## I. INTRODUCTION: THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON RACISM IN SOCIETY The causes of racism in American society have been the subject of considerable academic debate among social scientists for decades. Studies documented in the scientific literature support the view that racism is a universal social construct rooted in cultural understanding of the biased beliefs and attitudes contributing to this behavior. Social scientists attempting to shed light on the ideological forces mitigating this phenomenon's global rise allege that racism develops from the inequalities reinforced by society's social norms. They assert the global proliferation of social disparities tied to race creates the structural parameters institutions use to determine injustice. The Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential defines racism and racial discrimination as two overlapping subjective terminologies whose ambiguities are made clear by the socioeconomic, political, and scientific discourse that shape their origination. Although the term racism embodies more of an ideological form of social exclusion that emanates from a passive set of cognitive ideas learned in one's social environment, racial discrimination, on the other hand, is more of a reactionary process that actively restricts the participation of specific categories of individuals from all forms of engagement in the social institutions that comprise our culture (Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential, 2020). Scholars endeavoring to understand the leading causes of institutionalized racism worldwide have noted that the common thread that unifies people holding such extremist beliefs is the propagated distrust of individuals whose social characteristics differ from the mainstream culture. Research shows that the weaponization of misinformation about minority groups by politicians inspires fears and doubts about other people, creating a toxic environment whose adverse effects manifest most transparently during times of social unrest, war, and economic downturns (Shah, 2010). A video project developed by academics at the American Anthropological Association in collaboration with the Science Museum of Minnesota called Understanding Race supports this scientific premise. Spearheaded by Jeffrey Martin, Director of Communications and Public Affairs, and his colleagues, the project examines how the scientific community conceptualizes race from biological, historical, and social perspectives. Scholars working on the project utilize multimedia presentations, historical artifacts, graphical displays, and other educational tools to communicate eye-opening facts about the cultural history of race to those visiting the exhibit. The images displayed take the public on a journey through time that paints a visual picture of the history of racism in the United States and presents detailed information about the racial injustice resulting from discrimination across a broad spectrum of social institutions internationally. The photos offer a visual description of what the effects of institutionalized racism meant to the different minority groups in American society (American Anthropological Association, 2006). Scholarly analysis of the global expansion of institutionalized racism provides substantive evidence that recognizes the damage this type of ideological thinking poses to implementing human rights legislation designed to protect the most vulnerable members of society from harm. According to Dr. Stephen Castles, Director of the Centre for Multicultural Studies at the University of Wollongong in Australia, after a sustained period of relative decline, racism is once again on the rise in many institutional settings throughout the United States and Europe, where expanding participation in racist practices has reached new heights, particularly among those members of society that have committed their allegiance to a revitalized White nationalist movement gaining considerable momentum globally. Professor Castles asserts that racism stems from a dynamic of social interaction between two or more individuals that never occurs in isolation. Instead, it is a direct consequence of discriminatory policies and practices integrated into the social system that forms the foundation of oppression tied to biased actions such as sexism, religious persecution, international conflict, and economic exploitation. He posits that the rising incidence of racial injustice in the international community is the primary factor responsible for structural changes, which have adversely affected the global economy and harmed the political and cultural relations of the social order. He argues racial inequality has precipitated an international crisis that has damaged America's social structure and hurt the nation's national identity. He further alleges that such renewed escalation of this type of national crisis focused on race leads to increased global insecurity and disorientation among individuals targeted for discrimination, which often erupts in violence. Dr. Castles conjectures that implementing comprehensive anti-racist strategies to deter the expansion of global extremism connected to race effectively is daunting. It is a complex task requiring a four-step plan involving the following methods of policy reform: - Implement national policies designed to eliminate social inequality and discrimination and facilitate social justice, essential security, and an enhanced quality of life for all citizens regardless of race, ethnicity, and cultural heritage. - Provide incentives encouraging lawmakers and policy analysts in government service to introduce anti-racist legislation that targets disparities at the core of institutional discrimination. - Provide opportunities for nongovernment organizations to become involved in the battle against the cross-cultural expansion of racism in nations of the industrialized and third-world. - Develop collaborative partnerships between government agencies and non-government organizations to combine resources that prevent race-based discriminatory practices from being utilized to deny people of color inclusion in society. Professor Castles points out that racial injustice is a significant social problem with a long cultural history, the remnants of which are embedded in the social order of every society. He asserts that racial inequality is a power struggle caused by socioeconomic and political forces within the mainstream culture designed to legitimize the exploitation of minority groups viewed as outsiders. Therefore, finding the means to eliminate inequality's effects on society is challenging, especially for those concerned about implementing social justice reforms that protect human rights. He believes studying the root causes of racial inequality is not just an intellectual exercise for academics. Instead, it is the first step in developing an enlightened understanding of how inequality shapes society's reaction to injustice. Dr. Castles takes his argument further by asserting that understanding the international underpinnings of racial inequality is an essential precondition for developing research and policies to address its consequences effectively. He claims discriminatory behavior linked to institutionalized racism occurs along a continuum of intensity where acceptance of the more subtle forms of racial inequality precludes validation of the more extreme conditions of injustice. He concludes legislative policies that precipitate injustice through restrictive laws prohibiting equal access to housing, employment, healthcare, and legal services are a means of amplifying the racism that legitimizes the discriminatory behavior, which harms society (Castles, 1993). Professor Castle's assertions about the socioeconomic and psychological factors contributing to the global expansion of racial inequality are supported by a meta analysis of studies conducted by Professors Steven O Roberts and Michael T Rizzo at Stanford University. The study identified seven critical factors that help legitimize policy decisions that facilitate inequalities based on race. These factors are the following: - Discriminatory behavior against people of color based on stereotyped ideas about their cognitive abilities and reasoning skills that influence negative group perceptions. - The radicalization of sub-factions of the social order by government officials holding biased views of people from diverse racial and cultural backgrounds triggers cult-like loyalty, allegiance, and antisocial behavior, resulting in violence. - The implementation of repressive laws that reinforce segregation by promoting racial stereotypes that discourage intergroup contact. - The creation of a social hierarchy that encourages people to think about and react to others in ways that are harmful based on race. - The development of legislative policies that support discriminatory practices associated with race at the macro and micro levels of the social order. - The promotion of media misinformation that overemphasizes and legitimizes the proclaimed superior social status of White people in American culture while deemphasizing and delegitimizing the position of people of color in the social order. - The White majority's passive denial of racial injustice prohibiting people of color from engaging in all aspects of society (Roberts & Rizzo, 2020). The investigators argue that these interrelated factors are the driving force that perpetuates the biased attitudes and beliefs that foster racial inequality in American culture. Sociologist Karl Marx theorizes racial inequality is a social construct that is a by-product of the capitalist system of economic exploitation. He argues that the functioning of the labor market governs human interaction in society. Marx asserts racial injustice develops from the community's exploitation of workers by business owners. Owners' devaluation of workers' labor create social and economic conditions that promote racial inequality in the hierarchical structure of the class system. The system determines workers' wages and controls the conditions that produce tangible goods and services that translate into profits for owners. Marx viewed the capitalist system as a form of race-based oppression whereby White employers took advantage of Black employees to force wages down and break strikes. He believed the system was set up to facilitate economic racism through wage differentials paid to Black and White employees for the same labor. He concluded that White employers utilized this strategy to keep production costs low by circumventing the wages of Black employees to raise their profit margin (Willhelm, 2014). A similar assertion about racial inequality is embodied in the writing of the eminent sociologist Max Weber. Like Marx, Weber argues that racial inequality stems from a class struggle based on the labor market's economic structure. His research shows that social class struggles originate from conflicts that affect group interaction along race and ethnic lines. Such disputes inherently promote a stratified class system of social inequality, which manifests in racial discrimination. Based on this assumption, Weber posits that people who identify with a group in society having predominantly subservient racial and ethnic qualities receive less favorable treatment from those in the mainstream culture because of their disadvantaged status in the social hierarchy. Weber concluded that group identity is the primary determinant of racial inequality emanating from the social order (Cultural Reader, 2014). Another sociologist whose research supports the economic theory of racial inequality is Emile Durkheim. In his seminal work, *The Division of Labor in Society*, Durkheim posits that racial discrimination is a remnant of technological innovation that facilitates social change impacting the labor market. He argues that as advancements in the production of goods and services became more commonplace throughout Europe during the industrial revolution of the late 1800s, cities, and towns experienced a substantial increase in population density precipitated by a growing influx of people from agricultural communities migrating to urban areas to find better-paying jobs. Durkheim asserts that the demographic transition from rural to urban environments had significant economic benefits for the social hierarchy of organized labor. The shift fostered the development of specialized skills essential to performing specific occupations and created a sense of social solidarity among workers through a shared belief system known as collective conscience (Crossman, 2020). As a functionalist, Durkheim viewed the laws implemented by the government as the most transparent symbol of a shared belief system based on a moral code and a set of values designed to regulate the behavior of individuals in society. He theorized that the type of laws created by government bodies form the cornerstone of the ideological foundation of the democratic system and reflect the majority's will. Durkheim posits that as societies become more complex, implementing repressive laws prohibiting minority groups from accessing fundamental civil rights becomes paramount to those in power. For example, in 1912, the governing body of the Canadian province of Saskatchewan passed the White Women's Labor Bill, which prohibited Caucasian women from working for businesses owned and operated by Asians. Although business leaders in the community highly contested the discriminatory legislation based on racial bias, it became an effective tool the Canadian government used to place Asian employers at an economic disadvantage. Despite significant disapproval from Asian business owners in Canada, the racially biased labor law received substantial support from women's rights organizations. These organizations, comprised mainly of upper-class White women, alleged that it was dangerous for young Caucasian women to work for businesses owned by Asian men because of the racial stereotype that their employers would attempt to take advantage of them. Durkheim asserts that employment practices based on racial inequality contradict his vision of a society where everyone shares equitably in the benefits of economic change. He argues that legitimizing such false assertions by the predominantly White culture through restrictive laws creates a social environment where discriminatory employment practices flourish, subsequently denying people from diverse backgrounds the opportunity to participate in the labor market (Tamara, 2011). Durkheim is not the only functionalist to suggest that racial bias is the leading cause of social inequality. In his book *The Roots of Prejudice*, published in the late 1950s, sociologist Arnold Rose asserts that racial bias produces social dysfunction. It occurs when those in authority use their influence to selectively divert time and financial resources away from the needs of underprivileged groups to maintain racial boundaries that are artificially created. For instance, the investment of time and money into creating two separate but unequal education systems for Black and White students before the civil rights movement of the 1960s is a testament to social injustice based exclusively on race (Rose, 1958). Anthropologist Manning Nash asserted a similar view about social inequality tied to race in the mid-1960s. He theorizes that discrimination based on racial bias provides the moral justification for the more valued members of society to take advantage of those they consider inferior, treating them with less equality. A classic illustration of this is the transparent cruelty with which White enslavers treated their indentured Black servants on the southern plantations of the mid-nineteenth century. Slave owners justified their inequitable treatment of Black people with the rationalization that they preferred slavery to freedom. A false assertion used by slave traders to substantiate the continuation of this inhumane practice, one which historians have debunked (Nash, 1964). Sociologists use conflict theory as a social paradigm to explain the impact of inequality on gender, class, education, race, and ethnicity. Based on the pioneering research of Karl Marx, who believed that social inequality derives from class conflict, scholars adopted this concept to explain the global rise of the capitalist system. A meta-analysis of international studies by Dr. Nicki L. Cole of the University of California at Santa Barbara supports this assertion. Her findings suggest that the incorporation of the ideals of capitalist systems has harmed the economic structure of global nations, particularly those in the third world, whose financial systems are already experiencing extreme poverty driven by an increase in low-wage employment. Professor Cole's research shows that adopting the global capitalist model as a development tool by nations with struggling economies increases worker vulnerability. It enables employers to structure jobs in ways that harm workers by decreasing their access to institutional benefits and long-term job security. Conflict theorists note that such biased actions by elite corporations result in wealth inequality and racial injustice, forcing people of color to accept low-wage employment that heightens their risk of poverty, food insecurity, housing instability, homelessness, and poor physical and mental health outcomes. Further analysis of the socioeconomic conditions that foster inequality in the workplace indicates that people of color, women, and children are the most vulnerable to this type of employment-related discrimination. Conflict theorists assert that the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few under global capitalism is a symbol of social inequality that effectively denies minorities and women equal access to financial benefits generated by the system. This devalues their labor and relegates them to a subordinate position in the social hierarchy (Cole, 2019). Scholars have also used conflict theory to explain the ongoing social and political struggles between the White ruling class and the Black subservient class through the historical lens. For example, in the late nineteenth century, the emerging civil liberties of former slaves in post civil war society led congressional leaders in the south to pass Jim Crow laws designed to restrict the voting rights of Black Americans. The legacy of repressive race-based government legislation such as Jim Crow laws remain a stark reminder of the reality of social inequality and racial injustice that still exists in American society today. They have become a backdrop for much of the current federal legislation proposed by ultra right-wing conservatives in the republican party seeking to curtail the fundamental civil rights of Black people in America through social exclusion tied to race. Symbolic Interactionism is a sociological paradigm that sheds light on the causes of racism in America. Based on the groundbreaking research of sociologist Herbert Blumer in the late 1950s, symbolic interactionists view race and ethnicity as symbols of social identity. They assert that the transparent discrimination precipitating racism in society is a product of social interaction between dominant and subordinate groups over time. Such bias-laden interaction between these two factions allows dominant group members to negatively portray those they perceive as subordinate. This raises the bar on racial stereotypes that promote inequality, allowing those in power to maintain the status quo. A classic example of stereotyping that promotes this disparity is revealed in media images that criminalize Black people based on unsubstantiated racial assumptions (Introduction to Sociology, n.d.). Social psychologist Gordon Allport presents a similar view of race-based social inequality. In his eye-opening book *The Nature of Prejudice*, published in 1954, the Harvard-trained scholar examines the effects of various types of discriminatory practice on group interaction. He defines prejudice as an aversion process mitigated by hostile attitudes toward individuals based on their membership in a group with undesirable social characteristics. Dr. Allport argues that specific personality traits present in every culture are the social determinants of the racial bias contributing to discrimination. He argues prejudice is learned behavior that usually starts in the family environment and is based on faulty and inflexible generalizations about people with some physical, social, or cultural characteristic that sets them apart from the rest of society in some visual way. He contends this learned behavior is not part of the normal socialization process but rather stems from incorporating hostile attitudes toward a particular group of people based on race. Professor Allport maintains that raising awareness about social and psychological factors that facilitate prejudice marks the first step in eliminating the discriminatory behavior that accompanies it. To test the strength of his theory, Dr. Allport developed an assessment tool containing five scaled items to measure the degree of racial discrimination experienced at each stage of bias reaction in social situations. The items were ranked according to the amount of harm each produced. Data analysis revealed how subtle forms of radicalized social behavior based on intolerance, such as hate speech, can escalate over time to become instruments of mass extermination. One of the most high-profile illustrations of this type of extremist behavior occurred in Germany in the late 1930s when the Nazi party leader Adolf Hitler used hate propaganda to radicalize the German population into believing Jews and other minorities were responsible for the nation's economic and social problems. Professor Allport viewed prejudice as a psychological process of adaptation that manifests in the emotional response associated with the individual's personality formation and development. He posits that no two cases of this phenomenon are alike because individuals generally do not adopt a mindset of social intolerance toward a particular minority group unless compelled to do so by psychological need. He asserts when individuals are subjected to traumatic life experiences such as racial bullying in school or racially motivated police brutality during their formative years, it has a direct influence on their cognitive perception of those who administer the discriminatory action. His research also suggests psychological factors such as ambivalence toward parents, rigid personality structure, and the need for authority play a critical role in the adaptive process that culminates in the prejudice associated with racial discrimination (Allport, 1979; Katz, 1991). In addition to group identity and internal cognition, social psychologists have determined that cultural factors play a critical role in the development of racial attitudes associated with social inequality. According to an article published in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia in 2017 by Professor John Baldwin of Illinois State University, bias-motivated behavior is a complex social phenomenon expressed through verbal and nonverbal symbolic gestures, legal statutes, public policies, and institutional practices designed to exclude specific groups of people from the social, occupational, and cultural activities of everyday life based on race. He argues that cultural perceptions associated with outgroup identity amplify racial tensions between dominant White and subordinate minority cultures. Baldwin theorizes that cultural aspects of prejudice stem from a lengthy history of American social inequality, whose remnants of ethnocentrism and xenophobia are still visible in society today. He asserts political unrest, poverty, and war manifested internationally in the post-modern era are the primary social factors mitigating the reemergence of culture based intolerance and discrimination that result in the expansion of racial injustice globally. His research points to several notable illustrations of radicalized cultural extremism whose harmful effects have significantly impacted the most vulnerable groups in society. For instance, the recent uptick in hate crimes by radicalized White supremacist extremist groups in the United States is one of many transparent examples of culture's effect on antisocial behavior motivated by race. Based on an interdisciplinary review of research findings in cultural anthropology, sociobiology, psychology, and linguistics, Dr. Baldwin argues that ethnocentrism and xenophobia, two of the most extreme forms of racism, represent a search for human identity not attributable to biology. He asserts that race-based ideologies are a subjective interpretation of the cultural characteristics of those members of society who the dominant culture views as different from the rest of us. He concludes that cultural environments play the most critical role in influencing the racial bias individuals experience in the social world. Professor Baldwin's findings suggest social norms are the guiding principles governing patterns of behavior deemed appropriate to express in group situations. He concludes that group interaction based on norms of acceptable social behavior are often subject to distortion by public displays of intolerance supported by attitudes and beliefs connected to racial bias (Baldwin, 2017). The research findings show that racial injustice causes complex social issues in American culture. Social scientists examining the ramifications of this phenomenon over time have noted that no matter what the reason may be, one thing is for sure the social and political paradigms connected to racial inequality have created a substantial barrier to cultural understanding in the United States and abroad that has harmed the way White people think about and interact with those members of society who they perceive as different from themselves in some transparent way. The bias and discrimination that emanates from the inequality fostered by distorted assumptions about race are evident within America's social institutions. They have played an instrumental role in promoting the injustices that have shaped policies affecting millions of Americans of diverse racial ancestry for over two centuries. The social ramifications of such race-based policy decisions have taken many forms throughout history, making them the subject of considerable political controversy and social scientific investigation. A critical analysis of the impact of institutionalized racism on social inequality in American society through the decades is presented in the discussion that follows. ## II. HISTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL RACISM AND INEQUALITY IN AMERICA Empirical analysis of the terminology associated with racism in America indicates the concept received a broad range of meanings in the professional literature on race relations. The term became prominent in the late 1960s when political activist Stokley Carmichael and his colleague, political scientist Charles V Hamilton, published the book *Black Power: The Politics of Liberation*. In this work, the authors argue that the defining characteristic that differentiates the two primary forms of racism in the United States is how transparent the consequences of such actions are in the social situation in which they occur. They claim that the outward signs of racial bias associated with individual activities are more easily discernable than those stemming from institutional sources because of heightened observability. In contrast, the evident signs of institutional racism are less noticeable because the discriminatory behavior accompanying these actions is more subtle and less visible to the public eye (Nittle, 2021). History tells us that discriminatory ideas about racial inferiority existed in the minds of early European explorers like Christopher Columbus, who came to North America in the late fifteenth century, hundreds of years before our nation was born. Critical evidence substantiating this is documented in the book *Europe and the People Without History*, published in 1982 by Anthropologist Eric Wolf of the University of California at Berkeley. In this groundbreaking work, Professor Wolf describes the evolution of the modern form of racism as a pseudoscience used to justify the low social status, unequal treatment, and blatant exploitation of people of different racial backgrounds by White people in American society. He argues that the history of the United States contains many transparent examples of systemic racial disparities that have become institutionalized as part of America's cultural heritage. One of the most notable of these is the institution of indentured slavery. Like many other social scientists analyzing racism through the context of history, Wolf believed that the institutionalization of the transatlantic slave trade system epitomized White privilege and economic wealth in colonial America for more than three centuries and represented the normalization of subservience and cultural dominance along color based parameters. He asserts that this type of discriminatory thinking became the standard rationale used by the White majority to justify the low social status and unjust treatment afforded to millions of Black Americans for more than two centuries because of the color of their skin (Wolf, 1982). Statistics derived from an analysis of 158 archived resources on the history of anti-black violence and inequality in the United States in an article published on *Smithsonian Magazine*.com in June 2020 provide a clear illustration of the brutality that the institution of slavery inflicted upon African Americans during the period. The historical data reveals that between 1525 and 1866, 12.5 million Black people were involuntarily taken from their homes in Africa and transported to America without consent by the transatlantic system. Of those, only 10.7 million survived the 2-month journey to North America. The White traders viewed their Black captives as human cargo to be sold inter-regionally on the open market as indentured servants to the highest bidder for monetary gain. The system legitimized racial disparity and social inequality on a mass scale by giving slavery legal status, perpetuating this unjust practice throughout the country for generations. Once they were indentured as servants on the farms and plantations of White landowners, African Americans received harsh treatment. They were denied access to fundamental civil rights and received no financial compensation for their labor. Even after President Lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation in 1865, officially abolishing slavery as a legitimate institution, the practice continued in many parts of our nation for decades. This forced the newly liberated descendants of those enslaved to foster organized rebellions to gain the rights denied to them during their servitude. The institution of slavery left an indelible mark that scarred race relations in the United States for more than a century and remains at the heart of much of the racial tension in minority communities today (Solly, 2020). Systemic inequality based on race is nothing new in American culture. The process of social exclusion has been the bedrock of many of our institutions since the nation was founded more than two centuries ago. Although the words of the Declaration of Independence specifically proclaim that "all men are created equal," the evidence of that equality has not always been transparent in the history of American democracy. Historians following the path of social inequality and racial justice in the United States through time have uncovered evidence of discriminatory policies within the democratic system that has supported institutionalized racial, economic, and educational disparities that disenfranchise the rights of people of color. One of the most transparent illustrations of institutionalized racism mitigated by federal legislation during the post-civil war era was the passage of the poll tax. The law placed significant restrictions on the right of African Americans to vote in state elections and prohibited them from running for public office. This racial injustice is documented in the landmark case *Harper versus the Virginia State Board of Elections* brought before the United States Supreme Court in 1964. The case involved a legal challenge by Annie Harper, a Black woman who was denied the right to vote in the Virginia State Elections because she was too poor to pay the poll tax. The case is a stark reminder of just how far political officials in the south were willing to go to ensure that this gerrymandering strategy to suppress the voting rights of minorities was upheld (Keyes, 2016, March 18). This type of illegal voter suppression based on race has once again been revitalized in the post-Trump era as the republican party seeks to impose more restrictive voting laws across America through redistricting that will make it harder for Black Americans to vote in future elections (Kondik, 2021, July 22). ## III. THE RACIAL GAP IN HEALTHCARE SERVICES Politics is not the only social institution in American society where racism has played a significant role. History suggests that racial disparities have been crucial in influencing decisions about the quality of healthcare services minority populations receive for over a century. For example, an analysis of the post civil war discharge records of Black and White veterans applying for government benefits by researchers at Brigham Young University in 2010 indicated race was the primary factor used by review boards in their decisions to approve or deny claims. Findings show disability applications filed by White veterans for hard-to-verify war-related injuries like chronic back pain were more likely to receive favorable reviews by board members than those of Black veterans, who were twice as likely to have their applications denied. Results also revealed similar racial disparities in applications for pension benefits. Data analysis indicated that uninjured White veterans received twice the approval rate for service-connected pension benefits compared to Black veterans filing the same claims (Wilson, 2010). Historians also acknowledge the significant contribution that race-based inequalities have made to the abusive treatment of African Americans in medical research. One of the most transparent demonstrations of this type of racial injustice occurred in 1932 when researchers at the Tuskegee Institute in collaborative agreement with health officials from the U.S. Public Health Service received a government grant to conduct a longitudinal study to track the progression of syphilis in African American men. The investigators recruited a random sample of 600 African American men from Macon County, one of the poorest in the state of Alabama into the clinical trial promising them free medical care and other inducements such as meals and rides to medical appointments in exchange for their voluntary participation. The original protocol for the trial was conceived as a six month experiment that ended up being extended over the course of four decades, long after the initial seed money from the grant was exhausted. Physicians from the US Public Health Service who monitored the day-to-day operations of the study utilized a double-blind experimental design that required participants to be divided into two groups for comparison. Group one, the experimental group, contained 399 asymptomatic African American male subjects with untreated syphilis. Group two, designated the control group, had 201 African American male subjects uninfected with syphilis receiving treatment for other blood-borne illnesses. The socioeconomic and educational profile of the combined sample of African American men who agreed to participate in the initial phase of the research was comprised of illiterate sharecroppers from some of Macon county's poorest communities who had never been to a doctor in their entire life, which is why the recruitment incentives offered by the investigators were so alluring. The primary focus of the initial phase of the experiment was to withhold medical treatment from Black subjects experiencing post-infection symptoms of syphilis so investigators could follow the progression of the disease more closely. This scientific approach to understanding the illness made sense during the early years of the study when no proven treatments for syphilis were available. However, as the years passed and new drugs designed to effectively treat the post-secondary symptoms of this life threatening disease, such as penicillin, came on the market in 1947, public health officials engaged in oversight of the project refused to offer them as treatments to those enrolled in the study already experiencing complications of prolonged exposure to syphilis such as blindness and cognitive impairment. The researchers continued to utilize a nonintervention approach to assisting subjects with post infection symptoms of syphilis even after effective treatments for the disease became available. This led to dire health consequences for African American men and their families participating in the protocol. When public health officials finally decided to end the study in the early 1970's, mortality data revealed 28 African American men passed away from prolonged syphilis exposure. The data also indicated that more than 100 had perished due to untreated post secondary complications from the disease, which they unknowingly transmitted to their wives through sexual contact. The investigation's unethical treatment of African American men in high-risk experimental conditions broadened the distrust of public health officials in minority communities nationwide, making implementing effective programs to treat and prevent other types of severe illnesses much more challenging (Nix, 2020). Racial disparities in the delivery of healthcare services have also been historically documented in the mental health literature. Studies show that inequalities associated with race and ethnicity significantly influence access to treatment services by patients with psychiatric disorders from diverse backgrounds. Analysis of comparative data suggests that African Americans, Hispanics, and Indigenous people, such as American Indians and Asian/Pacific Islanders with psychiatric disorders, are: - Less likely to access psychiatric treatment through the mental health system than Whites because of communication barriers precipitated by a lack of cultural understanding. - Less likely to have health insurance to cover the cost of treatment than Whites. - More likely than Whites to receive substandard care from the system because of a lack of economic resources. - More likely than Whites to end treatment services prematurely. - More likely than Whites to be the subject of diagnostic error by clinicians. - More likely to be incarcerated in federal or state prison facilities than Whites where the quality of in-house treatment services received by inmates with mental health disorders is low. Another significant factor contributing to the expansion of treatment disparity in mental health is the disproportionate number of service providers from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. According to data from a survey by the American Psycho logical Association, $86\%$ of clinical psychologists practicing in the United States today are White, and less than $2\%$ are African American. Studies demonstrate racial and ethnic differences associated with the cultural background of mental health practitioners increase the risk of provider bias and stereotyping, two factors that can harm the integrity of a trusting professional relationship between the patient and the psychotherapist. In response to this emerging concern, the APA implemented a multi-decade initiative to incorporate cultural competency skills into the academic curriculum of professional training programs for clinicians. The association believes introducing cultural competency skills into professional training programs is the most effective method of raising cultural awareness among psychotherapists providing clinical services to patients from diverse backgrounds. APA believes increasing knowledge of the service needs of diverse patient populations will break down cultural barriers that stigmatize the treatment of mental illness in communities of color and encourage professional opportunities for ongoing diversification of the provider workforce (Perzichilli, 2020). While these three case studies represent the most visible signs of racial bias in medicine, many expert observers note that such transparent events are the tip of the iceberg. According to a personal account by Dr. Monique Tello, an internal medicine specialist of Hispanic descent at Women's Health Associates in Boston, she was denied pain medication in a hospital emergency room based on the physician's biased assumption that her racial background would cause a poor treatment outcome. Dr. Tello asserts minority patients tend to experience more health-related disparities than White patients, such as severe illness, lower quality treatment outcomes, and a higher risk of mortality because of the institutionalized racism that prohibits physicians from addressing their medical needs adequately. A study by Sun et al., 2022 corroborates Tello's assertion about the harmful impact of racial bias on service delivery in the healthcare system. The research focused on a comparative review of qualitative data from 40, 113 behavioral descriptors found in the medical histories and physical notes of 18,459 Black, Hispanic, and White patients between January 2019 and October 2020. Data analysis disclosed physicians used negative behavioral descriptors such as non-adherent, noncompliant, and agitated more frequently in the medical histories and physical notes of Black and Hispanic patients than White patients. Results show minority patients had 2.54 times the odds of having at least one of these racially stigmatizing descriptors appear in their medical histories and physical notes compared to White patients. The investigators conclude that negative terminology in patients' medical records amplifies social stereotypes that increase racial disparities, which harm the patient-provider relationship (Sun et al., 2022). The American Academy of Family Physicians supports Dr. Tello's position concerning the harmful effects of institutionalized racism on patient-provider interaction. In a policy statement released in 2021, AAFP asserts that American Health Care Institutions have consistently engaged in systematic racial discrimination that has adversely affected the quality of services patients receive from providers in the system. Studies show that medical institutions undergoing significant staffing short ages and financial constraints caused by cutbacks in government funding use racial bias to limit resources necessary to improve patient access to a higher standard of care that results in better treatment outcomes. AAFP points out that even though race-based practices related to the delivery of healthcare services are not sanctioned under the law in many regional locations in the United States, some healthcare institutions still engage in subtle forms of discrimination based on the insurance status of non-White patients seeking medical care. To address this problem, AAFP recommends a system-wide overhaul of policies and practices that support institutionalized racism against minority patients. They suggest that healthcare facilities adopt more enlightened practices and administrative procedures designed to create an equitable service delivery system that encourages inclusion, acknowledgment, and respect for racial, ethnic, and cultural differences (AAFP, 2021). Despite the call by service provider organizations such as AAFP to implement social reform measures capable of adequately addressing the racial disparities that impact minority access to quality care, the medical establishment has yet to develop a viable solution that can effectively resolve this critical issue. A clear illustration of this is the disproportionate participation rate of minority communities in vaccine initiatives implemented by the Biden administration to reduce the spread of COVID 19 illness. A statewide survey by a team of investigators at the Eastern Michigan University Center for Equitable Family and Community Well-Being in collaboration with the Washtenaw County Office of Racial Equity highlights racial differences in community participation in the COVID-19 vaccination program. The sample comprised 607 Michigan residents divided into three categories by race and ethnicity. The racial breakdown of respondents in each subcategory was $33\%$ African American, $11\%$ Latino, and $52\%$ White. Results indicated only $38\%$ of African Americans surveyed reported they had enough trust in the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine to consider taking the shot eventually. In contrast, $62\%$ of African Americans surveyed said they were highly skeptical about the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine and would not consider taking it. Findings further revealed that the overall skepticism and noncompliance with the immunization protocol among African American respondents proved higher than among White and Latino respondents. In contrast, only $17\%$ of Whites and $19\%$ of Latinos reported that they were skeptical of the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine and would refuse to get the shot. In comparison, $83\%$ of White and $81\%$ of Latino respondents reported having enough trust in the vaccine's effectiveness to get immunized. The researchers assert that vaccine hesitancy is mitigated by skepticism and distrust of the intentions of healthcare providers in the African American community and is tied to exploitation experiences of the past. They argue that the system's long history of deceptive medical practices associated with racism is the primary cause of African Americans' low immunization compliance rate. Data analysis revealed $23\%$ of African Americans surveyed reported they believe the COVID-19 vaccine offers safe and effective protection against the virus that causes the disease compared to $52\%$ of White and $62\%$ of Latino respondents who said they felt confident in the vaccine's ability to offer adequate protection against the illness. The study also suggests that the skepticism about the vaccine's effectiveness cuts across the full spectrum of educational attainment among African American respondents. Findings show that $44\%$ of African Americans with a Bachelor's degree or higher reported not being immunized with the COVID-19 vaccine. The investigators conclude that mixed messages from government officials and the public health system about the vaccine's safety and effectiveness in disease-fighting create significant challenges for healthcare providers in Michigan's African American community attempting to persuade those most at risk of COVID-19 infection to get immunized (Shanks et al., 2021). Results supporting these findings were disclosed in a British survey examining the impact of institutional racism on COVID-19 vaccination rates by a team of researchers at Queen Mary University in 2020. Data analysis revealed significant nationwide racial disparities in vaccination compliance rates. Findings indicated that vaccine hesitancy was substantially higher among Black respondents than among White respondents in all age groups. Only $39\%$ of Black respondents in London said they would consider taking the vaccine compared to $70\%$ of White respondents who said they would consider taking the shot. These two studies document the harmful effects that racial bias has on patients' willingness to comply with physician recommendations for treating serious illnesses like COVID-19 (Hitchings-Hales, 2021). ## IV. RACISM IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Healthcare is just one of many institutions in American society where African Americans and other minorities have faced systemic disparities reinforced by racism. The US criminal justice system represents one of the most transparent examples of a social institution influenced by racial inequality at every stage of the legal process. According to an analysis of national data summarized in a 2011 article by Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project in Washington, the current trend toward the mass incarceration of Black people in America's prison system is symbolic of one of the most visible forms of racial disparity in the history of our nation. In 1954, national statistics revealed that only 100,000 African Americans were incarcerated in US prisons. Today more than a half century later, that figure has risen to nearly 900,000 inmates of color. Mauer's research illustrates the harmful effect institutional racism has had on the imprisonment of minorities. Findings from studies by the United States Department of Justice have projected that if current trends continue unabated, one out of every three African American males can expect to spend some portion of their adult life serving time in a correctional facility run by the federal or state prison administration. Comparative data indicate that White males have an incarceration rate of one in seventeen, significantly lower than the imprisonment rate for Black, Hispanic and Latino males. Similar race and ethnic disparities in mass incarceration rates also exist among women. Studies show that one out of eighteen African American females is serving time in prison compared to one in forty-five Hispanic and Latino and one in eleven White females. National data also indicates that Native Americans have more than twice the imprisonment rate of Whites. In contrast, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have one of the lowest incarceration rates of any race or ethnic group. National data indicates young African American men have a disproportionately high rate of day to day involvement with the criminal justice system. Incarceration statistics show that one out every thirteen African American men between the age of 30 and 39 is presently serving time in our nation's federal prisons or in local jails. In addition the nationwide data suggests African Americans are disproportionately at-risk of victimization inside their communities because of a high rate of potential exposure to violent crime. National crime statistics indicate African Americans are three times more likely to become robbery victims than Whites. The data also suggests that victimization rates for criminal offenses like aggravated assault are twice as high in African American neighborhoods compared to predominantly White areas. Similar racial disparities are also reflected in victimization rates for Hispanic and Latino communities. Crime statistics suggest that criminal victimization rates are $15\%$ higher in Hispanic and Latino communities than in White communities. These sobering statistics further solidify how ingrained racial inequality is in America's criminal justice system. Based on his findings, Mauer identifies four factors that he believes are mainly responsible for the disproportionate rates of incarceration in communities of color. The four factors are the: - Degree of minority involvement in criminal activity - Unjust law enforcement practices influenced by racial stereotypes - Racial inequalities affecting sentencing and parole policies - Racial bias influencing court systems' decision-making process He alleges each factor contributes significantly to the social inequality that minority offenders experience in their encounters with the legal system (Mauer, 2011). Along with the racial inequality that causes mass incarceration, African Americans have a long history of institutionalized victimization yet to be resolved by the justice system. According to an analysis of historical records summarized in a report by the Alabama Equal Justice Initiative in 2017, there were 4400 lynchings of African Americans in the United States between the end of the reconstruction era and the beginning of the Second World War. Known as terror lynchings, these acts of mob violence took the lives of thousands of African American men, women, and children, destroying the family structure of Black Americans in the south for more than a century. These acts of domestic terrorism caused millions of African Americans to migrate from the deep south to the urban ghettos of the north and west during the first half of the twentieth century. Historians assert the onslaught of domestic terrorism by White Supremacist hate groups created a social environment of fear and distrust among Black Americans whose victimization served to strengthen public support for racial segregation in the old south. They assert that these bias-motivated hate group utilized extremist tactics such as public lynchings as a means of assuring the compliance of Black Americans with the racial segregation laws of mainstream White society. This racially charged intimidation of Black people by Whites laid the groundwork for the emergence of transparent inequalities in the criminal justice system evident today. Such antisocial behavior is representative of the institutionalized racism yet to be resolved by the justice system through policy and practice reform that gives people of color equal protection under the law (Equal Justice Initiative, 2017). Current policies administered by law enforcement agencies represent just how powerful the influence of race and ethnicity has become in the everyday decision making practices of the justice system. In an article published by the HuffPost online, Professor Bill Quigley of Loyola University School of Law argues that the racism that permeates every phase of the legal system is the driving force that is accelerating the increasing number of incarcerations of African American and Latino males in our nation's correctional facilities. He claims that the racially motivated policies of those who administer and sanction the practices carried out by law enforcement officials demonstrate one of the most visible criminal offenses in the system (Quigley, 2016). Empirical evidence substantiating Professor Quigley's claim is supported by a 2014 study of racial profiling at traffic stops by a team of researchers at the University of Kansas. Researchers surveyed 2329 motorists in and around Kansas City about their experiences with law enforcement officers using investigational stop-and-frisk procedures when detained at traffic stops. Data analysis revealed African American males aged 25 and younger had a $28\%$ greater chance of being detained for questioning by highway patrolmen at traffic stops over 12 months than White males of the same age whose cases of police interrogation were $12\%$ less in similar circumstances. The data also showed African American drivers were three times more likely to be subjected to a police search at highway stops than White drivers. Findings suggest that law enforcement officials make inquiries and arrests of African American male motorists at traffic stops using this procedure at more than twice the rate of White male motorists because of racial profiling, the primary determinant of this police practice (Epp & Moody, 2014). Racial disparities were also documented in a similar study proving the adverse impact of stop-and-frisk practices by the New York City Police Department. A team of investigators at The Center for Constitutional Rights conducted the research, and the results were disclosed in a report released in 2012. Researchers used structured interviews to collect qualitative data from minority respondents about their experiences with the NYPD's stop-and-frisk program. In the interviews, African American and Latino respondents reported various civil rights violations perpetrated by NYPD officers during stop-and-frisk interactions based on race. Abuses reported include racial profiling, improper arrest procedures, inappropriate touching and other forms of sexual harassment, and participation of police officers in acts of violence and humiliation against minorities detained in custody. The investigation showed that such abuses permanently affected survivors' lives. African Americans and Latinos who said they were victimized at the hands of NYPD officers because of the stop and-frisk program were members of marginalized communities targeted for social service intervention by the legal system. These include homeless people, undocumented immigrants, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender individuals, religious minorities, and economically disadvantaged individuals. Researchers concluded that the results highlighted in their final reports confirm that police misconduct based on race is still a severe issue in NYPD's stop-and-frisk program that should be addressed through interventions that reform the justice system. Despite the empirical evidence showing significant racial disparities in police programs like stop-and-frisk, law enforcement officers continue to use these harmful methods in routine encounters with minority drivers nationwide. The continuation of such practices has resulted in landmark civil rights cases that substantially limit discriminatory police procedures (Center for Constitutional Rights, 2012). Similar findings from other studies support this contention. A survey of the stop and-frisk practices implemented by nine Connecticut police departments and one state police troop by researchers at the Institute of Municipal and Regional Policy at Table 1: Racial differences in police conduct at traffic stops <table><tr><td>Racial Category</td><td>Percent Traffic Stops</td><td>Race/ethnicity of Officer</td><td>Percent of Traffic Stops</td><td>Race/ethnicity of driver</td></tr><tr><td>Black</td><td>71</td><td>Same</td><td>83</td><td>Black/Hispanic</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>88</td><td>Different</td><td>74</td><td>White</td></tr></table> Central Connecticut State University revealed significant racial disparities in the program. Data analysis showed that African American and Latino drivers were more likely to be detained at traffic stops during daytime hours than at night because highway patrolmen have difficulty identifying the race of drivers behind the wheel. A data review from 585,000 traffic stops in Hartford County disclosed evidence of this racial disparity. To address this concern, law enforcement officials on Connecticut's Racial Profiling Advisory Board collaborated with the research team to develop a practical solution to the veil of darkness identity issue at traffic stops, the leading influencer of racial bias against minority drivers. The investigation determined that policy and practice reform must be implemented to bring about measurable changes in officer reactions to drivers of color in these complex situations (Collins, 2016). Another study of racial disparities at traffic stops by researchers at the Bureau of Justice Statistics supports this view. The research examined perceptive differences in involuntary contact with law enforcement officers by drivers of diverse races and ethnic backgrounds. Racial differences in police conduct at traffic stops are shown in Table 1. Racial disparities associated with police conduct are further documented in studies by researchers at the Los Angeles Center for Police Equity and the Sentencing Project in Washington. These disparities are shown in Table 2. Research shows that racial disparities in arrest practices extend beyond color barriers, including inequalities based on sexual orientation and gender identity. A study by investigators at The Center for American Progress suggests that gay, lesbian, and transgender youth are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. Findings indicate that of the estimated 300,000 gay and transgender juvenile offenders in the justice system, $60\%$ are African American and Latino. The researchers assert that although gay and transgender youth of color comprise just $5 - 7\%$ of youth offenders in the justice system, crime statistics show that they make up $13 - 15\%$ of juveniles incarcerated in our nation's correctional facilities. Findings suggest that high rates of minority gay and transgender youth involvement with the law are mitigated by early experiences of family abandonment and peer victimization in school associated with the cultural stereotype about what it means to be a queer person of color. They also suggest that consistent exposure to adverse life experiences such as these during a child's formative years can significantly increase the risk of contact with the school-to-prison pipeline. They argue that the criminalization of minority youth who are gay and transgender by officials working for the justice system presents significant challenges for offenders that the majority are ill-equipped to handle. They conclude subjection of Black and Latino youth identifying as gay or transgender to restrictive school sanctions, involuntary detainment by the police for minor infractions, and sex offender labeling by the court system amplify the social inequality and racial injustice, which many are already struggling to cope with in their daily lives (Hunt & Moodle-Mills, 2012). Table 2: Disparities in police arrest for categorical offenses by race <table><tr><td>Racial Category</td><td>Use Deadly Force</td><td>Crime in School</td><td>Curfew Violations</td><td>Extended Detention</td><td>All Criminal Offenses</td></tr><tr><td>Black</td><td>More likely</td><td>More likely</td><td>More likely</td><td>More likely</td><td>More likely</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>Less likely</td><td>Less likely</td><td>Less likely</td><td>Less likely</td><td>Less likely</td></tr></table> Source: Sentencing Project 2015 and Center for Police Equity 2021 Note: Data analysis from these two projects indicates significant racial disparities in police arrests across offense categories nationwide. Findings in Table 2 suggest that: Law enforcement officers are likelier to use deadly force when arresting youth offenders who are African American than those who are White African American youth are twice as likely to be arrested for crimes committed in school than White youth African American youth are twice as likely to be arrested for curfew violations than their White counterparts African American youth are twice as likely to be arrested for all crimes and detained for extended periods than their White peers Differences in drug arrest rates for African American and White youth offenders indicate the stark racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Although annual surveys of drug and alcohol use show no significant differences in substance abuse patterns among African American and White youth, racial differences in arrest rates among these groups tell a different story. Surveys show arrest rates of African Americans for drug offenses are more than twice those found in the general population of the United States (US Department of Health and Human Services, 2013). According to an analysis of national data from the FBI's uniform crime report in 2014, $29\%$ of individuals arrested for drug-related criminal offenses nationwide were African American (FBI Uniform Crime Report, 2014). The contribution of racial bias to disproportionate arrest rates for drug-related offenses in the United States is further supported by research findings highlighted in a report by the American Civil Liberties Union in 2013. The report titled The War on Marijuana in Black and White: Millions of Dollars Wasted on Racially Biased Arrests presents transparent evidence that substantiates arrests for marijuana possession are motivated by race. The study utilized data from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program and the United States Census to track arrest rates for possession of marijuana by race across the United States between 2001 and 2010. Results indicate that: - There were over eight million marijuana arrests nationwide between 2001 and 2010; $88\%$ were for possession. - Marijuana arrests increased, comprising $52\%$ of all drug arrests nationwide. - African Americans are almost four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than Whites, even though the rate of marijuana use is statistically similar in both racial groups. - Racial differences between African Americans and Whites regarding arrest rates for marijuana possession encompassed residents from urban and rural counties across the country. They cut across economic extremes of wealth and poverty. - In counties where at least $2\%$ of the population is African American, arrest rates for marijuana possession are higher for Blacks than Whites. The results of the ACLU study suggest that government policies focusing on decreasing rates of marijuana possession and use have failed to meet their designated goals because of the racial bias built into the justice system that disproportionately targets Black people for arrest and conviction for drug offenses. ACLU researchers assert racially biased law enforcement measures carry severe long-term consequences for African Americans who become entangled in the legal system. They conclude that severe legal penalties for marijuana and other drug related offenses imposed by a racially biased court system have a significant detrimental impact on Black Americans in terms of their ability to access the financial resources necessary to pursue higher education and substantially restrict opportunities for them to gain access to government employment, public housing, immigration assistance, and favorable child custody determinations. Based on these findings, ACLU investigators recommend system wide changes to the penal code that legitimize the use and possession of marijuana by persons aged 21 and older through socioeconomic reforms that provide for the taxation, licensing, and regulatory oversight of businesses that sell and distribute drugs of this kind for public consumption. They believe that government-sanctioned legalization represents the most effective method of eliminating racially biased marijuana laws that unfairly target minority communities (ACLU, 2013). In addition to drug felonies, research shows racial inequalities exist in the justice system's pretrial policies and practices. A study by Dr. Traci Schlesinger, Professor of Sociology at DePaul University, in 2013 provides evidence of racial bias in the pretrial system. The research examined differences in pretrial diversion outcomes of African American and White male offenders charged with felony crimes and processed through the state court systems in several urban counties between 1990 and 2006. Findings show that: - Prosecutors are more likely to grant pretrial diversions to White defendants than to African Americans and Latinos for the same criminal offenses. - Racial inequalities that disadvantage African Americans and Latinos in pretrial diversion cases are more transparent among defendants with drug offenses and no record of previous convictions (Schlesinger, 2013). A review of pretrial detention statistics by researchers at the Prison Policy Initiative support Dr. Schlesinger's findings. Longitudinal analysis of pretrial data compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics between 2002 and 2017 suggests the defendant population detained in America's prisons and jails has grown significantly from 182,754 to 482,000, a figure that has more than doubled in the last decade and a half. The national data provides considerable evidence of the disproportionate representation of African Americans and Latinos entering the pretrial detention system. Statistics show $63\%$ of pretrial defendants detained in our nation's correctional facilities are African American and Latino, compared to $31\%$ that are White. National pretrial post-detention data also shows significant differences in unemployment and poverty rates among African American and White men and women released from pretrial correctional facilities. Data analysis indicates $35\%$ of African American men aged 35-44 reported they were jobless post-detention compared to $18\%$ of White men. Racial differences in the rate of joblessness were similar among African American and White women in the same age group. National pretrial detention data reveals the average unemployment rate for African American women postdetention was $44\%$ compared to $23\%$ for White women. The study also revealed robust differences in economic resources among African American and White men and women serving extended prison sentences. National data showed that the average annual preincarceration income for African American male inmates serving longer prison sentences was $31,245 compared to$ 47,505 for White males incarcerated for the same time. More minor differences in pre-incarceration income were also noted among African American and White women. The data revealed the average pre-incarceration income for African American women was $24,255. In contrast, the average pre-incarceration income for White women was slightly higher at$ 26,130. The study also documents significant post incarceration racial differences among inmates serving life sentences. Findings reveal that 64% of prisoners serving life sentences in federal correctional facilities are African American and Hispanic compared to 32% of White lifers. Results further disclose that African Americans and Hispanics represent a disproportionate segment of the prison population facing capital punishment on death row. The national data indicates that 55% of prisoners on death row are African American and Hispanic compared to 42% of White inmates. Based on this analysis, the investigation concludes that women and minorities are the most disadvantaged groups serving longer prison sentences in our nation's correctional institutions (Sawyer, 2020). A 2016 study by Dr. Ashley Nellis, a researcher at the Sentencing Project, supports the position that America's flawed system of mass incarceration has failed to develop policies that can effectively reduce the rate of minority imprisonment. In her report, *The Color of Justice: Racial and Ethnic Disparity in State Prisons*, she paints a disparaging picture of racial disparity in incarceration rates for Whites, African Americans, and Hispanics in state-run prisons. Results show the following systemic differences tied to race: - African Americans are incarcerated in state prisons at five times the national average of Whites. - The highest incarceration rates for African American offenders were revealed in Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Virginia, and Mary land, where more than $70\%$ of the state prison population is Black. - In 11 regional locations, incarceration statistics show one of every 20 Black males is serving time in a correctional facility operated by the state prison system. In Oklahoma, the state with the highest African American incarceration rate, one out of 15 African American males age 18 and older is doing time in state prison. - In most state prisons, the percentage of African American and Hispanic inmates exceeds that of Whites in the general prison population. According to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, $59\%$ of incarcerated inmates in state prisons are African American and Hispanic, while $33\%$ are White. - In New Mexico, Arizona, and California, states with large Latino populations, $42 - 61\%$ of incarcerated inmates in the prison system are Hispanic. Dr. Nellis's research confirms how entrenched the state correctional system is in the racial inequality contributing to the disproportionate incarceration rate of African Americans and Hispanics. Her findings highlight the need for legislative action to reform the prison system in ways that provide people of color with fair and equitable treatment under the law (Nellis, 2016). Imprisonment differences in correctional institutions are not the only transparent sign of racial bias in the criminal justice system; research shows that law enforcement officers are three times more likely to kill African American suspects during attempted arrests. A study by Harvard School of Public Health investigators con firms this assertion. Researchers reviewed the death records of 5494 African Americans who died at the hands of the police between 2013 and 2017. Results indicated a significant relationship between African American police interaction and the heightened risk of race-based mortality, particularly in urban areas. For example, the data revealed that African Americans were more than $650\%$ more likely to be killed during their interactions with the police than Whites in Chicago. Findings also indicated that individual risk of police violence resulting in death was more common in metropolitan areas in the western and southern parts of the country, where minority populations are high. National statistics show that police-related fatalities involving African Americans and other minorities were nine times higher in some urban areas than others. These findings prompted researchers to suggest that most race-related violent interaction between the African American community and the police is preventable through law enforcement policies that reduce the bias associated with race (Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 2020). The national data analyzed in this review illustrates the need for policy and practice reform in the criminal justice system to eliminate social inequalities that promote racial bias. Lawmakers recognize that implementing a progressive policy agenda with the ability to facilitate the transparent reduction of structural racism embedded in the American system of criminal justice is a daunting task. It is one that requires public support for legislative action fostering systemic reform of the justice process in ways that make the outcome of legal litigation more equitable for all criminal defendants, regardless of race (Jahn & Schwartz, 2020). In 2016, The Sentencing Project developed the latest edition of its training manual for criminal justice practitioners and public policy professionals. The manual outlines four caveats of applied knowledge that experts believe law enforcement professionals can use to address systemic racism. It also introduces five pillars of essential wisdom that police officials must understand to facilitate critical policy and practice changes that can reduce the harm caused by the racial inequality indoctrinated into the justice system. These include the following: - Law enforcement professionals must acknowledge the detrimental impact of racial bias on minority communities at every stage of the criminal justice process and recognize that the effects of such actions are cumulative over time. - Law enforcement professionals need to implement policies capable of combating race-based systemic bias through pragmatic communication among key players across the decision-making continuum of the judicial process. - Law enforcement professionals need to develop a knowledge base that will help them decide which strategic measures are most appropriate for eliminating racial inequality at each stage of the judicial process and which ones are not. - Law enforcement and policy professionals must collaborate to develop resources that will enable them to implement system-wide reforms to make the judicial process more responsive to the unique needs of minority communities. - Law enforcement professionals must encourage their leaders to commit time and money to develop strategies that allow oversight of critical judicial decisions that affect racial justice. In addition, the project outlines specific guidelines for police reform they believe are necessary to reduce racial bias and discrimination in the justice system. These guidelines are: - Work in collaboration with the government to promote the adoption of legislative action that can change existing punitive sentencing laws responsible for the disproportionate representation of African Americans and Hispanics in federal and state prison systems. - Require law enforcement officers to engage in cultural competency training programs to improve cultural understanding and break down attitudinal barriers that adversely affect their day-to-day interactions with minority communities. - Eliminate racial profiling at traffic stops through the reform of regulations that allow officers to search the vehicles of African American and Hispanic drivers for contraband weapons and illicit drugs without legal justification. - Eliminate racial inequalities in the pretrial decision-making process in federal and state court systems to provide greater assurance that cases involving minority defendants receive a fair and adequate assessment by experienced attorneys and judges. - Eliminate racial inequalities in adjudication and sentencing practices in the court system that unjustly disadvantage minority offenders. - Develop community-based alternatives to involuntary incarceration and punitive probation policies that disenfranchise the civil rights of minorities resulting in disproportionate rates of imprisonment. - Use research findings to determine the equity of treatment of minority offenders during the prosecution phase of the judicial process. - Develop specific guidelines for race-sensitive prosecution of minority offenders that help lawyers and judges make equitable judicial decisions about bail and release recommendations, plea bargaining, and prosecution diversion. - Engage in public advocacy to oppose laws that have the potential to draw a disproportionate number of minorities into the judicial system without a compel ling public safety rationale. - Support the adoption of modified professional standards that improve oversight of bail and release law enforcement practices in communities of color. - Reform parole policies so minority offenders can re-enter their communities with a structured plan for a successful transition. - Require law schools to implement continuing education programs for attorneys to sensitize them to the causes and effects of racial inequality on society. - Work with law school faculty nationwide to implement affirmative action measures that incentivize students to learn about the diverse racial and cultural backgrounds of minority clients they will encounter when they become practicing attorneys. Researchers and policy analysts at the Sentencing Project conclude that implementing the proposed guidelines for reform will be an initial step in developing national standards for best law enforcement practices with the capacity to change the detrimental treatment people of color receive from the judicial system (Sentencing Project, 2016). ## V. RACIAL INEQUALITY IN EDUCATION The American education system is another institutional setting where racial bias has influenced inequality significantly. Historians have noted a deep and abiding public concern about racial justice and equality's path in our nation's public school system for over two centuries. Empirical evidence of the national problem of racial inequality in America's schools is brought to light in a book chapter by Professor Amity L Noltemeyer and his colleagues at Sacred Heart University. The chapter provides a window into the complex events that shaped segregation policy in the American school system. It suggests that the history of race relations in the United States intertwines with segregationist policies that support educational inequality (Noltemeyer et al., 2012). One of the earliest examples of racial segregation in the school system occurred in the early1800s when European settlers created separate boarding schools for American Indian children to force them to abandon their cultural heritage and assimilate into White society. The researchers note that implementing segregationist policy was not limited to children of Native Americans who wanted to enter the predominantly White education system. A similar situation occurred in California in the late nineteenth century when school boards sought to deny children of Chinese Americans equal access to the state's public schools as an exclusionary measure to encourage the expansion of racial segregation. Local school boards enforced this segregationist policy against children of Asian American descent for decades despite a court decision in 1884 that prohibited school segregation based on ancestry. Asian American children were not the only cultural minority singled out for exclusion by the public school system through racial segregation. History discloses that during the early twentieth century, school systems throughout the United States, particularly those in the southwest, utilized state-sponsored school segregation laws to deny students of Hispanic heritage equal access to educational opportunities. In a landmark, civil rights decision in the case of Roberto Alvarez versus The Lemon Grove School Board in 1931, a San Diego judge overturned the existing segregationist policy of the school board that prohibited Mexican American children from taking full advantage of educational opportunities offered by the public school system. Even though some civil rights activists consider this decision a victory in the fight for racial justice through desegregation, others view the underlying motive for this legal precedent as less transparent. They allege that the judge's decision in the case's outcome was influenced by racial bias because, at this time in history, Mexican American children were considered to be members of the White race and, therefore, exempt from school segregation laws applied to the exclusion of other racial minorities from the school system. Despite this allegation, scholars believe that early efforts to restrict access to education through legal means were instrumental in laying the cornerstone for legitimizing later forms of racially motivated segregation in schools. Among those most affected were African Americans. Since the days of slavery in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, segregationist laws sought to deny Black people the fundamental right to an education, particularly in the south, where laws prohibited children of enslaved people from attending school alongside their White peers. Historians note enforcement of such restrictive laws placed significant limitations on the ability of White educators to teach basic skills such as reading, writing, and mathematics to children of enslaved people because of their race. They point to a direct connection between early race-based restrictions on Black education before the civil war and historically low rates of literacy in today's African American communities. Historians assert that even though congress granted formerly enslaved people civil rights during the reconstruction era of 1865-1868 through the implementation of constitutional amendments, these legislative changes proved insufficient to override the institutional racism reinforcing segregation in the school system. Systemic progress toward racial equity in education was further undermined by the implementation of Jim Crow laws that required segregation in all public facilities based on the separate but equal philosophy. A flawed doctrine of racial inequality that received public support in the supreme court case of Plessy versus Ferguson in 1896. In this case, the federal court's decision legitimized the Jim Crow doctrine, which constituted a significant setback for equality in education by segregating African American children into underfunded schools with poorly qualified teachers – further widening the racial inequality gap between Black and White students in the school system. The tipping point for such race-based inequalities in public education came in the case of Brown versus the Board of Education in 1954 when a United States Supreme Court successfully overturned the previous 1896 decision of Plessy versus Ferguson, stating that the education of Black and White students in separate facilities of different quality facilitates an injustice that impedes the educational progress of minorities and must therefore be abolished. Despite initial opposition to the Brown decision, this controversial piece of federal legislation became a rallying cry that inspired the formation of a national grassroots movement to end racial segregation that sent shockwaves through the corridors of the public education system in the 1950s and early 1960s, resulting in nationwide demonstrations against school integration. The Brown decision unleashed a firestorm of activism that resulted in the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. A groundbreaking piece of federal legislation that became a benchmark for racial justice and equality in education. It required all public institutions administering programs supported by government funding, including school districts, to receive oversight by the US Department of Justice to ensure they comply with established guidelines that band discrimination based on race and ethnicity. The legislation also established the Office of Civil Rights as a division of the US Department of Education to safeguard and enforce nondiscrimination policies and practices that protect the civil liberties of minorities entering the public school system. Inspired by landmark court decisions, many districts introduced school busing programs as a progressive means of helping schools achieve racial equality. Busing programs allowed Black students from economically disadvantaged neighborhoods to attend better-equipped schools in more affluent White middle-class communities. While some well-intentioned liberals viewed school busing programs as an opportunity to equalize the educational playing field for African American and other minority students, these programs became highly controversial in many parts of the United States, setting off legal challenges in many White communities by those who opposed integration and want to maintain the status quo. Aside from legal challenges, the program caused considerable resentment among working-class White families angered because their more affluent peers in upper income communities were exempt from participating in school desegregation initiatives. They argued that the exemption of wealthy White families from school integration programs such as busing was unacceptable and served as an incentive for a national anti-busing campaign that facilitated the establishment of private schools as a practical alternative for White students choosing not to attend integrated public schools. (Frankenberg et al., 2019). Further evidence of the White backlash against school integration is revealed in an analysis of historical events by Professor Sonya Ramsey of the University of North Carolina. Professor Ramsey's research analyzed the connection between the radicalized behavior of hate groups like The Foundation for White Supremacy and court decisions in civil rights cases such as Brown, which supported school desegregation. Her findings show that the primary motivators of this type of extremism are the biased assertion that African Americans are intellectually inferior and the unsubstantiated claim that Black males take unfair sexual advantage of White females in an integrated school setting. Dr. Ramsey's findings confirmed that racial stereotypes were the underlying rationale facilitating opposition to government backed desegregation of the public school system. The results of her study soon became the main reason local school boards implemented appeasement strategies that manipulated budgets to temporarily allow districts to increase funding for predominantly Black schools. This diversionary tactic supported false claims that mostly Black schools were not underfunded and did not require desegregation. When this tactic failed to produce the desired outcome, local school boards came under pressure from federal officials to come up with an appropriate plan that would allow for the desegregation of predominantly Black schools in racially divided communities. The federal government's renewed focus on strategies that promote the integration of African American and White students in the same educational facility fostered a nationwide push for desegregation, causing the termination of thousands of African American teachers and principals at racially segregated schools, leaving Black students with few options for receiving a quality education in their communities. Two subsequent Supreme Court decisions, *Green versus the County School Board of New Kent County* in 1968 and Alexander versus the Holmes County Board of Education in 1969, established a legal precedent that took the process further by requiring national enforcement of school desegregation measures. These decisions forced federal judges to demand that local school boards develop an effective plan for desegregation that adhered to acceptable standards of school integration laid down by the national court system (Ramsey, 2017). Despite government support for progressive civil rights decisions handed down by the federal court system, advocates confronted considerable socioeconomic barriers to racial equality in the public school system. Paramount among them were the neighborhood locations where the new school facilities were built. Results of a study documented in a book by Dr. Ansley Erickson, professor of history and education at Teachers College Columbia University, provide evidence that supports the argument that city planners played an instrumental role in assisting local school districts to reinforce segregationist policies by constructing alternative private school facilities in predominantly White suburban communities that were unavailable to African Americans for economic reasons. Professor Erickson argues that utilizing this transparent approach to urban planning and development combined with the unavailability of affordable FHA mortgages marked another unprecedented moment in the ongoing struggle to preserve the integrity of White communities by excluding African American families of low-income status. Erickson's research affirmed that moving to the suburbs symbolized upward social mobility for the White working-class living in the inner city during the late 1960s. It fostered a renewed sense of pride in their financial ability to give their children a quality education in a safe environment, removed from the racial problems common to schools with large minority populations in less desirable urban areas. Like other scholars of similar mindsets, Professor Erickson's findings document race's powerful influence over social equality in America's educational system. The events described in her analysis reflect yet another compelling example of the race based efforts of White society to maintain racial inequality by restricting opportunities for African Americans to achieve social and economic advancement through quality education over time (Erickson, 2016). Although landmark decisions like Brown and those that came after have received recognition as mainstream civil rights measures that ushered in a new era of substantial educational progress for minorities in this country, many scholars still argue that such well- meaning reforms have not gone far enough to address the social concerns that underly the racial bias promoting inequality in the American system of education for generations. Evidence supporting this position is documented in a secondary analysis of the groundbreaking research of sociologist James Coleman by Professor Steven Rivkin of the University of Illinois at Chicago. Dr. Rivkin's eye-opening critique of Colman's 1967 study examining the effects of desegregation on the Black student's ability to learn gives a new perspective to American understanding of current disparities that African Americans and other minorities face when navigating the complexities of the educational system. He points out that Coleman's research focused on two essential unanswered questions: to what extent does racial segregation exist in the public school system of the United States, and how adversely does that segregation affect educational opportunities for Black students. The results of the investigation determined that: - Although school segregation exists throughout the country, crucial Supreme Court decisions from landmark civil rights cases declared the practice unconstitutional. - African American families play a more significant role in supporting the quality of the learning experience of Black children than the availability of resources associated with the racial composition of the schools in which they are allocated. - The racial composition of the peer group that Black students affiliate with significantly influences their ability to learn more than other school-related factors. Professor Rivkin argues that Coleman's findings remain a fixture of scholarly inquiry into the positive effects of desegregation on closing the gap that has historically denied African Americans equal access to educational opportunities. He further asserts that the social fallout from progress initiated by Coleman's research was the driving force that motivated the development of public policies, encouraging school districts to actively engage in a nationwide campaign to relinquish the practice of segregation throughout the 1970s early 1980s. The renewed focus on achieving the national goal of school desegregation was marked by a significant social change in the racial balance of the public education system, particularly in inner-city neighborhoods where the White flight to the suburbs transformed many low-income areas into minority ghettos. Data analysis documented in Dr. Coleman's report *Equality of Educational Opportunity* highlights substantial evidence of the federal government's efforts to ramp up support for a more racially balanced system of public education nationwide. Empirical evidence of the impact of such legislative action is disclosed in a review of national statistics showing Black student enrollment at predominantly White schools has increased significantly from $22\%$ to $36\%$ annually. Professor Rivkin asserts much of the change documented in Coleman's report was attributable to the government's contingency restrictions on school funding. Under the new regulations, funds could only be distributed to school districts that agreed to comply with federal guidelines pertaining to desegregation. He argues that despite the regulatory reform, setbacks slowed the progression of school desegregation. For example, his research shows after 1988, a sudden downturn in community acceptance destabilized the expansion of desegregation across the board, causing Black student enrollment in mostly White schools to decline significantly over the next two decades. In his evaluation of Coleman's data on racial patterns associated with school desegregation, Professor Rivkin describes national trends in declining Black enrollment at predominantly White schools as the product of three interrelated statistical methods used to measure social change: - The exposure index that defines the degree of Black and White student interaction rates in integrated school environments. - The dissimilarity index that defines the percentage of racial balance between Black and White students in desegregated schools. - The demographic indicators that define the racial composition of the student population in desegrated schools by percentage. Using these methods as a guide, Dr. Rivkin examined the impact of desegregation on enrollment patterns in public schools during the post-Coleman era. His analysis determined that between 2000 and 2012, the percentage of Black students enrolled in integrated primary and secondary schools declined from $31\%$ to $27\%$ overall. The data also showed a significant decrease in White student enrollment at those same schools. Professor Rivkin asserts that the number of Black students attending integrated schools has declined by 20 points from $71\%$ to $51\%$ in 12 years. The study also showed that a critical factor contributing to the inhibition of Black and White student interaction in integrated schools was the introduction of students from other racial groups, such as Hispanics and Asians, which changed the demographic composition of the student population. Introducing students from different cultural backgrounds resulted in a dramatic shift in the racial balance of desegrated schools, making it more challenging for educators to initiate minority involvement in integrated school activities, an essential part of the educational experience. This was particularly the case in desegregated schools in districts in the Northeastern and Midwestern regions of the nation, where modest upticks in African American, Hispanic, and Asian populations destabilized the racial balance of student enrollment in the public schools. Professor Rivkin argues that even though initial efforts to desegregate the public school system to increase African American exposure to White students were met with significant challenges, some progress has been made in improving racial equality in education since the publication of Coleman's findings more than a half century ago. He points out that even though the Coleman study failed to provide educators with definitive proof that school desegregation is the most effective method of achieving racial equality in the public education system, it provided a stepping stone for subsequent research identifying social factors contributing to racial gaps in academic achievement. Dr. Rivkin conjectures that the findings documented in the Coleman report provided an incentive for facilitating fundamental change in how research and policy are viewed and implemented by educational institutions across America. The results increased understanding of significant social and economic issues connected to racial inequality in education, which has become the focal point of much of the critical debate among academics today (Rivkin, 2016). Professor Rivkin's secondary analysis of the Coleman data provides conclusive evidence that the struggle for racial equality in the public school system is not over. Studies have disclosed that despite the passage of progressive federal legislation designed to improve access to educational opportunities for students of color by eliminating socioeconomic and cultural barriers, many problematic obstacles still exist that prohibit students of different racial backgrounds from attending school together. In addition, national data from surveys by the US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights show substantial differences in college preparation between Black and White students enrolled in the public school system (US Department of Education, 2015-2016). Racial disparities related to college readiness are documented in Tables 3, 4, and 5. Table 3: Racial disparities in college readiness among high school graduates <table><tr><td>Racial Category</td><td>Percent Enrolled</td><td>Access College Prep classes</td><td>Percent difference</td></tr><tr><td>2014/2015</td><td></td><td>2014/2015</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Black/</td><td>57</td><td>Asian/White</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>71</td><td>Black/White</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Asian</td><td>81</td><td>Black/Asian</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>2016/2017</td><td></td><td>2016/2017</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Black</td><td>24</td><td>Asian/White</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>98</td><td>Black/White</td><td>74</td></tr><tr><td>Asian</td><td>128</td><td>Black/Asian</td><td>104</td></tr></table> Table 4: Racial disparities in AP courses and special talent programs <table><tr><td>Racial Category</td><td>Percent AP enrollment</td><td>Minority access Special programs</td><td>Percent enrollment</td></tr><tr><td>2015/2016</td><td></td><td>2015/2016</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Black/Latino</td><td>27</td><td>Not offered</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>White/Asian</td><td>60</td><td>Offered</td><td>40</td></tr><tr><td>2017/2018</td><td></td><td>2017/2018</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Black/Latino</td><td>34</td><td>Gifted/Talented</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>White/Asian</td><td>88</td><td>Black/Latino</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>White/Asian</td><td>21</td></tr></table> Table 5: Racial disparities in teacher qualifications in public schools <table><tr><td>Student Population</td><td>Percent New Teacher Hires</td><td>Racial Category</td><td>Underqualified Teacher</td></tr><tr><td>Black/Latino</td><td>3to4</td><td>Black</td><td>Four times more likely</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>1</td><td>Latino</td><td>Twice as likely</td></tr></table> Similar findings were reported in a joint study by the United Negro College Fund and the American College Testing Service (ACT) in 2015. Results show African American students are less likely to be college-ready than their White peers. Data analysis indicated $61\%$ of ACT-tested African American high school seniors could not meet minimum proficiency requirements for college readiness in the four core areas measured by the testing service. ACT scores for African American high school seniors were significantly lower than those of high school students of other races, even among those who fulfilled core curriculum requirements for college readiness. Findings also show that African American high school students were the least likely to perform well in math and science STEM subjects on the ACT examination, indicating insufficient academic preparation for college (Lomax & Roorda, 2015). ACT data documented in a national report in 2017 supports these results. Data analysis suggests a widening educational gap in college preparation based on race. Findings reveal that ACT-tested African American high school graduates continue to lag behind their White and Asian peers in their ability to meet required standards of knowledge proficiency in core subjects like math and science, which are essential for college readiness (ACT, 2017). In addition to test scores, data analysis from a national survey of teacher equity by the US Department of Education in 2014 indicates that teachers' professional qualifications also play a critical role in determining student readiness for college. Findings reveal that in schools with predominantly Black and Latino students, most teachers have not completed the educational and experiential requirements for state certification in their area of specialization, resulting in lower-quality instruction in core subjects that inhibits college readiness (U.S. Department of Education, 2014b). An evaluation of recent data on minority college readiness indicates that many racial inequalities have begun to improve by implementing programs that incentivize change. According to an article titled 'Diversifying AP,' published on Inside Higher Education in 2020 by Mark Carl Rom, Professor of Government and Public Policy at Georgetown University, the Advisory Council of the National College Board has invested considerable time and resources into making AP courses more available to minority students in the public school system. Dr. Rom asserts that the College Board is aware of the adverse impact that racial bias has on AP access and has subsequently developed two evidence-based initiatives to assist educators in meeting this challenge. The first is the Pre-AP program, designed to give all students an equal opportunity for educational enrichment and the potential for growth that extends beyond the classroom. The Pre-AP initiative utilizes racial discrimination tracking strategies to collect data that pinpoints why Black students are selectively overlooked for inclusion in exceptional talent and gifted education programs in the public school system. Educators are expected to imbue Pre-AP information to guide minority recruitment in mainstream programs that advance their educational goals. As an additional incentive for increasing racial diversity in advanced placement courses, Professor Rom points out the College Board also encourages student–teacher commitment to advanced preparation for the AP examination through a pilot program started during the 2019–2020 school year. The program requires students to commit to preparing for the AP examination through early registration. He asserts preliminary assessment of the benefits of the early registration AP program provides two significant behavioral insights about the rationale underlying student–teacher willingness to participate. First, program administrators assume that when students publicly commit to taking critical examinations months in advance, they are more motivated to work harder to prepare for the test consistently. Second, they believe that implementing official rules and regulations governing the administration of AP examinations by the College Board serves as an oversight that will prohibit teachers wanting to raise test scores artificially through racial bias from excluding minority students they view as high-risk for failure from taking the examination prematurely. Dr. Rom argues that while innovative programs like Pre-AP and early registration can potentially increase the number of minority students taking and passing the advanced placement examination, institutional participation in these initiatives does not guarantee the reduction of all enrichment inequalities in the education system that affect students from diverse racial backgrounds. He contends that urban schools, particularly those in underserved minority communities, do not have the financial resources to enable student participation in innovative programs like Pre-AP. These interventions require schools to pay an average of $3,000 per course in core subject areas such as English, Math, Science, and Social Studies, a price many cannot afford. This creates a social barrier that exacerbates racial injustice. Professor Rom concludes that although national statistics affirm precommitment to educational programs such as these have made critical strides toward improving the number of students from diverse racial backgrounds passing the AP exam in recent decades, racial discrimination remains a significant deterrent to minority enrollment in advanced placement courses(Rom, 2020). Research shows teachers' biased expectations of African American students are another critical factor influencing academic performance. A collaborative study by investigators at American University and Johns Hopkins University substantiates this claim. Based on a literature review, the researchers assert racial bias stemming from student–teacher demographic mismatch directly affects teacher expectations of the academic performance of African American high school students. Data analysis shows that when African American high school students are assigned to classes where the teacher's racial profile differs from their own, the tendency for the instructor to perceive classroom conduct as inattentive and disruptive is higher than those assigned to classes where student–teacher racial profiles match. Findings also show that teachers with mismatched racial profiles are more likely to perceive African American students as less capable of completing homework assignments adequately (Gershenson et al., 2015). Subsequent evidence of this disparity is illuminated by White teachers' having significantly lower educational expectations for African American students than Black teachers. The analysis further reveals teacher misconceptions about African American students' academic ability are associated with three factors that harm their classroom performance. These factors are: - The generalized racial stereotypes teachers have about African American students' academic ability. - The low teacher expectations influenced by race that stigmatize the academic performance of African American students. - The race-based attitudes of teachers that overshadow their objective ability to equitably evaluate the potential of students of color to succeed academically in a competitive learning environment in the classroom. Results suggest that such racially biased teacher perceptions inflict psychological damage on the self worth of African American students that manifest in emotional reactions triggering behavior problems in the classroom that lead to poor academic performance and a disidentification with the school environment. They also suggest African American students whose academic performance has been stigmatized will adjust their classroom behavior to conform to educators' low expectations. The researchers conclude that bias-laden beliefs among educators concerning unsubstantiated perceptions of poor academic performance of minority students perpetuate the myth that raises the bar of educational inequality tied to race. This position is supported by other studies showing racial bias has significant implications for the college readiness of African American students. The research asserts academic gaps that impair African American students' academic performance usually begin in primary school. Results suggest that a disproportionate number of African American students will remain disadvantaged when they enter college without a solid primary and secondary school educational foundation (Lomax & Roorda, 2015). Researchers assert that when African American students receive inadequate instruction in essential skills during their formative years, it creates an educational deficit requiring remediation to bring students up to speed to handle the more challenging college curriculum. They also assert that taking remediation courses causes a delay in the time African Americans need to complete college, requiring additional financial aid to defray college expenses and contributing to above-average rates of college attrition among Black students. Investigators believe it is one of the main reasons less than $10\%$ of African Americans complete college by the time they are in their mid-twenties. The studies further suggest that other inequalities harm the ability of African Americans to achieve college success. These race-based disparities include the fact that: - African American students tend to be enrolled in schools with less rigorous graduation requirements. - African American students have diminished opportunity to work with high school guidance counselors regularly on selecting academic courses that satisfy pre requisites for college placement. - African American students with poor academic performance in Math and Science in high school are not encouraged by educators to pursue careers in STEM fields that require mastery of those skills. Based on these findings, investigators make the following recommendations for progressive reform of the educational system they believe will close the equity gap in higher education between African American and White students. They suggest that: - States must invest in early childhood education programs designed to target academic deficiencies that impact the performance of African American students at the primary stages of child development and introduce interventions to eliminate the harm caused by them. - School districts must support investment in instruction-based early monitoring and warning systems that help teachers to identify African American students at risk whose low academic performance in the classroom requires corrective feedback and subsequent remediation. - School officials must provide African American students with educational support by implementing summer bridge programs, communication technologies such as texting, and adequate guidance to smooth the transition from high school to college. - State and local officials must provide oversight to ensure core courses taken by African American high school students directly align with the rigorous academic standards of universities. - School officials must make staffing investments that increase the number of guidance counselors available to assist African American students in selecting preliminary academic courses that meet the requirements of the university curriculum. - School officials must invest in promoting an instructional environment that facilitates African American engagement in STEM courses in Math and Science that upgrade their college preparation. - School officials must invest in establishing an educational environment that promotes the positive benefits of college enrollment to African American students at an early age. - School officials must invest in upgrading the professional training of guidance counselors to include information about government-sponsored financial aid programs and other institutional resources that African American high school students can use to help them pay for college. - School officials must invest in facilitating nationwide tours of college campuses to give African American students first-hand information about the college experience. On the instructional side, ACT investigators also recommend a series of professional development enhancements for teachers that will improve their capacity to remediate academic deficiencies common among African American students in high schools nationwide. These instructional reforms include: - State-sponsored investment in a robust multilayer teacher evaluation system utilizing assessment tools such as objective classroom observation, parent and student surveys, and other standardized student growth and performance measures. - State and university collaborative investment in upgrading admission standards for teacher education degree programs combined with support for professional development opportunities for new teachers that increase their classroom effectiveness. - School administrators must invest in training programs that produce a more culturally competent, racially diverse teacher workforce to improve the academic outcomes of African American and White students in the public school system. - School administrators must also invest in implementing evidence-based behavior modifica tion methods that help teachers manage the disciplinary problems of African American students in the classroom that reduce productivity and limit instructional opportunities for those students who seriously want to learn. Racial disparities in school discipline are shown in Table 6. Table 6: Racial differences in disciplinary school suspensions <table><tr><td>Racial Category</td><td>Percent Preschool Disciplinary Suspensions</td></tr><tr><td>Black</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Racial Group</td><td>First-time Suspensions</td></tr><tr><td>Black</td><td>More likely</td></tr><tr><td>White</td><td>Less likely</td></tr></table> - Twice as likely to be subject to one or more internal suspensions without educational services - Four times more likely to receive one or more external suspensions than their White counterparts for the same discipline problem in the classroom - Twice as likely to be subjected to law enforcement disciplinary methods for conduct violations than White students To address this concern, the investigators recommend that school administrators and teachers invest in eliminating zero-tolerance behavior modification approaches such as suspension and replace them with more effective interventions such as restorative justice techniques and enhanced staff training methods, representing a positive approach to alleviating these disruptive behaviors in the classroom. Implementing a standardized transparent data collection system is an initial step toward helping school administrators identify disproportionate disciplinary trends requiring alternative intervention and practice reform. The reviewed studies provide a transparent picture of American education's problematic racial inequality gap. Documented results illustrate the disruptive impact that structural racism has had on our nation's educational institutions. An analysis of 186 articles in the scholarly literature by researchers at the University of California Riverside and San Jose State University in 2017 documents the significance of race-based inequality in the American education system on multiple levels. Social scientists assert that research focused on addressing the causes of racism in the education system is the best method of building resistance to its effects in communities of racial diversity (Kohli et al., 2017). ## VI. RACIAL JUSTICE AND INCOME INEQUALITY More than 50 years after the start of the civil rights movement in the United States, income inequality based on race remains a national problem for which adequate solutions have yet to be found. Research on the social and economic factors contributing to this undeniable disparity in American society by Robert Manduca, Professor of Sociology at the University of Michigan, and his colleagues at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth shows the economic gap between African American, Hispanic, and White workers has been growing for more than four decades due to wage stagnation and discriminatory employment practices associated with race. Findings show that despite government efforts to increase employment equity through congressional legislation such as the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which attempted to expand worker protections against wage discrimination, minority communities have continued to fall behind economically, increasing the number of low-income households and a rise in persistent poverty. They also indicate that disparate socioeconomic conditions harm the family structure and increase urban segregation, contributing to the disproportionate expansion of income inequality affecting African American and Hispanic populations adversely (Manduca, 2018; Kurt, 2022). A 2016 study by Dr. Joseph Cortright, principal economist and senior policy analyst at Impresa, a Portland-based consulting firm, revealed similar findings. The research showed a consistent national decline in the household incomes of African American families compared to White families. Analysis of economic data indicates that the annual household income for the average African American family is $42\%$ lower than that of the average White family, further evidence of income inequality facilitated by race. The study also revealed that residential segregation significantly influences gaps in household income associated with race. Researchers noted that African Americans living in more racially integrated communities had fewer variations in household income than those residing in more segregated urban areas. Dr. Cortright concludes that resolving the economic disparities associated with income inequality through racial integration is one of the most effective ways of eliminating segregation (Cortright, 2016). A study by the Pew Research Center in 2018 corroborates Cortight's findings about race-based income inequality. The research analyzed the widening income gap between rich and poor among Asian Americans. Pew investigators reviewed house hold income data from the American Community Survey and other census bureau sources between 1970 and 2016 to determine the equitable distribution of economic resources by race. Results revealed that the economic divide between Asian Americans at the top and bottom of the income ladder has nearly doubled in recent years. Asian Americans currently outrank African Americans and other minorities as the country's most economically divided ethnic group. National data indicates that Asian Americans at the bottom of the financial ladder experienced a higher level of decreased economic opportunity and social mobility than those whose incomes placed them at the top of the economic scale (Kochhar & Cilluffo, 2018). Table 7: Disparities in annual household income by race and ethnicity <table><tr><td>Racial Category and Economic Status</td><td>Median Annual Household Income</td></tr><tr><td>Asian Americans</td><td>$51,288</td></tr><tr><td>White Americans</td><td>$47,958</td></tr><tr><td>African Americans</td><td>$31,082</td></tr><tr><td>Hispanic Americans</td><td>$30,400</td></tr><tr><td>Upper-Income</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Asian Americans</td><td>$133,529</td></tr><tr><td>White Americans</td><td>$117,986</td></tr><tr><td>African Americans</td><td>$80,502</td></tr><tr><td>Hispanic Americans</td><td>$76,847</td></tr><tr><td>Lower-Income</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>White Americans</td><td>$15,094</td></tr><tr><td>Asian Americans</td><td>$12,478</td></tr><tr><td>African Americans</td><td>$8,201</td></tr><tr><td>Hispanic Americans</td><td>$9,900</td></tr></table> The research also notes that although a substantial segment of the Asian American community has made financial strides through enhanced access to higher education, those economic gains have not been shared equally by all Asian Americans entering the US labor market. The backlash of anti-immigrant sentiment tied to racism has taken a considerable toll on the community's ability to distribute income equitably throughout the population, causing many middle- and low-income Asian American families to limit or entirely forgo investment in higher education for their children and leave others on the brink of extreme poverty. A comparative analysis of household income disparities based on race and ethnicity is presented in Table 7. An analysis of findings on income inequality across the racial spectrum documented in a 2019 Census Bureau survey substantiates the results of the study by the Pew Research Center. Results show a steady rise in household income among all racial and ethnic groups, particularly Asian Americans. Data analysis reveals that the annual household income for Asian Americans increased by $10.6\%$ between 2000 and 2019, compared to more moderate gains of $8.5\%$ for African Americans, $7.1\%$ for Hispanic Americans, and $5.7\%$ for White Americans during the same period. The results highlight the growing income inequality in American society driven by race (Wilson, 2020). ## VII. RACISM AND XENOPHOBIA IN EUROPE Social inequality facilitated by the definitive narrative surrounding race is a centuries-old problem whose ideological underpinnings have significantly impacted how other countries perceive outsiders' fundamental human rights and social justice concerns. Unlike the disparities associated with cultural beliefs about race and ethnicity so pervasive in the history of the United States, the nation-states of the European Union have a long-standing tradition of benevolence and respect for those whose transparent differences set them apart from the mainstream of European society. The multigenerational liberalism of the EU nations toward people of various racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds is most evident in the development of progressive policies designed to promote the general welfare of entire national populations. Historians have often referred to these nation-states as the architectural model of regional human rights and social justice reform. A distinction unmatched throughout the history of civilization. Over the decades, humanitarian organizations like Amnesty International have considered the EU nations the gold standard of human rights protection and social equality worldwide. However, recent global events, such as the expansion of the refugee crisis in the third world, have dramatically changed the view of humanitarian outreach that many European nations once had toward immigration. Even though the governing bodies of Europe have consistently strived to maintain a welcoming environment of social inclusion where everyone's civil liberties are respected and protected regardless of racial identity, escalating political conflict across the spectrum of EU nations facilitated by worsening socioeconomic conditions has put a significant strain on the quality of race relations between Whites and other minorities in Europe. The proliferation of negative propaganda about the social characteristics and cultural behavior of immigrants by those affiliated with populist political factions has destabilized many European countries, resulting in the rise of White nationalism in most liberal sovereign nations, causing a significant uptick in systemic racism. Anecdotal evidence suggests that racism is growing in European countries at an unprecedented pace. For example, during the Syrian Civil War, thousands of civilians from predominantly Muslim countries became displaced due to political unrest and sought asylum in western Europe. Although Europeans initially welcomed the refugees through humanitarian efforts, that soon changed as Muslim women began reporting being sexually harassed and robbed in many EU nations they entered because of an Islamophobic backlash driven by racial bias against immigrants. In the face of Russian aggression, a similar situation erupted among Ukrainian refugees fleeing their homelands, which started a year ago. As millions of Ukrainians displaced by the ravages of war sought asylum in neighboring NATO nations, those belonging to minority populations were given low priority for receiving humanitarian aid in predominantly White EU nations, indicating they were not wanted. These are just two of the many transparent examples of how race, culture, and politics still play a decisive role in influencing immigration decisions throughout Europe, even during times of crisis (Haqqi, 2018; Wamsley, 2022). Table 8: Incidence of racial harassment by timeframe <table><tr><td>Perceived Racial Harassment</td><td>Period Racial Harassment Occurred</td></tr><tr><td>1 in 3</td><td>In the last 5 years</td></tr><tr><td>1 in 5</td><td>In the last year</td></tr></table> Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019. Note: Data analysis indicates that 1 in 3 respondents reported experiencing harassment based on race within the last 5 years, and 1 in 5 said they were subjected to race-based harassment within the past year. These differences are shown in Table 8. Table 9: Incidence of racial harassment by gender category <table><tr><td>Gender</td><td>Percent</td></tr><tr><td>African men</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>African women</td><td>20</td></tr></table> Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019. Note: Data analysis indicates that African women residing in the European Union reported a lower incidence of race-based harassment than African men. These differences are shown in Table 9. Table 10: Frequency of racial harassment by country <table><tr><td>Host country</td><td>Percent harassment in the last 5 years</td></tr><tr><td>Malta</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Finland</td><td>63</td></tr></table> Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019. Note: Data analysis indicates that African respondents in Finland reported the most frequent occurrences of race-based harassment within 5 years. In contrast, African respondents in Malta reported the lowest frequency of such incidences during the same period. These differences are shown in Table 10. The nations of the European Union have long been home to thousands of people of African descent, the majority of whom are Black. Although these immigrants have become an integral part of the general population of the nations of western Europe for decades, their assimilation into the mainstream culture of many European societies remains controversial because of the xenophobic backlash. To address this concern, the 12 member nations of the European Union allied to develop effective methods of resolving the problems associated with racism at the grassroots level. However, despite this effort, analysis of data from a national survey of minorities by researchers at the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights in 2018 revealed almost 6000 incidents of racial bias against African immigrants reported throughout western Europe. The data also suggested that African immigrants in EU nations were more likely to experience a higher risk of physical harassment and violence motivated by racism. Key findings from the survey are highlighted in Tables 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18. Table 11: Incidence of racial violence by method of victimization <table><tr><td>Method of Attack Used by Perpetrator</td><td>Percent Race-based Violence Reported</td></tr><tr><td>Racist cues</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Racist remarks</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Physical violence</td><td>8</td></tr></table> Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019. Note: Data analysis indicates that among African respondents reporting violence against their fellow citizens, more than $20\%$ said perpetrators used nonverbal racist cues and race-based verbal threats targeting minorities as a prelude to actual physical violence, which occurred in only $8\%$ of cases. These differences are shown in Table 11. Table 12: Incidence of racial harassment by age <table><tr><td>Age Category of Respondent</td><td>Risk of Racist Harassment</td></tr><tr><td>Younger</td><td>More likely</td></tr><tr><td>Older</td><td>Less likely</td></tr></table> Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019. Note: Data analysis indicates a significant decline in the risk of racist harassment by age in EU nation-states. Findings reveal that younger respondents were more likely to report experiencing harassment motivated by race than older respondents. These differences are shown in Table 12. Table 13: Prevalence of racial harassment reported to police <table><tr><td>Gender of Victim</td><td>Percent of Police-Reported Incidents</td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Incident</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Reported</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Unreported</td><td>64</td></tr></table> - Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019 - Note: Data analysis indicates gender differences in reported incidents of harassment motivated by race. Findings in Table 13 suggest that: - A higher percentage of incidents of harassment reported to law enforcement, or other protective service agencies were committed against women - Only $14\%$ of recent incidents of race-based harassment were reported to law enforcement authorities by victims, compared to $64\%$ of incidents that went unreported. An analytic summary of social and economic factors contributing to the increase in discriminatory behavior against people of African descent in Europe is presented in Tables 16 and 17. The survey results confirm how widespread the influence of race has become throughout the nations of Europe. Evidence supporting this assertion is documented in a study of racial attitudes toward Muslim immigrants by researchers at the Pew Research Center in 2019. Findings reveal a broad spectrum of popular opinions about the favorability of Muslims residing in host countries. Data analysis shows that most people in Western and Northern Europe, Russia, and Ukraine hold favorable views of Muslims living in their countries. In contrast, the data shows that people living in countries located in Eastern, Southern, and Central Europe have more negative opinions about Muslims living in their homeland. The analysis also revealed a significant correlation between the respondent's age, education level, and unfavorable beliefs. The national data indicates that in countries such as the Czech Republic, Netherlands, Poland, and Italy, negative opinions about Muslim refugees were between 14 and 29 percentage points higher among respondents with less education than those with more education. A similar correlation was noted among respondents in different age categories. Findings show that adults aged 60 and older in France, Sweden, Italy, Greece, Germany, and the Czech Republic are between 15 and 27 percentage points more likely to hold negative opinions about Muslim refugees than those age 18 to 34. The international data also shows a significant relationship between negative views of Muslim refugees and European political party affiliation. Respondents in Sweden, Germany, the Czech Republic, Netherlands, Italy, and France, where over $40\%$ of adults are affiliated with right-wing political parties that hold anti-immigrant views, were between $22\%$ and $42\%$ more likely to have negative opinions about Muslim refugees compared to those with more liberal political ties (Wike et al., 2019). The breakdown of views about the Muslim population in Europe is shown in Table 19. Table 14: Prevalence of racial violence by nation <table><tr><td>EU Nation</td><td>Percent of Racist Violence Recorded</td></tr><tr><td>Finland</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Ireland/Austria</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Luxembourg</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Combined rate</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Portugal</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Combined rate</td><td>5</td></tr></table> Source: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights 2019. Note: Data analysis shows significant differences in rates of race-based violence recorded through out the nations of Europe. National statistics suggest that: The highest rates of race-based violence were reported in Finland, Ireland, Austria, and Luxembourg The four-nation combined rate represents $38\%$ of documented cases of racial violence reported to law enforcement and victim protection agencies in the EU 5 years before the survey Only $5\%$ of cases of race-based violence documented by authorities were in the United Kingdom and Portugal, the countries with the lowest reported cases in the Union. Table 15: Incidence of physical attack reported to police authorities <table><tr><td>Perpetrator Category</td><td>Percentage of Incidents Reported</td></tr><tr><td>Unknown</td><td>61</td></tr><tr><td>Non-minority</td><td>65</td></tr><tr><td>Racial minority</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Police officer</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>50</td></tr></table> Table 16: Incidence of racial profiling at traffic stops <table><tr><td>Profiling</td><td>Percent reported</td></tr><tr><td>In the last 5 years</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>In the last year</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>EU country</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>63</td></tr><tr><td>Finland</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>Traffic stops by gender</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Racism by gender</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Age</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>16to24</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>49to59</td><td>35</td></tr><tr><td>Police behavior</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Respectful</td><td>60</td></tr><tr><td>Disrespectful</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Difference by nation</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Denmark</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Police trust</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Complete trust</td><td>6.3</td></tr><tr><td>Trust after profiling</td><td>4.8</td></tr><tr><td>Trust by nation</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Finland</td><td>8.2</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>3.6</td></tr></table> Younger drivers of African descent were more likely to perceive traffic stops initiated by police authorities as motivated by racism than older drivers of the same racial background. Among African drivers stopped by police at traffic stops, more than $50\%$ said they perceived the officer's behavior as respectful. In contrast, less than $20\%$ perceived the behavior as disrespectful during the interaction The two nations with the highest proportion of courteous police behavior associated with racial profiling were Austria and Denmark The Impact of the Global Expansion of Racism and Xenophobia on... 45 African drivers profiled by law enforcement authorities reported a significant decline in trust in police behavior in contrast to those who said they trusted the police completely before profiling occurred African drivers profiled in Finland demonstrated the highest percent of trust in the police officers who stopped them. In contrast, drivers of color profiled in Austria showed the lowest percentage of faith in police officials they interacted with during detainment The United Nations has been a role model of international peacekeeping and collaborative fellowship worldwide for decades. Yet even here in this microsome of global alliance, a groundbreaking study conducted by investigators at UN headquarters in Geneva and New York in 2020 uncovered some startling revelations about racism within the organization's professional ranks. Investigators surveyed 688 UN staffers working at various professional and administrative jobs at both UN head quarters to determine the degree of racial bias among the employee ranks. Analysis of findings at the organization's Geneva headquarters disclosed that: - One out of three staffers surveyed reported they experienced racial bias directed at themselves or their colleagues in the workplace. - Staffers surveyed said they believe racial bias and workplace discrimination incidents stem from their nationality. - Staffers surveyed said that racial discrimination in the workplace harmed their opportunities for career advancement within the organization. - Staffers surveyed said workplace discrimination related to their race manifested in verbal abuse directed at them and deliberate exclusion from collaborative work related events such as decision-making training sessions. - Staffers targeted for racial discrimination, harassment, and abuse by their colleagues at the UN said they did not report the incident to supervisors because of a lack of trust in the organization's disciplinary mechanisms. - Staffers said they believe racial discrimination inside the ranks of the UN organization requires a multifaceted policy response on several levels. These include: - Implementation of a zero-tolerance anti-discrimination policy within the professional ranks of the organization at all levels is necessary to protect employees from physical and verbal abuse and hold violators accountable Table 17: Factors contributing to perceptions of racial discrimination in EU countries <table><tr><td>Perceived Discrimination</td><td>Percent Reported</td></tr><tr><td>Last 5 years</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Last year</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Rate by country</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Luxembourg</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>Finland</td><td>45</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Denmark</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Portugal</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Skin color</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Ethnic origin</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Religion</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Complaints filed</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Finland</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Ireland</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Sweden</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>Portugal</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Equality awareness</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ireland</td><td>67</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>65</td></tr><tr><td>Denmark</td><td>62</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Luxembourg</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Malta</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Legislation</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>87</td></tr><tr><td>France</td><td>81</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Malta</td><td>18</td></tr></table> Note: Data analysis reveals the social and political factors contributing to perceptions of racial discrimination against African immigrants in each E.U. country surveyed. Table 17 shows that: Four out of ten respondents reported experiencing a perceived incident of racial discrimination in business or social settings within 5 years before the survey One out of four respondents said they experienced a perceived incident of discriminatory behavior in these settings within 1 year before the study was initiated One-quarter of respondents said skin color was the main reason for the racial discrimination they experienced Male respondents reported a higher incidence of perceived discrimination associated with skin color than their female counterparts in the same social or business situations One-fifth of respondents said discrimination linked to their race and religious practices occurred in business settings and other areas of their daily lives Respondents in Luxembourg, Finland, Austria, and Denmark reported the highest rate of perceived racial discrimination In Portugal and the United Kingdom, respondents reported the lowest rate of perceived discrimination based on race One in six respondents perceiving racial bias filed a formal complaint with an anti-discrimination organization in their country Respondents from Finland, Ireland, and Sweden filed the highest rate of formal anti discrimination complaints Respondents from Portugal, Italy, and Austria filed the lowest rate of formal anti-discrimination complaints At least half of the respondents surveyed said they know of an anti-discrimination organization operating in their country of residence The highest level of equality organization awareness occurred among respondents in Ireland, the United Kingdom, and Denmark Respondents in Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, and Malta had the lowest level of this awareness Three-quarters of respondents surveyed said they knew about government-backed equality directives in their country Respondents in the United Kingdom and France had the highest anti-discrimination legislative awareness Respondents in Italy and Malta had the lowest understanding of government-created legislative initiatives (FRA, 2019) - The introduction of sensitivity training sessions for UN employees is an essential part of building cultural understanding and racial tolerance within the organization's professional ranks - Implementation of more equality-centered hiring practices associated with the recruitment, promotion, and retention of UN employees from diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds is a critical component of creating a more inclusive work environment that is beneficial to all - The UN needs to develop a strategic approach to opening up an internal professional dialog about transparent issues associated with racial bias that impacts employee safety, job performance, and overall health and well-being at all levels of the structure of the organization. Similar findings were noted by researchers surveying staff at the organization's New York headquarters. Data analysis revealed that: - Forty-four percent of staff surveyed said that racial diversity was not adequately represented in their department. - Forty-six percent of staff surveyed said that people of African descent were not adequately represented in their division. - Forty-three percent of staff from diverse racial backgrounds reported they were subjected to harassment and intimidation by colleagues because of their race. - Minorities responding to the survey reported they felt that racial bias was directed at them by human resource staff who used language beset with racial overtones in their recruitment, retention, and promotional practices - Like staffers participating in the Geneva survey, those in the New York head quarters also said a multifaceted approach to addressing racism within the organization ranks is essential to creating a more inclusive, safe work environment where everyone's civil rights are protected (Deen, 2020). Table 18: Racial factors influencing employment and housing discrimination <table><tr><td>Countries With High Rates of Job and Housing Discrimination</td><td>Percentage of Incidents Reported</td></tr><tr><td>Luxembourg</td><td>47</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>46</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>46</td></tr><tr><td>Gender</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Paid employment</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>63</td></tr><tr><td>Lower wages</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Portugal</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>75</td></tr><tr><td>Ireland and Malta</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>45</td></tr><tr><td>Denmark</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Unemployment</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>Malta</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Housing denied</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Italy and Austria</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Luxembourg</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>Germany</td><td>33</td></tr><tr><td>Denmark</td><td>&lt;10</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>&lt;10</td></tr><tr><td>Reason denied</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Skin color</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>First and last name</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Citizenship status</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Renting denied</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Luxembourg</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Germany</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Overcrowded Conditions</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>African Population</td><td>45</td></tr><tr><td>General Population</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Economic Hardship</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>African Population</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>General Population</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Household Poverty</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>African Population</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>General Population</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Home Ownership</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>African Population</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>General Population</td><td>&lt;80</td></tr></table> Note: Data analysis suggests that racial bias contributes significantly to employment and housing discrimination among African immigrants surveyed in the nations of the European Union. Table 18 shows that: One in four respondents said they experienced extreme employment discrimination in their host country 5 years before the survey Respondents in Luxembourg, Austria, and Italy reported the highest rates of employment discrimination Male respondents reported slightly higher employment discrimination rates based on race and ethnic identity than female respondents More than $80\%$ of respondents said that skin color and physical appearance were the primary reasons they experienced employment discrimination Seven in ten respondents surveyed with a college education engaged in full-time paid employment said their employer paid them lower wages than other employees performing the same job. The highest rate of race-related wage discrimination was reported in Portugal and the United Kingdom and the lowest in Denmark, Austria, Ireland, and Malta One in five working-age respondents reported non-engagement in full-time paid employment, post-secondary education, and vocational training programs because of the institutional racism that denied them access The highest rates of non-engagement in paid employment associated with race were reported in Austria, Malta, and Italy One in five respondents reported experiencing housing discrimination within 5 years before the survey Respondents surveyed in Italy, Austria, Luxembourg, and Germany reported a combined rate of $108\%$ for housing discrimination based on race, one of the highest in the European Union Respondents surveyed in Denmark and the United Kingdom reported a housing discrimination rate of less than $10\%$ based on race, the lowest in the European Union Eight out of ten respondents said skin color was the main reason for the housing discrimination they experienced when looking for a place to live in their host country Over one in ten respondents reported experiencing housing discrimination based on race when they tried to rent an apartment in their adopted country The highest rate of race-based renter discrimination was in Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, and Germany, and the lowest rate was in the United Kingdom Only $15\%$ of African respondents surveyed reported owning the apartment where they presently lived, compared to over $80\%$ of the general population who owned their current residence. More than $40\%$ of Black respondents reported living in overcrowded housing conditions, unlike $17\%$ of White respondents More than $10\%$ of Black respondents surveyed in Austria said they were experiencing economic challenges tied to their household income compared to just $4\%$ of the general Austrian population reporting similar circumstances Over $50\%$ of Black respondents surveyed reported living in households with incomes below the poverty threshold of their adopted homeland compared to $31\%$ of the general population that said they lived in homes with similar income disparities The household poverty rate for Black immigrants in Austria, Malta, and Luxembourg ranged between $71\%$ and $88\%$, further highlighting socioeconomic inequalities in the EU related to race Germany Favorable 69 Unfavorable 34 <table><tr><td>Nation</td><td>Percent</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>78</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>France</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>72</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Netherlands</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Germany</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable'</td><td>69</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Bulgaria</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>69</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Sweden</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>68</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Spain</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Italy</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>Greece</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>57</td></tr><tr><td>Poland</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>66</td></tr><tr><td>Lithuania</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Czech Republic</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>64</td></tr><tr><td>Slovakia</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>Hungary</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>58</td></tr><tr><td>Russia</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Ukraine</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Favorable</td><td>62</td></tr><tr><td>Unfavorable</td><td>21</td></tr></table> ## VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The research reviewed in this article documents the complex ideological issues fueling the global expansion of racial injustice that must be addressed through the implementation of government backed antidiscrimination legislation supporting positive social reform at the institutional level. Two months after his inauguration in January of 2021, President Biden and Vice President Harris released a public statement outlining their administration's plan for addressing issues associated with the spread of systemic racism inside America's public and private institutions. Specific measures detailed in the Biden-Harris anti-racism agenda include the following: - Implement a comprehensive approach to advancing racial equity in the federal government by creating opportunities to improve underserved communities. Implement specific legislative initiatives to address the social fallout of racism, xenophobia, and intolerance targeting the Asian American/Pacific Islander community related to the COVID-19 pandemic. - Implement a government-backed interagency study to assess the threat that bias motivated domestic violence and extremism pose to the safety and welfare of minority communities. - Implement the creation of a federal position known as Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer (CDIO) at the State Department to: - Conduct oversight of diversity advancement and inclusion policies and practices throughout the department's subdivisions. - Hold division heads accountable for incorporating initiatives that facilitate racial diversity and cultural inclusion into their units. - Incorporate racial justice into US foreign policy goals by funding civil society grants, special embassy initiatives, international exchange, and leadership programs to address racial bias and injustice abroad. - Provide global support for marginalized populations by funding international humanitarian organizations that empower communities of color by implementing programs that preserve dignity and respect and eliminate the harm caused by racism. - Initiate a joint agreement between the United States and 140 countries in the international community to develop a coordinated response to the global spread of racism and intolerance. The deal will include the following: - Recognizing the persistent legacy of systemic racism in every society worldwide and implementing culturally appropriate evidence-based community strategies can effectively address these issues. - Revising long-standing public policies and professional practices inside social institutions to ensure that all individuals, regardless of their racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, are treated equally. - Ensure that government policies associated with racial, ethnic, and cultural equity and inclusion are incorporated into the global decision-making process. Change inequalities embedded in present government policies that foster the creation of social barriers to equal opportunity for people of all national origins. - Eliminate racial barriers to political participation in the United States and across the nation-states of Europe. - Nominate a US representative to the Committee on Eliminating Racial Discrimination (White House, 2021). In addition to the legislative action by the Biden-Harris administration to eliminate the global expansion of racism, academicians and grassroots organizers believe that one of the most potent weapons that can be used to counteract the harmful effects of racial bias and injustice is education. According to an article by Drs. Cecilia Barbieri and Martha K. Ferede, two UNESCO education specialists, in 2020, all educational institutions must take steps to actively eliminate the racial bias that jeopardizes the health and safety of students of color. They assert that implementing evidence-based learning intervention strategies can address this problem effectively. The researchers argue that educators share a responsibility for curtailing discrimination that causes discipline problems in the classroom among students of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. They assert implementing innovative measures with the capacity to correct such troublesome behaviors through education encourages racial tolerance and acceptance of others. They recommend the application of the following educational strategies to accomplish this goal: - Support public institutions that implement policies encouraging racial integration at all levels of the education system. - Recruit teachers and other administrative staff that reflect student populations' racial and ethnic diversity. - Adapt educational curriculums to present information that eliminates racial stereotypes by having Textbooks and other materials that offer an unbiased depiction of people from different cultures. - Identify and address the cognitive biases implicit within the structural hierarchy of educational institutions, and implement strategic policies and programs to eliminate negative ideas and beliefs about racial and ethnic diversity. Scholars point out that incorporating DEI programs into the public education system is an effective strategy for breaking the cycle of racial disparity that facilitates social inequality in many American institutions. The researchers conclude that implementing instructional programs that teach children to understand and respect the beliefs and practices of people from diverse backgrounds marks the initial step toward eliminating race-based discrimination and building a more tolerant and inclusive robust society where everyone's racial and cultural differences are accepted (Barbien & Ferede, 2020). ## IX. KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Income Inequality is the unequal distribution of economic resources throughout the general population (Investopedia.com, 2022). Pretrial Detention is the deprivation of personal freedom administered by the criminal justice system during the interim period between the defendant's arrest and court sentencing (Law Insider.com, 2022). Racial Disparity is a condition of social inequality whereby members of main stream society are granted more privileged treatment at the expense of others seen as outsiders because of their racial and ethnic characteristics. Such disparities are reflected in the law's diminished access to educational opportunities, health care, fair housing, employment, and equal treatment by the justice system (Law Insider. com, 2022). Racial Discrimination is unfair treatment or bias against an individual or group based on race (Collins Dictionary.com, 2022). Racial Prejudice is unprovoked negative feelings or attitudes toward an individual or group of individuals based exclusively on their race, ethnicity, or national origin (Merriam-Webster.com, 2022). School Segregation is the enforced isolation of a particular group of primary and secondary school students in separate educational facilities utilizing discriminatory strategies (Merriam-Webster.com, 2022). Social Inequality is the relational process in a society involving limiting or harming an individual or group's social status, social class, or social circle (Science Daily. com, 2022). Social Justice is the assertion that all people, regardless of group identity, have the legal right to attain equal access to opportunities, resources, and social benefits that enhance their quality of life (University of Denver Graduate School of Social Work, 2020). Xenophobia is an irrational fear of individuals from other countries based on their racial and cultural backgrounds and religious beliefs (Merriam-Webster. com, 2022). ### Additional Reading 84. Adler, J. S. (2019). Murder in New Orleans: The creation of Jim Crow policing. University of Chicago Press Retrieved from https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo40201706.html 85. Anderson, K. J. (2010). Benign bigotry: The psychology of subtle prejudice. Cambridge University Press Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/psychology/social-psychology/benign-bigotry-psychology-subtle-prejudice 86. Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2016). Blind spot: Hidden biases of good people. Bantam Books Retrieved from spottheblindspot.com 87. Bhopal, K. (2018). White privilege: The myth of post racial society. Policy Press, University of Bristol Retrieved from https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/white-privilege 88. Candelclario, C. (2020, June 3). 13 Podcasts that can help us learn about Race and Racism in - America. Retrieved from https://www.purewow.com/ entertainment/podcasts-about-race-and-racism 89. DiAngelo, R. J. (2018). White fragility: Why it's so hard for white people to talk about race. Beacon Press Retrieved from http://www.beacon.org/White-Fragility-P1631.aspx 90. Fleming, C. M. (2018). How to be less stupid about race. Beacon Press Retrieved from http://www.beacon.org/How-to-Be-Less-Stupid-About-Race-P138 8.aspx 91. Ralph, L. (2020). The torture letters: Reckoning with police violence. University of Chicago Press Retrieved from https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/T/bo26783305.htm 92. Sadd, L. F. (2020). Me and white supremacy: Combat racism, change the world, and become a good ancestor. Publisher Sourcebooks LLC Retrieved from https://www.sourcebooks.com/me and-white-supremacy.html 93. Wise, T. (2005). White like me: Reflections on race from a privileged son, Soft Skull Press, Retrieved from https://wilcfry.com/reviews/books/wise-tim/white-like-me/.

Generating HTML Viewer...