Connect with us

Published

on

This article was featured in One Story to Read Today, a newsletter in which our editors recommend a single must-read from The Atlantic, Monday through Friday. Sign up for it here.

For more than half a century, I have been studying the shifting relations between white and Black Americans. My first journal article, published in 1972, when I was a graduate student at the University of Chicago, was about Black political power in the industrial Midwest after the riots of the late 1960s. My own experience of race relations in America is even longer. I was born in the Mississippi Delta during World War II, in a cabin on what used to be a plantation, and then moved as a young boy to northern Indiana, where as a Black person in the early 1950s, I was constantly reminded of my place, and of the penalties for overstepping it. Seeing the image of Emmett Tills dead body in Jet magazine in 1955 brought home vividly for my generation of Black kids that the consequences of failing to navigate carefully among white people could even be lethal.Explore the November 2023 Issue

Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read.View More

For the past 16 years, I have been on the faculty of the sociology department at Yale, and in 2018 I was granted a Sterling Professorship, the highest academic rank the university bestows. I say this not to boast, but to illustrate that I have made my way from the bottom of American society to the top, from a sharecroppers cabin to the pinnacle of the ivory tower. One might think that, as a decorated professor at an Ivy League university, I would have escaped the various indignities that being Black in traditionally white spaces exposes you to. And to be sure, I enjoy many of the privileges my white professional-class peers do. But the Black ghettoa destitute and fearsome place in the popular imagination, though in reality it is home to legions of decent, hardworking familiesremains so powerful that it attaches to all Black Americans, no matter where and how they live. Regardless of their wealth or professional status or years of law-abiding bourgeois decency, Black people simply cannot escape what I call the iconic ghetto.

I know I havent. Some years ago, I spent two weeks in Wellfleet, Massachusetts, a pleasant Cape Cod town full of upper-middle-class white vacationers and working-class white year-rounders. On my daily jog one morning, a white man in a pickup truck stopped in the middle of the road, yelling and gesticulating. Go home! he shouted.

Who was this man? Did he assume, because of my Black skin, that I was from the ghetto? Is that where he wanted me to go home to?

From the May 1994 issue: Elijah Anderson on the code of the streets

This was not an isolated incident. When I jog through upscale white neighborhoods near my home in Connecticut, white people tense upunless I wear my Yale or University of Pennsylvania sweatshirts. When my jogging outfit associates me with an Ivy League university, it identifies me as a certain kind of Black person: a less scary one who has passed inspection under the white gaze. Strangers with dark skin are suspect until they can prove their trustworthiness, which is hard to do in fleeting public interactions. For this reason, Black students attending universities near inner cities know to wear college apparel, in hopes of avoiding racial profiling by the police or others.

I once accidentally ran a small social experiment about this. When I joined the Yale faculty in 2007, I bought about 20 university baseball caps to give to the young people at my family reunion that year. Later, my nieces and nephews reported to me that wearing the Yale insignia had transformed their casual interactions with white strangers: White people would now approach them to engage in friendly small talk.When I jog through upscale white neighborhoods near my home, white people tense upunless I wear my Yale or Penn sweatshirt.

But sometimes these signifiers of professional status and educated-class propriety are not enough. This can be true even in the most rarefied spaces. When I was hired at Yale, the chair of the sociology department invited me for dinner at the Yale Club of New York City. Clad in a blue blazer, I got to the club early and decided to go up to the fourth-floor library to read The New York Times. When the elevator arrived, a crush of people was waiting to get on it, so I entered and moved to the back to make room for others. Everyone except me was white.

As the car filled up, I politely asked a man of about 35, standing by the controls, to push the button for the library floor. He looked at me andemboldened, I have to imagine, by drinks in the bar downstairssaid, You can read? The car fell silent. After a few tense moments, another man, seeking to defuse the tension, blurted, Ive never met a Yalie who couldnt read. All eyes turned to me. The car reached the fourth floor. I stepped off, held the door open, and turned back to the people in the elevator. Im not a Yalie, I said. Im a new Yale professor. And I went into the library to read the paper.

I tell these stories and Ive told them beforenot to fault any particular institution (Ive treasured my time at Yale), but to illustrate my personal experience of a recurring cultural phenomenon: Throughout American history, every moment of significant Black advancement has been met by a white backlash. After the Civil War, under the aegis of Reconstruction, Black people for a time became professionals and congressmen. But when federal troops left the former Confederate states in 1877, white politicians in the South tried to reconstitute slavery with the long rule of Jim Crow. Even the Black people who migrated north to escape this new servitude found themselves relegated to shantytowns on the edges of cities, precursors to the modern Black ghetto.

All of this reinforced what slavery had originally established: the Black bodys place at the bottom of the social order. This racist positioning became institutionalized in innumerable ways, and it persists today.

I want to emphasize that across the decades, many white Americans have encouraged racial equality, albeit sometimes under duress. In response to the riots of the 1960s, the federal governmentled by the former segregationist Lyndon B. Johnsonpassed far-reaching legislation that finally extended the full rights of citizenship to Black people, while targeting segregation. These legislative reformsand, especially, affirmative action, which was implemented via LBJs executive order in 1965combined with years of economic expansion to produce a long period of what I call racial incorporation, which substantially elevated the income of many Black people and brought them into previously white spaces. Yes, a lot of affirmative-action efforts stopped at mere tokenism. Even so, many of these tokens managed to succeed, and the result is the largest Black middle class in American history.To survive in white workplaces, Black newcomers must perform an elaborate dance in which they demonstrate their distance from the ghetto.

Over the past 50 years, according to a study by the Pew Research Center, the proportion of Black people who are low-income (less than $52,000 a year for a household of three) has fallen seven points, from 48 to 41 percent. The proportion who are middle-income ($52,000 to $156,000 a year) has risen by one point, to 47 percent. The proportion who are high-income (more than $156,000 a year) has risen the most dramatically, from 5 to 12 percent. Overall, Black poverty remains egregiously disproportionate to that of white and Asian Americans. But fewer Black Americans are poor than 50 years ago, and more than twice as many are rich. Substantial numbers now attend the best schools, pursue professions of their choosing, and occupy positions of power and prestige. Affirmative action worked.

But that very success has inflamed the inevitable white backlash. Notably, the only racial group more likely to be low-income now than 50 years ago is whitesand the only group less likely to be low-income is Black.

Read: Five decades of white backlash

For some white people displaced from their jobs by globalization and deindustrialization, the successful Black person with a good job is the embodiment of whats wrong with America. The spectacle of Black doctors, CEOs, and college professors out of their place creates an uncomfortable dissonance, which white people deal with by mentally relegating successful Black people to the ghetto. That Black man who drives a new Lexus and sends his children to private schoolhe must be a drug kingpin, right?

In predominantly white professional spaces, this racial anxiety appears in subtler ways. Black people are all too familiar with a particular kind of interaction, in the guise of a casual watercooler conversation, the gist of which is a sort of interrogation: Where did you come from?; How did you get here?; and Are you qualified to be here? (The presumptive answer to the last question is clearly no; Black skin, evoking for white people the iconic ghetto, confers an automatic deficit of credibility.)

Black newcomers must signal quickly and clearly that they belong. Sometimes this requires something as simple as showing a company ID that white people are not asked for. Other times, a more elaborate dance is required, a performance in which the worker must demonstrate their propriety, their distance from the ghetto. This can involve dressing more formally than the job requires, speaking in a self-consciously educated way, and evincing a placid demeanor, especially in moments of disagreement.

From the November 2018 issue: The personal cost of Black success

As part of my ethnographic research, I once embedded in a major financial-services corporation in Philadelphia, where I spent six months observing and interviewing workers. One Black employee I spoke with, a senior vice president, said that people of color who wanted to climb the management ladder must wear the right uniform and work hard to perform respectability. Theyre never going to envision you as being a white male, he told me, but if you can dress the same and look a certain way and drive a conservative car and whatever else, theyll say, This guy has a similar attitude, similar values [to we white people]. Hes a team player. If you dont dress with the uniform, obviously youre on the wrong team.

This need to constantly perform respectability for white people is a psychological drain, leaving Black people spent and demoralized. They typically keep this demoralization hidden from their white co-workers because they feel that they need to show they are not whiners. Having to pay a Black tax as they move through white areas deepens this demoralization. This tax is levied on people of color in nice restaurants and other public places, or simply while driving, when the fear of a lethal encounter with the police must always be in mind. The existential danger this kind of encounter poses is what necessitates The Talk that Black parentsfearful every time their kids go out the door that they might not come back alivegive to their children. The psychological effects of all of this accumulate gradually, sapping the spirit and engendering cynicism.

Even the most exalted members of the Black elite must live in two worlds. They understand the white elites mores and values, and embody them to a substantial extentbut they typically remain keenly conscious of their Blackness. They socialize with both white and Black people of their own professional standing, but also members of the Black middle and working classes with whom they feel more kinship, meeting them at the barbershop, in church, or at gatherings of long-standing friendship groups. The two worlds seldom overlap. This calls to mind W. E. B. Du Bois double consciousnessa term he used for the first time in this publication, in 1897referring to the dual cultural mindsets that successful African Americans must simultaneously inhabit.

From the August 1897 issue: W. E. B. Du Bois Strivings of the Negro People

For middle-class Black people, a certain fluidityabetted by family connectionsenables them to feel a connection with those at the lower reaches of society. But that connection comes with a risk of contagion; they fear that, meritocratic status notwithstanding, they may be dragged down by their association with the hood.

When I worked at the University of Pennsylvania, some friends of mine and I mentored at-risk youth in West Philadelphia.

One of these kids, Kevin Robinson, who goes by KAYR (pronounced K.R.), grew up with six siblings in a single-parent household on public assistance. Two of his sisters got pregnant as teenagers, and for a while the whole family was homeless. But he did well in high school and was accepted to Bowdoin College, where he was one of five African Americans in a class of 440. He was then accepted to Dartmouths Tuck School of Business, where he was one of 10 or so African Americans in an M.B.A. class of roughly 180. He got into the analyst-training program at Goldman Sachs, where his cohort of 300 had five African Americans. And from there he ended up at a hedge fund, where he was the lone Black employee.

Whats striking about Robinsons accomplishments is not just the steepness of his rise or the scantness of Black peers as he climbed, but the extent of cultural assimilation he felt he needed to achieve in order to fit in. He trimmed his Afro. He did a pre-college program before starting Bowdoin, where he had sushi for the first time and learned how to play tennis and golf. Let me look at how these people live; let me see how they operate, he recalls saying to himself. He decided to start reading The New Yorker and Time magazine, as they did, and to watch 60 Minutes. I wanted people to see me more as their peer versus someone from the hood. I wanted them to see me as, like, Hey, look, hes just another middle-class Black kid.? When he was about to start at Goldman Sachs, a Latina woman who was mentoring him there told him not to wear a silver watch or prominent jewelry: ?KAYR, go get a Timex with a black leather band. Keep it very simple Fit in.? My friends and I had given him similar advice earlier on.

All of this worked; he thrived professionally. Yet even as he occupied elite precincts of wealth and achievement, he was continually getting pulled back to support family in the ghetto, where he felt the need to code-switch, speaking and eating the ways his family did so as not to insult them.

The year he entered Bowdoin, one of his younger brothers was sent to prison for attempted murder, and a sister who had four children was shot in the face and died. Over the years he would pay for school supplies for his nieces and nephews, and for multiple family funeralsall while keeping his family background a secret from his professional colleagues. Even so, he would get subjected to the standard indignitiesbeing asked to show ID when his white peers were not; enduring the (sometimes obliviously) racist comments from colleagues (You dont act like a regular Black). He would report egregious offenses to HR but would usually just let things go, for fear that developing a reputation as a race guy would restrict his professional advancement.

Robinsons is a remarkable success story. He is 40 now; he owns a property-management company and is a multimillionaire. But his experience makes clear that no matter what professional or financial heights you ascend to, if you are Black, you can never escape the iconic ghetto, and sometimes not even the actual one.

The most egregious intrusion of a Black person into white space was the election (and reelection) of Barack Obama as president. A Black man in the White House! For some white people, this was intolerable. Birthers, led by Donald Trump, said he was ineligible for the presidency, claiming falsely that he had been born in Kenya. The white backlash intensified; Republicans opposed Obama with more than the standard amount of partisan vigor. In 2013, at the beginning of Obamas second term, the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, which ad protected the franchise for 50 years. Encouraged by this opening, Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Texas moved forward with voter-suppression laws, setting a course that other states are now following. And this year, the Supreme Court outlawed affirmative action in college admissions. I want to tell a story that illustrates the social gains this puts at risk.

Many years ago, when I was a professor at Penn, my father came to visit me. Walking around campus, we bumped into various colleagues and students of mine, most of them white, who greeted us warmly. He watched me interact with my secretary and other department administrators. Afterward, Dad and I went back to my house to drink beer and listen to Muddy Waters.

So youre teaching at that white school? he said.

Yeah.

You work with white people. And you teach white students.

Yeah, but they actually come in all colors, I responded. I got his point, though.

Well, let me ask you one thing, he said, furrowing his brow.

Whats that, Dad?

Do they respect you?

After thinking about his question a bit, I said, Well, some do. And some dont. But you know, Dad, it is hard to tell which is which sometimes.

Oh, I see, he said.

He didnt disbelieve me; it was just that what hed witnessed on campus was at odds with his experience of the typical Black-white interaction, where the subordinate status of the Black person was automatically assumed by the white one. Growing up in the South, my dad understood that white people simply did not respect Black people. Observing the respectful treatment I received from my students and colleagues, my father had a hard time believing his own eyes. Could race relations have changed so much, so fast?

Read: A 1999 interview with Elijah Anderson on his book Code of the Street

They hadin large part because of what affirmative action, and the general processes of racial incorporation and Black economic improvement, had wrought. In the 1960s, the only Black people at the financial-services firm I studied would have been janitors, night watchmen, elevator operators, or secretaries; 30 years later, affirmative action had helped populate the firm with Black executives. Each beneficiary of affirmative action, each member of the growing Black middle class, helped normalize the presence of Black people in professional and other historically white spaces. All of this diminished, in some incremental way, the power of the symbolic ghetto to hold back people of color.

Too many people forget, if ever they knew it, what a profound cultural shift affirmative action effected. And they overlook affirmative actions crucial role in forestalling social unrest.

Some years ago, I was invited to the College of the Atlantic, a small school in Maine, to give the commencement address. As I stood at the sink in the mens room before the event, checking the mirror to make sure all my academic regalia was properly arrayed, an older white man came up to me and said, with no preamble, What do you think of affirmative action?

I think its a form of reparations, I said.

Well, I think they need to be educated first, he said, and then walked out.

I was so provoked by this that I scrambled back to my hotel room and rewrote my speech. Id already been planning to talk about the benefits of affirmative action, but I sharpened and expanded my case, explaining that it not only had lifted many Black people out of the ghetto, but had been a weapon in the Cold War, when unaligned countries and former colonies were trying to decide which superpower to follow. Back then, Democrats and some Republicans were united in believing that affirmative action, by demonstrating the countrys commitment to racial justice and equality, helped project American greatness to the world.

Beyond that, I said to this almost entirely white audience, affirmative action had helped keep the racial unrest of the 60s from flaring up again. When the kinthe mothers, fathers, cousins, nephews, sons, daughters, baby mamas, uncles, auntsof ghetto residents secure middle-class livelihoods, those ghetto relatives hear about it. This gives the young people who live there a modicum of hope that they might do the same. Hope takes the edge off distress and desperation; it lessens the incentives for people to loot and burn. What opponents of affirmative action fail to understand is that without a ladder of upward mobility for Black Americans, and a general sense that justice will prevail, a powerful nurturer of social concord gets lost.

Yes, continuing to expand the Black professional and middle classes will lead to more instances of the dance, and the loaded interrogations, and the other awkward moments and indignities that people of color experience in white spaces. But the greater the number of affluent, successful Black people in such places, the faster this awkwardness will diminish, and the less power the recurrent waves of white reaction will have to set people of color back. I would like to believe that future generations of Black Americans will someday find themselves as pleasantly surprised as my dad once was by the new levels of racial respect and equality they discover.

This article appears in the November 2023 print edition with the headline Black Success, White Backlash.

Continue Reading

Politics

Angela Rayner: ‘Victim of misogyny’ or ‘freeloading’ deputy prime minister?

Published

on

By

Angela Rayner: 'Victim of misogyny' or 'freeloading' deputy prime minister?

To her most savage critics – from Tories to the far left – she’s “Rotten Rayner”, a tax evader, freeloader and a “low life… on the make”.

To her trade union friends, she’s a victim of misogyny who right-wing politicians are attempting to hound out because she’s working class.

And after her tearful interview on Sky News, even among some of her political opponents there’s a degree of sympathy for Angela Rayner too.

Politics latest: Why the deputy PM nearly resigned

But amid the rancorous debate among MPs about whether she should stay or go, there’s one part of her defence that is attracting scepticism from friends and foes.

That’s her claim that she was initially given duff advice by a solicitor. Really? If she has evidence to substantiate that, she may be in the clear, though there’d no doubt be accusations of an establishment stitch-up.

But if not – and the city grandee who’s the PM’s ethics adviser – the Eton and Oxford-educated baronet Sir Laurie Magnus – rejects her defence, she’ll almost certainly have to go.

And with her resignation – or sacking – would almost certainly go her hopes of succeeding the increasingly unpopular Sir Keir as Labour leader, despite her popularity with the party’s activists.

When she arrived for Prime Minister’s Questions, just half an hour after her bombshell confession, the Labour high command placed a collective arm around her.

Sir Keir Starmer, who told MPs he was proud to sit alongside a deputy PM from a working-class background, put his hand on her left shoulder.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Beth Rigby on Angela Rayner’s uncertain future

Badenoch misses an open goal…

Lucy Powell, the leader of the Commons, sitting the other side of the beleaguered Ms Rayner, did the same on her right shoulder.

Rachel Reeves, who also knows all about being beleaguered and shedding tears in public, looked across at her and smiled sympathetically.

If Labour feared a brutal PMQs onslaught from Kemi Badenoch, they needn’t have worried. “Why is she still in office?” the Tory leader began. So far, so good.

“If he had a backbone he would sack her,” she said in the second of her six questions. But that was it. “But let us get back to borrowing,” she continued.

Inexplicably, the Tory leader ploughed on with her pre-prepared questions on government borrowing. Labour MPs couldn’t believe their luck. Cue numerous jokes about missed open goals.

After another dud Kemi-Kaze performance at PMQs, some MPs were even speculating that Ms Rayner’s survival prospects – slim, at best – remain better than those of the Tory leader.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Badenoch calls on PM to sack Rayner

…but others go in studs up

But in the cruel world of social media, Ms Rayner was not spared a vicious onslaught from critics from across the political divide. You’d better keep your phone switched off, Angi.

From the spiky shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel, Ms Rayner was “the property tax dodging, freeloading deputy prime minister” who had “finally admitted breaking the law and evading paying taxes owed”.

There was more. “She says that she’s sorry,” said punchy Priti. “But she’s only sorry that she was caught out. Rotten Rayner should go.”

Nadhim Zahawi, who was sacked as Tory chairman in 2023 after an inquiry found he failed to disclose an investigation into his tax affairs, added: “Did you think about my children Angela Rayner?

“Breaks my heart seeing anybody distressed about their children, but the hypocrisy really does hurt.”

But it wasn’t just Tories – who let’s not forget were denounced as “Scum!” by Ms Rayner back in 2021, in what she described as “street language” – who were brutal.

The acerbic George Galloway declared: “She’s a lowlife”. For good measure, he claimed she was “on the make” and on “Supermarket Sweep, piling her trolley full”.

Read more:
Rayner admits she should have paid more stamp duty
Rayner came out fighting in Sky interview
Rayner’s tax affairs statement in full

However, from the trade union movement, which campaigned hard for the DPM’s workers’ rights legislation, there was unequivocal support.

TUC general secretary Paul Nowak told Sky News: “Angela Rayner comes under sustained coverage because she’s a working-class woman in a way that frankly Nigel Farage, leading members of the shadow cabinet, never would.

“I think there’s a real heavy dose of misogyny when it comes to Angela.

“I wouldn’t want to see a hounded out of an important role by right wing politicians and the right wing media who frankly can’t handle the fact that a working class woman is our deputy prime minister.”

There was sympathy from one party leader, Sir Ed Davey of the Liberal Democrats, who said that as a parent of a disabled child “I know the thing my wife and I worry most about is our son’s care after we have gone”.

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

Shortly after PMQs, opening a Tory debate on, yes, property taxes, shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride opted for ridicule and mockery. “I’m absolutely certain that the deputy prime minister had a good recess,” he began.

“We saw many photographs of her down at the seaside, just off the coast in a rubber dinghy, rather like many of the other photographs over the summer given the reckless policies this government has towards illegal migration.

“She was probably celebrating the acquisition of another property for her property empire, but perhaps also slightly tinged with that nagging doubt as to whether she had indeed paid enough stamp duty.

“Well, we’ll get to the bottom of that in due course.”

Quite so, Mel. We will.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Angela Rayner’s tax affairs interview in full

A fight for survival

Let’s also reflect that on Monday Sir Keir Starmer proudly announced: “Phase two of my government starts today.” On Tuesday, he informed MPs, he was “speaking at length” to Ms Rayner. Must have been awkward.

And on Wednesday, the PM had to watch her tearful confession, just minutes before facing MPs in the Commons.

Not a great start to phase two, prime minister. Nor for his embattled and tearful deputy, who’s now fighting for political survival.

Continue Reading

Politics

Can Starmer live without Rayner?

Published

on

By

Can Starmer live without Rayner?

👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne’s on your podcast app👈

The government minister responsible for housing didn’t pay enough tax on her house.

Sam and Anne let Angela Rayner’s admission sink in on this episode – as they wonder how much government business is on hold as a result.

The independent ethics adviser Laurie Magnus’ view on how she took inaccurate legal advice could be public within days – presumably that means the cabinet reshuffle has to wait until the Deputy Prime Minister knows her fate.

Never mind what else it might mean for the early days of Keir Starmer’s “phase two”.

But, whatever the outcome, is it safer for Starmer to keep Angela Rayner in a job?

Continue Reading

World

China’s Xi believes in destiny – and it’s bad news for the West

Published

on

By

China's Xi believes in destiny - and it's bad news for the West

China put on a show of military strength and diplomatic pulling power in Beijing this week that should worry us all.

At the heart of it was one all-powerful man.

Xi Jinping is emerging as the emperor of a rising China bent on reshaping the world in its image.

He wears the garb of his communist forebears, but he is much more than just another heir to Chairman Mao.

Xi increasingly has more in common with China’s imperial past.

He has disposed of rivals and term-limit rules, making him potentially ruler for life.

Xi believes it is China’s destiny to return to its rightful place as the centre of the world. A new world order dominated by China is approaching he believes, hastened by the Trump administration’s willingness to dismantle the current Pax Americana and western disarray over Ukraine.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The Chinese weapons that will worry America

China has a right to assert itself more robustly on the world stage, of course, but it’s the manner of that assertion and the risks of collision with the West that should give cause for concern.

Xi has ruthlessly crushed dissent at home with quasi genocidal repression in Xinjiang, a cultural holocaust in Tibet and brutal suppression of human rights in Hong Kong.

Next in his sights is Taiwan. It is claimed by the Chinese communists as part of their One China project.

That opens up one fault line between Xi’s rising China and Western nations.

China’s more and more open support of Putin’s war in Ukraine is of course another.

Western impotence and failure to bring enough pressure on Russia to end the conflict has allowed it to metastasize into a much bigger one.

Read more from Sky News:
Xi presents his vision of the future
Who is Kim Jong Un’s sister Kim Yo Jong

The three autocrat amigos in Beijing on Wednesday. Pic: Reuters
Image:
The three autocrat amigos in Beijing on Wednesday. Pic: Reuters

On one side in the East, authoritarian governments lining up to support Russia. And on the other, democratic countries supporting Ukraine.

This week’s jamboree of autocrats in Beijing seems to have tipped things more in their favour. Good news for regimes using Orwellian surveillance, censorship, and repression to control their people and keep a grip on power.

Bad news for the rest of us who prefer a future organised around democracy, freedom, and the rule of law.

Dictators rejoice. Democrats beware.

Continue Reading

Trending