceptable level of crime is zero” - but we don’t want to treat misdemeanors like felonies, or execute every criminal on a one-size-fits-all policy. That has severe unintended consequences.
Well, why not? I posit that it’s biologically impossible to be completely unracist. If a difference can be perceived, it will affect that person’s mental standing in some fashion, however minor.
Suppose racism were brought to a level where there was no statistically detectable effect at a societal level, but that sophisticated psychological experiments could still tease out an effect for most individuals (for instance, the experiment that uses reaction time to see how people perceive race/behavior pairings). Wouldn’t that be acceptable?
This level is of course several orders of magnitude below current levels, even among “not a racist” types. That doesn’t mean there isn’t some level of “it’s there, but it doesn’t matter”.
IATs have some controversy about precisely what they’re measuring, and it’s entirely possible that there’s no correlation between a positive IAT result and real-world prejudice. However, it is nevertheless clearly measuring some kind of racism (or sexism, or whatever), however benign. And almost everybody has a bias on these tests.
It is a bias that can change when the test is re-taken and overall it is not a test that gives consistent results for the same person so I’m dubious as to its validity for individuals.
I’m with** Leaffan** on this. I don’t think I’m in any meaningful way racist but the scale proposed starts with the assumption that everyone has “baser impulses” that must be consciously fought against. I don’t think so.
I don’t agree with the OP about “baser impulses”. I don’t think everyone has an inner Nazi. Instead, I think everyone has unavoidable biases due to our pattern recognizers running wild.
Suppose a Japanese stranger does you a favor. Are you absolutely certain that you would not treat the next few Japanese you meet with a bit of preferential friendliness? If you did, then you would be a little bit racist. Racist in a completely imperceptible and benign way, of course, but racist nevertheless.
If anything, I think the lack of consistency over time reinforces the idea of minor, low-level racism over some innate hatred. People recognize patterns around them (both real and imagined), and due to well-known but unavoidable cognitive errors (like confirmation bias), these get amplified and fed into behavior. For many, these stay at a benign level. For others, there is a feedback loop that amplifies it to insane levels. Keeping this in check isn’t a matter of harnessing your inner demons, but rather about having some degree of introspection.
Having utter confidence in your own lack of bias is a dangerous attitude, IMO. It’s like having complete confidence in your own memory or senses. You’ve got a wrinkly sack of meat for a brain and wet blobs as sense organs. Having complete confidence in anything like that is just a sign that you’ve overestimated your own abilities.
I think that reduces the word “racist” to something utterly meaningless. The same thinking above could be applied to people with beards, kilts, glasses or “Hello Kitty” backpacks and we would not think any potential temporary preferential treatment as worthy of note.
I claim that there is a smooth gradation between those low-level forms of bigotry and things that we’d definitely call racism. Arguably, this is just another form of the Sorites “paradox”–if you remove a grain at a time, when does a heap of sand become not-a-heap?
Or, continuing on with the premise of the OP, there is no distinguishing line between earthquake and not-an-earthquake. The more general view is that of the energy in ground movement, which can be put on a scale. At very low levels, where we can’t perceive the movement, we don’t tend to call those earthquakes, even though it’s the same *kind *of thing as a 9.0.
If you want to use “racism” as a binary label, more power to you, but then you have to figure out where the dividing line is. Viewed as a spectrum, there’s no need to set a threshold at all.
Are you suggesting that an irrational dislike of people with kilts, beards, etc is acceptable behaviour? Just because you can’t justify your likes and dislikes rationally that doesn’t give you a pass to discriminate against people.
Do people really state preferences like that nowadays? Sounds atavistic to me.
Although all ethnic groups have both beautiful and ugly women, I am more likely to feel sexually attracted to women of certain ethnic groups than I am to women of other ethnic groups. Am I a racist?
There are many whites who insist that they have no racist tendencies, but since whites are so mistreated in present-day American, they feel they should support the so-called white supremacists (for the same reason blacks supported MLK’s efforts). Are they racist?