Many people feel that racism in modern culture has a new face because of the color blind perspective on race. Adherents of this ideology frequently assert that they do not perceive race and that racism is no longer a big issue in American culture. Despite the seeming innocence of these assertions, they reinforce the bigotry and discrimination that already exists in society and obstruct its advancement. The idea is known as “color blind racism” as a result (Brown et al., “Whitewashing Race”). The four primary theoretical frameworks of color blind racism – abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and reduction of racism – each put forth a unique set of ideological justifications. These manifestations of color blind racism hamper the fight against racial inequality in the US.
The degree to which the beliefs of white supremacy are expressed distinguishes the color blind perspective on race from overt racism. This idea differs from the beliefs about the biological inferiority of black people, which were at the core of Jim Crow’s racism, as detailed in the introduction paragraph above. The term “blatant prejudice” refers to persistent beliefs that persons from a particular racial origin are inferior to others (Ditomaso, “Race – The Power of an Illusion”). These ideas are spoken without hesitation by individuals who are seen to be bigots, and they typically engage in a ferocious debate with others who attempt to highlight their mistakes in logic or offer alternative viewpoints on the subject.
Differently, the color blind perspective on race entails masking the racist ideology with logical arguments. Therefore, color blind racism concentrates on covering up its support for discrimination and coming up with new justifications for it rather than openly defending white supremacy. The naturalization frame, for instance, asserts that racism is regular since individuals seek to associate and live with people who are similar to them. This suggests that despite all efforts to solve it, prejudice is unavoidable and will continue. That mainly happened after the end of slavery, as “the status of being white continued to be a valuable asset, carrying with a set of assumptions, privileges, and benefits” (Martinez, “Mexican-Americans and Whiteness,” p. 99). Thus, to a greater extent, color blindness helps to disguise unintentional racism and discrimination against minorities.
People discover the ultimate explanation for racism – that racism is biologically ingrained in people – which negates all other counterarguments and counter efforts. Similar to this, cultural racism links racism to cultural disparities. This school of thought contends that because some groups in society deviate from accepted cultural norms, discrimination against those groups in society is inevitable. Racial distinctions are believed to exist on a cultural level. Cultural racism, for instance, frequently draws attention to cultural variations in work ethics and educational attainment to justify society’s undervalued status of people of color. As stated in “Ethnic Studies,” this interpretation receded into the background each time, given that in the 80s, more and more universities and schools included programs to study the ethnic origin and culture of minorities of that time (Gutierrez, p. 161). Therefore, even if overt prejudice and color blindness are both forms of racism, the latter has a distinct logic and pronunciation.
However, both prejudice and color blind racism have negative repercussions on society. The latter is more concerned with racism evasiveness, which implies that it supports discrimination indirectly, whereas the former explicitly encourages segregation and discrimination. The concept of the color blind perspective on race serves as the foundation for the mechanism for disregarding racial prejudice (Ditomaso, “Race – The Power of an Illusion,” p. 1). Simply expressed, those who hold this viewpoint dismiss the systematic prejudice that people of color experience and blame personal hardships on unrelated factors.
The narratives of equal opportunity and liberalism, for instance, are promoted by the framework of abstract liberalism, which contends that the challenges experienced by people of color are a matter of personal choice. This makes racism elusive by denying that discrimination is apparent in all facets of society. Other forms of color blind racism use a variety of arguments to dismiss systemic discrimination, much as abstract liberalism.
For instance, the minimization frame contends that racism is not as pervasive as people think and that, with enough effort, individuals of color may still obtain outstanding educational and employment prospects. That was partly the reason for the segregation of Mexicans and African Americans from high-ranked schools during the ’70s since their IQ results depict that they were “dull” in comparison to white students (Menchaca & Valencia, “Anglo-Saxon Ideologies in the 1920s-1930s”,). In reality, this viewpoint seeks prejudice as a defense rather than a cause of minorities’ disadvantaged status.
The battle against racism and inequality suffers when challenges are attributed to personal failings and biological or cultural differences rather than structural discrimination on multiple levels. On the one hand, the color blind perspective on race makes it challenging to identify instances of racial discrimination. Persons who claim they do not perceive race overlook their prejudices toward people of color. Thus, a crucial component of color blind racism is the use of logical reasoning to mask the justifications for the preferential treatment of white people. Because they can constantly come up with rational, unconnected justifications for their racist attitudes and actions, it is challenging to call attention to them.
Conversely, color blindness makes the battle against prejudice pointless or ineffective. From the standpoint of naturalization, racial segregation will always exist in society. In contrast, cultural racism contends that minorities’ conditions cannot be improved unless they alter their cultural beliefs and practices. As a result, the emphasis is shifted from combating discrimination to improving the conditions of those harmed by it.
Conversely, those who subscribe to the abstract liberal perspective frequently reject measures to combat inequality, such as affirmative action, because they are unfair and should not be implemented. The idea of color blind racism thus hinders American society from identifying and combating racism on all levels. Therefore, the statement that America is “color blind” is partly true, but it is completely far from the meaning that is attached to this term.
In general, the color blind perspective on race differs from prejudice because it covers up racist beliefs and justifies racial discrimination rationally. People who subscribe to this philosophy frequently disregard the systematic prejudice pervasive in modern society and how it affects people of color. Racism evasiveness results from the attempt to explain away the socioeconomic circumstances of racial minorities by pointing the finger at individual failings, biological factors, and cultural differences. The secretive nature of color blind racism and the justifications put out by its proponents hinder efforts to combat prejudice, which supports inequality in the US.