Racism in australia, essay plan PDF

Preview

Summary

Assignment on racism in Australia....

Description

Running head: REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 1

Interventions to Reduce Prejudice and Racism in Australian Communities. Monash University

ATS1042 Tutor: Due Date: Word Count: 1089

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 2 Introduction -

Define racism using ("Racism: definition, research and laws ", 2012) as a belief

that a particular race or ethnicity is inferior or superior to others and racial discrimination as acts where someone is treated differently due to race, nationality or colour. -

Explore how racism has resulted in slavery, marginalization, extinction, and

mental health problems in those who experience it (Lemmer & Wagner, 2015). -

Use facts from the human right commission ("No place for racism," 2015) to

introduce the issue of racism. Do this through facts such as; 1 in 5 Australians have experienced racism or hate talk and one in 20 say they have been physically attacked because of their race. -

Further introduce the impact of racism through Bloch (2009) who analyzed 91

websites for discussions around ‘Americans for legal immigrations’ which found that immigrants were frequently viewed as unable to assimilate, criminals and other negative views. -

State the aim as “to introduce successful interventions that have reduced racism

and advocate for their use within Australia, whilst applying the social identity theory to aid understanding of both the issue and applicable interventions”. -

The essay will focus primarily on reducing racism within the Australian context;

however, it will incorporate articles from a variety of countries due to limited research on the topic within the Australian context. -

Introduce Lopez (2018) Media article (Appendix) to emphasis the relevance of

reducing racism today and discussing the impact racism can have on people’s lives. Discuss how within the American context Black Americans are still less wealthy, have lower incomes

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 3 and less access to education and relate this to Australia by discussing similarities to aboriginals.

Theoretical background Use the original research on the social identity theory by Tajfel (1974) to introduce the proposition of a person’s sense of who they are depending on the group in which they identify as well as how it can cause in and outgroup competition. Discuss human desire to compete with other groups in order to improve personal feelings and raise self-esteem. Use McKeown, Haji, and Ferguson (2016) to discuss how the social identity theory can be used to understand both peace and conflict. Discuss innate social behaviour of humans and discuss intergroup discrimination and its causes, use evidence from this article to justify why the theory was selected. Explore group boundaries within a hospital setting in order to introduce the existence of group conflicts on a smaller scale (Bochatay et al., 2019). State the selection of this theory due to its root causes of racism seen in history, these being that to survive you had to follow in-group rules and, in many cases, it was ‘us against them’. Discuss how the need to strictly adhere to in-group beliefs is no longer necessary in today’s more excepting world and rewriting these beliefs within children can help to prevent racist and prejudice beliefs from forming. Application of Social Identity Theory to Explain Racism and interventions to decrease racism. -

Begin the main section by discussing the issue of racism in terms of the social

identity theory using Ai et al. (2011) application in the American topic for a basis of discussion.

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 4 -

Progress to apply the social identity theory to explain how Pica-Smith and

Poynton (2014) intervention works to reduce the impact of in an out groups and blur the line between groups. Their successful intervention in school age students, aimed to support interracial friendships and in turn aimed to redefine the childrens social identity to include those of other races. -

Discuss whether cultural education alone is a powerful enough tool to overcome

racism resulting from clashing social identities by discussing research performed by Durey (2010). This article relates strongly to the Australian context by exploring how aboriginals experience health care and reducing reported racism that they experience when seeking help and will allow for greater discussion within the essay about the Australian population. Compare to the media article that suggests to “stop” calling people racist and “find enough common ground for a real conversation about race”. -

Finally, a second study exploring education as an intervention by Pack, Tuffin,

and Lyons (2016) will be used to drive home the effects of learning about out-groups can decrease negative perceptions. This study focuses on the Maori population of New Zealand, similar to Australia’s aboriginal population and will greatly complement the study by Durey. -

Tie these three articles together by examining how negative perceptions were

overcome in each intervention as well as exploring how social identities were altered from being closed off and specific to each in-group to becoming more fluid, expandable and humane. -

Explore the benefits the findings of these studies may have, these include

improvements of mental health for both indigenous New Zealanders and Australians, better

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 5 access to health care for aboriginals and reproduceable ways of preventing development of prejudice beliefs within school aged children. Reflection Following my application of the social identity theory to the issue of racism it became apparent that it is possible that our strong reliance on our social identity may have been the original creator of racism. Hence it appears as though back in history the formation of social identity and reliance on the in group was vital to survival, as with the first settlers of Australia. These opinions that have been formed may remain within us in some strength and it appears that we might maintain these negative views of outgroups in order to raise our self-esteem. After observing the interventions in these studies it is clear that changing our social identity at a young age to include people of other races minimizes the likely hood of racism and prejudice beliefs, I experienced this myself as instead of believing I was better because of my skin colour I believed everyone at our school was better due to our values, beliefs and intelligence. The last two interventions also expose the power that learning about another’s history and beliefs can allow us to empathize with their experiences, create understanding and eventually value their culture and beliefs as their own instead of competing with our own beliefs, cultures and values. Being able to learn and accept different cultures allows us to overcome our need to validate our own social identity and instead to become proud to be human and all the achievements that we as a multicultural race have achieved. The social identity theory however is limited as it does not count for cultural differences and other factors that may play a role in determining in-group favoritism. Some research suggests conflict can be better explained simply as competition rather than in-group favourtisim.

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 6

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 7 References Ai, A., Plummer, C., Heo, G., Lemieux, C., Simon, C., Taylor, P., & Copeland, V. (2011). Racial Identity–Related Differential Attributions of Inadequate Responses to Hurricane Katrina: A Social Identity Perspective. Race and Social Problems, 3(1), 13-24. doi:10.1007/s12552-0119039-1 Bloch, K. (2009). Social movement framing and the reproduction of inequality: Immigrant restrictionists constructing virtual selves on the Internet. In M. Schulman (Ed.): ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Bochatay, N., Bajwa, N. M., Blondon, K. S., Junod Perron, N., Cullati, S., & Nendaz, M. R. (2019). Exploring group boundaries and conflicts: a social identity theory perspective. Medical Education, 53(8), 799-807. doi:10.1111/medu.13881 Durey, A. (2010). Reducing racism in Aboriginal health care in Australia: where does cultural education fit? Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 34 Suppl 1, S87. doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00560.x Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U. (2015). Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta‐ analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 152-168. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2079 Lopez, G. (2018). Research says there are ways to reduce racial bias. Calling people racist isn’t one of them. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/identities/2016/11/15/13595508/racismresearch-study-trump McKeown, S., Haji, R., & Ferguson, N. (2016). Understanding Peace and Conflict Through Social Identity Theory: Contemporary Global Perspectives. Cham: Cham: Springer International Publishing.

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 8 No place for racism. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/no-placeracism Pack, S., Tuffin, K., & Lyons, A. (2016). Reducing racism against Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand. (Report). New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 30. Pica-Smith, C., & Poynton, T. A. (2014). Supporting Interethnic and Interracial Friendships among Youth to Reduce Prejudice and Racism in Schools: The Role of the School Counselor. Professional School Counseling, 18(1). doi:10.1177/2156759X0001800115 Racism: definition, research and laws (2012). Retrieved from https://www.humanrightscommission.vic.gov.au/media/k2/attachments/Racism__definition_research_and_laws.pdf Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13(2), 65-93. doi:10.1177/053901847401300204

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 9 Appendix Research says there are ways to reduce racial bias. Calling people racist isn’t one of them. In 2016, researchers stumbled on a radical tactic for reducing another person’s bigotry: a frank, brief conversation. The study, authored by David Broockman at Stanford University and Joshua Kalla at the University of California Berkeley, looked at how simple conversations can help combat antitransgender attitudes. In the research, people canvassed the homes of more than 500 voters in South Florida. The canvassers, who could be trans or not n 2016, researchers stumbled on a radical tactic for reducing another person’s bigotry: a frank, brief conversation. The study, authored by David Broockman at Stanford University and Joshua Kalla at the University of California Berkeley, looked at how simple conversations can help combat antitransgender attitudes. In the research, people canvassed the homes of more than 500 voters in South Florida. The canvassers, who could be trans or not, asked the voters to simply put themselves in the shoes of trans people — to understand their problems — through a 10-minute, nonconfrontational conversation. The hope was that the brief discussion could lead people to reevaluate their biases. It worked. The trial found not only that voters’ anti-trans attitudes declined but that they remained lower three months later, showing an enduring result. And those voters’ support for laws that protect trans people from discrimination increased, even when they were presented with counterarguments for such laws. I’ve been thinking a lot about this research since Election Day. After Donald Trump’s victory in 2016, it is clear that the prejudiced views of a lot of Americans helped elect to the White House a man who’s repeatedly made racist, offensive statements. Not only did Trump

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 10 build his campaign largely on fears of immigrants and Muslims, but based on a lot of polls and surveys, he also attracted the voters who reported, by far, the highest levels of racial resentment and other prejudiced views. RELATED When a drug epidemic’s victims are white One telling study, conducted by researchers at UC Santa Barbara and Stanford shortly before the election, found that if people who strongly identified as white were told that nonwhite groups will outnumber white people in 2042, they became more likely to support Trump. That suggests there’s a significant racial element to support for Trump. But just noting these racial attitudes and biases did not seem to have a huge impact on the election. Despite bigoted policy proposals that at one point even called for banning an entire religious group from the US, and the media’s constant reminders that Trump is racist, Trump won. Clearly, a lot of US voters either shared Trump’s prejudiced views or, at the very least, didn’t find such ideas to be fundamental deal breakers. That suggests there’s a lot of racism — or at least the enabling of it — in America, perhaps even more than one would think in the modern age. So how can we reduce this type of prejudice? The canvassing study provides a model for anti-trans attitudes, but can it be applied to other kinds of bigotry, such as racism, that might be more entrenched in the US? And even if we do embrace the canvassing model or something similar, how can we ensure that the conversations don’t lead to a backlash — the kind of defensive posturing and denial of racism that might lead even more people to support candidates like Trump?

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 11 In talking with researchers and looking at the studies on this in 2016, I found that it is possible to reduce people’s racial anxiety and prejudices. And the canvassing idea was regarded as very promising. But, researchers cautioned, the process of reducing people’s racism will take time and, crucially, empathy. This speaks to the point Margaret Renkl made on Monday in the New York Times: “If … you’re a white liberal whose goal is to foster a more equitable culture, you need to stop yelling ‘Racist!’ at anyone who doesn’t see the world exactly as you do. Somehow you need to find enough common ground for a real conversation about race. Very few people are stupid or irredeemably mean. They’ll listen to what you have to say if they trust you’ll listen to what they have to say back.” It’s the direct opposite of the kind of culture the internet has fostered — typically focused on calling out racists and shaming them in public. This doesn’t work. And as much as it might seem like a lost cause to understand the perspectives of people who may qualify as racist, understanding where they come from is a needed step to being able to speak to them in a way that will help reduce the racial biases they hold. The coded language that many white Americans hear So how do we have a better conversation around these issues, one that can actually reduce people’s racial prejudices and anxieties? The first thing to understand is how white Americans, especially in rural areas, hear accusations of racism. While terms like “racist,” “white privilege,” and “implicit bias” intend to point out systemic biases in America, for white Americans they’re often seen as coded slurs. These terms don’t signal to them that they’re doing something wrong, but that their supposedly

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 12 racist attitudes (which they would deny having at all) are a justification for lawmakers and other elites to ignore their problems. Imagine, for example, a white man who lost a factory job due to globalization and saw his sister die from a drug overdose due to the opioid epidemic — situations that aren’t uncommon today. He tries to complain about his circumstances. But his concerns are downplayed by a politician or racial justice activist, who instead points out that at least he’s doing better than black and brown folks if you look at broad socioeconomic measures. Maybe he does have some level of white privilege. But that doesn’t take away from the serious problems he sees in his world today. This is how many white Americans, particularly in working-class and rural areas, view the world today. So when they hear politicians and journalists call them racist or remind them about their privilege, they feel like elites are trying to distract from the serious problems in their lives and grant advantages to other groups of people. When Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton called half of Trump voters “deplorable,” she made this message explicit. “Telling people they’re racist, sexist, and xenophobic is going to get you exactly nowhere,” said Alana Conner, executive director of Stanford University’s Social Psychological Answers to Real-World Questions Center. “It’s such a threatening message. One of the things we know from social psychology is when people feel threatened, they can’t change, they can’t listen.” Arlie Hochschild, a sociologist and author of Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right, provided an apt analogy for white rural Americans’ feeling of neglect: As they see it, they are all in this line toward a hill with prosperity at the top. But over the past few years, globalization and income stagnation have caused the line to stop moving. And

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 13 from their perspective, people — black and brown Americans, women — are now cutting in the line, because they’re getting new (and more equal) opportunities through new anti-discrimination laws and policies like affirmative action. As a result, Hochschild told me that rural white Americans “feel like a minority group. They feel like a disappearing group. Both minority and invisible.” One can pick the facts here — particularly since black and Latino Americans still trail white Americans in terms of wealth, income, and educational attainment. But this is how many white Americans feel, regardless of the facts. So when they hear accusations of racism, they feel like what they see as the “real” issues — those that afflict them — are getting neglected. This, obviously, makes it difficult to raise issues of race at all with big segments of the population, because they’re often suspicious of the motives. What’s more, accusations of racism can cause white Americans to become incredibly defensive — to the point that they might reinforcewhite supremacy. Robin DiAngelo, who studies race at Westfield State University, described this phenomenon as “white fragility” in a groundbreaking 2011 paper: White people in North America live in a social environment that protects and insulates them from race-based stress. This insulated environment of racial protection builds white expectations for racial comfort while at the same time lowering the ability to tolerate racial stress, leading to what I refer to as White Fragility. White Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and

REDUCING PREJUDICE AND RACISIM 14 behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation. These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial equilibrium. Most Americans, white people included, want to think that they’re not capable of racism — particularly after the civil rights movement, overt racism is widely viewed as unacceptable in American society. Yet racism, obviously, still exists. And when some white people are confronted with that reality, whether it’s accusations of racism against them personally or more broadly, they immediately become very defensive — even hostile. “Most of us live in racial segregation,” DiAngelo told me. “Our teachers are white. Our role models are white. Our heroes and heroines are white. That insulation is very rarely challenged.” She added, “So when that reality is questioned, we don’t tend to handle it very well.” DiAngelo’s paper explained that white Americans have a range of “triggers” that make them defensive about race, from suggestions that a person’s viewpoint is racialized to the rise of people of color into prom...