Grad Team, in his 2016 article, “How to end institutional racism,” emphatically states the vicious yet short-lived political concern about racism during campaign trails. In his opening statement, he observes, somewhat regrettably, that despite making enormous promises during campaigns, politicians rarely follow them through after the waves. He observes that despite the implied commitment by politicians in campaigns to end institutional racism, it is not something that can be achieved overnight. Team categorically puts it that institutional racism is a process that needs time, research, and resources to exterminate. He establishes a formal and highly analytical tone his anti-racism audience and sophisticated political and sociological readers.
He invariably examines the statistics that reflect the level of racism in the American institutions, perhaps in a bid to highlight how deeply the vice is entrenched. From the criminal justice system, housing departments, to the healthcare, the writer does not shy away from highlighting startling statistics. He infuses the politics and sociological aspects of the problem and puts it to his audience that the two are inseparable. To support that he quotes Bernie Sanders in his campaign trail who promises to end institutional racism. However, he is quick to invoke a familiar yet disturbing reality that political promises mostly do not end up materializing. Nonetheless, he purposes to offer a solution, which he believes in the concerted effort of institutions backed up with political goodwill steered towards a positive direction.
Michael A. McCarthy, in his article “Racism and Structural Solutions” portends that the March 18 Barack Obama speech opened up the optimistic hopes of the Americans, particularly those of color, that soon the racial stalemate was going to be addressed. It is his position that the former president observed that the debate on racial discrimination was not getting the attention it required. Not because the problem had been addressed, neither is it because that the issue of racialism had subsided. In fact, previous presidential candidates have been turning a blind eye to the issue; often using euphemistic language which failed to evoke a reaction of equal magnitude to the problem.
McCarthy uses an optimistic and firm tone in addressing his audience. He points out the significance of shifting from the usual narrative that has been prevalent but ineffective. For instance, he notes that presidential campaigns have been addressing by burying it in coded language. McCarthy contends that the very first step towards addressing the systemized problem of racism has to start with calling the problem as it is. The former president Barack Obama incepted that shift during his address. McCarthy states that “by dealing a bit more squarely with the issue, the speech had the potential to ignite national debate.” Therefore, according to him, the problem of racism has been persisting due to intended ignorance by the country’s leadership.
In the article, he assumes the position of a radical democrat. He boldly addresses the underlying causes of racism. Unlike the former contributors to the debate who avoid the reality by turning a blind eye on the vices, McCarthy demystifies the rhetoric. He does not stop short of airing his opinion. The writer synthesizes expert opinions and scholarly works to come up with a lucid conclusion that racism and class are interconnected. He leaves his audience in such an optimistic mood.
However, Christopher Ingraham, in his 2015 article, “Americans say racism is a bigger problem today than at any point in the past 20 years,” seems to paint a grey yet realist picture. He observes that the problem has escalated despite the optimism that the Obama administration brought in. For instance, citing a poll release, Ingraham states that half of the Americans feel that the problem is bigger than how it was in 2010. He firmly asserts the indices had hit an all-time higher compared with the past 20 years. It is through that saddening reality that audience appreciates that despite the various strategies that have been used to fight the vice have been ineffective. What he posits is the fact that the public has become more sensitive and aware of the problem of racism.
Therefore, Ingraham is insinuating that the levels of ignorance have tremendously gone down on issues of racial discrimination. Perhaps, that implies that awareness campaigns have been successful in bringing to light the causes and kinds of injustices that amount to racism. Surprisingly, the American society is still divided on the issue. The whites do not see the problem as big as the blacks do. That is a pointer that the minority and the victims will always be at the forefront of acknowledging their problems. The division is also political – and the audience will note that democrats and republicans have different perceptions as regards racism.
His analysis points out that the problem of racism is not one that is to be solved superficially. The different perception of the problem coming from various groups and political divides shows that the issue has more to do with attitudes that system. He is telling his audience that despite the amendment of laws, the problem of racism cannot be addressed without a change in attitude. Somehow, he is implying that when anti-discrimination laws are not attuned to the public consciousness, then any efforts to address racism might be futile. He concludes by laying the bare truth that a lot needs to be done.
Ibram X Kendi, in “What will it take for the US to eradicate racist ideas?” implies that anti-racist needs to do more than protest if the problem is to be annihilated in the United States: they need to hold on to power. The writer somehow implies that for racism to end, people against the vice ought to acquire power and stay put. To the writer, the institutionalized racism in the United States needs more Obamas. He notes that Obama was an embodiment of racial reconciliation and American exceptionalism. To his audience, he invokes an optimistic and radical tone that carries with it a subtle firmness that is required to slay the dangerous dragon. Ibram implies that antiracist need to acquire power for the lofty purposes of ending racism; and continually cling to it if the war is to be won.
He gives an embodiment of the characters that are necessary to end racism. That is profoundly demonstrated through the description of the Obama presidency that attracted both awe and admiration. Obama was seemingly the epitome of anti-racism president who exuded “public intelligence, morality, speaking ability and political success as the extraordinary negro.” This articulate combination displays the underlying impression of Ibram’s idea of what is needed to end racism. The author seems to have an interracial audience in mind although he creates an optimistic mood albeit with radical undertones.
Works Cited
Ibram X Kendi. What Will It Take for the US to Eradicate Racist Ideas? 2017. www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/04/what-will-it-take-for-the-us-to-eradicate-racist-ideas.
Ingraham, Christopher. Americans Say Racism is a Bigger Problem Today Than at Any Point in the Past 20 Years. 2015. www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/05/americans-say-racism-is-a-bigger-problem-today-than-at-any-point-in-the-past-20-years/?noredirect=on"utm_term=.261e30da25d8.
McCarthy, Michael A. Racism and structural solutions. solidarity-us.org/atc/135/p1609/.
Team, Grad. How to End Institutional Racism - Contexts. contexts.org/blog/how-to-end-institutional-racism/.
