A shorter version of these comments was delivered
at the South Side headquarters of the Chicago Urban League on
June 21, 2005, in connection with the public release of Still
Separate, Unequal: Race, Place, Policy, and the State of
Black Chicago (Chicago, IL: The Chicago Urban League,
2005). Forty years ago, the great social justice leader
Martin Luther King, Jr. and his colleagues in the Southern Christian
Leadership
Council came to Chicago determined to take the civil rights struggle
to a radical new level. It was one thing, King told his colleagues,
for blacks to win the right to sit at a lunch counter. It was
another thing for black and other poor people to get the money
to buy a lunch.
It was one thing, King
argued, to open the doors of opportunity for some few and relatively
privileged
African-Americans. It was another thing to move millions of black
and other disadvantaged folks out of economic despair. It was
another and related thing to dismantle slums and overcome barriers
to equality that continued after public bigotry was discredited
and after open discrimination was outlawed.
It was one thing to get
some black kids into formerly all-white schools. It was another thing to provide
all black children with quality, integrated education. It was
one thing to defeat the overt racism of snarling southerners
like Bull Connor; it was another thing to confront the deeper,
more covert institutional racism that lived beneath the less
openly bigoted, smiling face of northern and urban liberalism. It
was one thing to defeat the anachronistic caste structure of
the South. It was another thing to attain substantive social
and economic equality for black and other economically disadvantaged
people across the entire nation.
As many of you know, King
left Chicago more than a little, yes, dissatisfied with the outcome
of the
movement’s efforts in the Second City. What would he see and
think if he could magically return to Chicago four decades later? He
would be disappointed to learn that, as we have found, the Chicago
metropolitan area, has a black-white dissimilarity measure of
80.8, meaning that more than four out of every five area blacks
would have to move for African-Americans to be distributed evenly
with whites across blocks and census tracts throughout the metropolitan
region. It would bother King to learn that within Chicago,
74 percent of black residents live in 22 neighborhoods that are
90 percent or more African-American – this, in a city that is
home to 77 officially designated neighborhoods or community areas.
King would be intrigued
to learn that blacks have recently gained unprecedented entrance
to the suburbs
and that one third of the metropolitan area’s black population
now lives outside the central city. It would bother him, however,
to lean that 70 percent of all suburban Chicago area blacks live
in just one county and that more than half (52 percent) of all
suburban Chicago area blacks reside in just 18 south suburban
Cook County towns – this in a six country metropolitan area that
is home to 265 local municipalities.
Fifty one years after the
Brown v. Board decision declared that “separate is unequal” and therefore unconstitutional
in public education, King would be depressed to learn that 84
percent of black kids in the Chicago metropolitan area would
have to switch schools for African-American children to be evenly
distributed throughout the area's schools. Within Chicago, where
two-thirds of the metropolitan area’s total black population – including
three fourths of that population’s children – lives, the average
black student attends a school that is 86 percent black. Two
hundred and seventy four schools (or 47 percent) of the city’s
579 public elementary and high schools, are 90 percent or more
African American and 173 of these schools – or 30 percent of
all public schools in the city – are 100 percent black.
King would be bothered
by all this not because blacks have some special inherent need
to live or study
next to whites but because separate is unequal in a nation where
crucial social and economic opportunities are not distributed
evenly across and between place and jurisdiction. As the sociologist
Douglass Massey notes, housing markets and residential patterns
are important for racial parity because they distribute so much “more
than a place to live; they also distribute any good or resource
that is correlated with where one lives. Housing markets don’t
just distribute dwellings, they also distribute education, employment,
safety, insurance rates, services, and wealth in the form of
home equity; they also determine the level of exposure to crime
and drugs, and the peer groups that one’s children experience.” They
distribute opportunity.
Which raises the critical
question of how the city and metropolitan area’s blacks are doing in terms
of socioeconomic status, health, and position. If King could
go to Chicago and its surroundings today, he would recoil in
horror at the index of racial disparity we have culled from the
2000 Census and other sources. Moving from separate to unequal,
he would be dissatisfied to learn that black median household
income was just 58 percent of white median household income in
the metropolitan area, according to the 2000 Census. It would
upset him to learn that the median income of the average neighborhood
inhabited by African-Americans in the Chicago metropolitan area
($36,298) is just 59 percent of the median income in the average
neighborhood inhabited by whites in the same metropolitan area
($61,952).
He would be concerned to
learn that the black population in and around Chicago is much
more socio-economically “bottom-heavy” than
the white population. The black metropolitan area income structure
is built like a pyramid, with a wide base at the bottom and an
increasingly narrow profile as one ascends to the top. As portrayed
in the latest decennial census, the metropolitan white income
structure is considerably more “top-heavy,” with larger percentages
at the top and a narrower concentration at the socioeconomic
bottom. While more than a third of the metropolitan area’s white
households received an income of $ 75,000 or more per year, just
16 percent of the black households earned that much. More than
a fourth of the region’s black households received less than
$14,995, more than $1,700 less than the poverty level for a family
of four in 1999. Less than a tenth of the area’s white households
had incomes that low. As I’m sure many of you know, the official
poverty measures in the U.S. have become an open joke among serious
poverty and social policy researchers. According to the Economic
Policy Institute, the real no-frills cost of a minimally decent “basic
family budget” for a family of three in Chicago was $35,307 in
2001.
Speaking of the poverty
level, a fourth of the metropolitan area’s black households were officially poor
in the 2000 Census, compared to just 5.6 percent white and 16
percent of Latin households. Sixteen percent of the central
city’s blacks were living in what researchers now call “deep
poverty” – at less than half of the federal government’s notoriously
low and inadequate poverty level.
King would be especially
bothered by the child poverty measures in the census. He would be crestfallen
to learn that more than a third of the metropolitan area’s black
kids were living in poverty at the peak of the Clinton economic
boom, compared to just 5 percent of the white kids.
And then there’s the home-ownership,
unemployment, prison, felony-marking, education, and health numbers.
At 42 percent, the black home ownership rate in the region is
30 points below the white home ownership rates.
Fifteen of the metropolitan
area’s blacks
were officially unemployed, compared to 4.1 percent of whites
and 8 percent of Latinos a the end of the 1990s. As I’m sure
many of you know, the official unemployment rate significantly
understates real unemployment and real black unemployment especially
because it leaves out job-seekers who’ve given up and because
it deletes involuntarily part-time workers and – of special significance
for our story – the incarcerated.
Two-thirds of the state’s more than
43,000 prisoners and more than 80 percent of its drug prisoners
are African-American; this in a state that is just 15 percent
African American. From 2000 through 2002, a quarter of the state’s
released prisoners return to just 10 predominantly black zip
codes on the West and South Sides and the number of black males
carrying the lifelong mark of a criminal record was equivalent
in absolute numbers to 42 percent of the city’s black male workforce
at the turn of the century. There were nearly 20,000 more black
males in the Illinois state prison system than enrolled in the
state’s public universities in the summer of 2001.
King would be especially
struck by the new centrality of the mass imprisonment system
in the creation
and exacerbation of racial inequality in and around Chicago. At
the time he was assassinated there were less than 8000 prisoners
in the entire state of Illinois. Today’s top ten prisoner and
prisoner release zip codes in Chicago together generate and receive
considerably more prisoners than that each year.
At least part of the problem is the dropout
rate. We learned that just 4 in 10 black Chicago students graduate
from high school in
four years, compared to 6 in 10 white students and 8 in 10 Asian
students. According to the latest research, at least 50 percent
of all black male high school dropouts will be incarcerated at
one point in their lives.
Turning to health issues,
we found that 24 percent of the state’s black residents lack health insurance,
compared to 10 percent of its whites. Predominantly white Northwest
Side Chicagoans can expect to live 75 to 80 years while predominantly
black South Siders can expect to live to 60 years.
Another way to cut the
data is to look at the racial composition of the Chicago neighborhoods
that host
the greatest concentrations of misery in the metropolitan area. It’s
one thing to talk about metro- and city-wide disparities. It’s
another thing to grasp the full dimension of interrelated, cross-cutting
social, economic, and health difficulty in the worst-off community
areas where poverty and its many toxic effects are most dangerously
concentrated. There are 77 official community areas in Chicago.
Of the city’s 15 richest among those 77 neighborhoods, all but
two are disproportionately white. Of its 15 poorest communities,
with average household incomes ranging from $11,000 to 28,000,
all but 12 are very disproportionately black and none are disproportionately
white. Of the 22 neighborhoods where 19 percent or more of rental
households are spending 50 percent or more of their income on
housing, all are 90 percent or more black. Of the city’s 15 highest
unemployment neighborhoods, with jobless rates ranging from 18
to 34 percent, all are disproportionately black, including 12
that are more than 94 percent black. Of the city’s top 20 neighborhoods
ranked for loss of manufacturing jobs between 1980 and 2000,
all are disproportionately black and the great majority are more
than 90 percent black. Of the 15 neighborhoods ranked by the
Boston Consulting Group as the most “economically vital” neighborhoods
in the city, all are disproportionately white. Fourteen of the
bottom 16 neighborhoods for “economic vitality” are disproportionately
black. By the way, those disadvantaged neighborhoods get the
short end not just of economic health but also of private and
public economic development funding dollars.
Of the city’s 15 poorest neighborhoods,
with poverty measures ranging from 32 to 56 percent, 14 are disproportionately
black. Of the city’s top 15 neighborhoods for child poverty,
with rates ranging from 55 to 71 percent – I said 71 percent – 10
are disproportionately black and none are disproportionately
white, the rest being disproportionately Latino. In 15
of the city's 77 officially designated Community Areas at the
relatively prosperous time of the last census, more than 25 percent
of the kids were growing up in deep poverty even before the recession – at
the peak of the Clinton boom. There were six neighborhoods – Oakland,
North Lawndale, Washington Park, Grand Boulevard, Douglass, and
Riverdale – where more than 40 percent of the children were deeply
poor and in the last one (Riverdale) it was actually more than
half.
The only exception is the Near North
Side, which had the 10th highest percentage of deep poverty kids
and anyone who knows the city can tell you that's because of
the presence there of the Cabrini Green housing project. All
but one of these community areas has black population percentage
that is considerably higher than the city average. All but three
of them are at least 94 percent black.
These are some things you
won't read about, by the way in this big fancy book that has
just been released
by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations – Global Chicago
(2004) – with assistance from it's friends at the Chicago Tribune
and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and which
has numerous glowing references to the glories of wonderfully
global military-industrial corporate-welfare receiving Boeing
Corporation – maker of the deadly B-2 Stealth Bomber and the
savage Arab killing Blackhawk Helicopter, but no direct references
to the uncomfortable, merely local pain and experience of thousands
and thousands of black children living in the shadows of the
great expanding world-connected corporate downtown and its growing
ring of gentrifying condo complexes.
The concentration of urban
misery extends to health issues. Counter-intuitively for those who identify
HIV and AIDS with white gay North Side populations, 13 of the
city’s top 15 neighborhoods for HIV mortality are predominantly
black communities on the South and West side. Twelve of the
top 15 community areas for heart disease and ten of the top 15
for diabetes are disproportionately black.
Part of the health problem
for African-Americans may be a shortage of full-service grocery
stores selling fresh
fruits and vegetables necessary for a good diet. Twenty of the
city’s 23 Dominick’s are in disproportionately white neighborhoods. Thirty-three
of the city’s 40 Jewel’s are in such predominantly Caucasian
community areas.
One of the most interesting
and unpleasant things we did in our study is that we combined
key statistics
from the city’s 22 90-percent black neighborhoods, treating them
as a collective “city within a city” and comparing this hyper-segregated
black inner-city with the overall city and metropolitan areas.
We found that the collective unemployment rate of the predominantly
black 22 is nearly twice that of the city as a whole. One-fourth
of the children in this predominantly black city within a city – home
to three fourths of the city’s African-Americans – live in deep
poverty. The official unemployment rate of these 22 neighborhoods
is nearly twice that of the city as a whole. The poverty rate
in these 22 neighborhoods is more than three times higher than
that of the metropolitan area as a whole. It’s worth recalling
these 22 neighborhoods together account for three fourths of
the city’s black population.
When I talk about these
and other numbers to reporters, they ask me which stands out
as the worst, the
most shocking. It’s hard to say with the 4 in 10 four-year graduation
rate for black high school students and the 20,000 more black
male prisoners in state prisons than in four year state university
programs, but I guess I’d have to pick the child poverty and
deep poverty numbers. The existence of 15 neighborhoods with
more than 55 percent of their children living at the openly inadequate
US poverty level raises truly troubling questions about what’s
really going on in the forgotten shadows of the glittering corporate
downtowns of the “city that works.” The presence of 14 predominantly
black community areas where more than a quarter of children are
living at less than half – less than half – is a savage indictment
of the underside of business as usual in our celebrated, freshly
anointed global city.
The other shocking thing
is that all these numbers, or most of them, all the socioeconomic
numbers,
come from the peak of the longest “peacetime” economic expansion
since World War II – the long “Clinton boom” of the 1990s. Things
have gotten worse in communities of color since the onset of
recession in 2000 and the subsequent slow, so-called jobless
recovery. We know for example, the black adult employment/population
ration actually went below 50 percent in 2002 according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Of course, facts and findings
are one thing. Frames and explanations are another. The really interesting
and controversial question, for me at least, is …what does that
dreaded word “racism” got to do with all this racial inequality,
which continues despite and perhaps partly because of the very
real progress that some African-Americans have made since the
1960s? The answer depends on who you talk to. I’m an atypical
Caucasian. I work in a predominantly black organization and live
in a relatively liberal, integrated neighborhood. For most of
the people I talk to, the answer ranges from “everything” to “a
lot.”
As far as mainstream white
society is concerned, however, the answer is “nothing” or next to it. Insofar
as differences in wealth, income, security and general well being
persist between blacks and whites (and nearly half of the white
population thinks that blacks have pulled even with whites),
the large majority of white Americans deny that anti-black racism
is the cause. Many point to the elimination of numerous discriminatory
laws and barriers as well as the passage of equal employment
legislation and affirmative action as proof that American society “bent
over backwards” to guarantee blacks equal opportunity. Convinced
that racism is no longer a significant problem for blacks, most
whites find the real barriers to black success and equality within
the African-American community itself. If problems for blacks
persist, many whites and some privileged blacks think it’s only
because too many blacks engage in “self-sabotaging” behaviors. As
white America sees it, every effort has been made to welcome
blacks into the American mainstream and now they’re on their
own. “We made the corrections” and now it’s up to you.
Our study’s position is that racism
is part of the explanation but we think you have to be very clear
about what you mean when you use a loaded word like racism. The
main difficulty with conventional mainstream white wisdom on “race
relations” is a failure to distinguish adequately between level-one
racism, which I call overt open public bigotry and prejudice
and what I call level two racism or the deeper racism, by which
I mean underlying covert societal or institutional racism. Level
one overt racism, which King encountered in Chicago in 1966,
has a long and sordid history, but it has largely been defeated,
outlawed and discredited in the US and even here in Chicago.
The deeper, covert level
of racism, however, involves the more impersonal operation of
social and
institutional forces and processes in ways that “just happen” but
nonetheless serve to reproduce black disadvantage in the labor
market and numerous other sectors of American life. These processes
are so ingrained in the social, political, and institutional
life of the city, the region, the state and indeed nation that
they are taken for granted – barely noticed by the mainstream
media and other social commentators. Richly enabled by policymakers
who commonly declare allegiance to anti-racist ideals, this second,
deeper form of racism has an equally ancient history that has
more than simply outlived the explicit, open and public racism
of the past and the passage of civil rights legislation that
is justly cherished within and beyond the black community
What processes of underlying,
covert societal and institutional racism continue to generate
blacks’ persistently
separate and unequal status in and around Chicago? Here’s a short
list:
• widely documented racial bias in real
estate and home lending that complement, reflect and empower
the general reluctance of
whites to live next door to blacks, all of which combine with
disproportionate black poverty to keep blacks out of the metropolitan
area’s highest-opportunity communities.
• the proliferation of
expensive, taxpayer-financed suburban roads and developments
constructed on behalf of mainly
white
suburbanites far from the predominantly black inner city, which
subsidizes white flight and takes critically needed economic
resources and opportunities yet further from those who are most
in need of it.
• the funding of schools
largely on the basis of local property wealth, which tends to
favor whiter
school districts over blacker
districts, an especially big issue in Illinois, where per-student
funding ranges from more than 20K per kid in Lake Forest to less
than 7K per kid in many black south suburbs.
• the excessive use of
high-stakes standardized test-based neo-Dickensian “dill and grill” curriculum
and related zero-tolerance disciplinary practices in predominantly
black
public schools
• the hyper-concentration
segregation of black children into segregated ghetto schools
where frazzled
teachers have to deal
with oversized classes where as many as 90 percent of their kids
are dealing with the special barriers to learning that come with
extreme poverty and its effects.
• rampant and widely documented
racial discrimination in hiring and union-managed apprentice-training
admissions
• the racially disparate “War on Drugs” and the related campaign
of mass black imprisonment and felony-marking, which is waged
with such racially selective ferocity that two thirds of state’s
40-thousand plus state prisoners are African-Americans and more
than 80 percent of the state’s drug prisoners are black even
though blacks make up 15 percent of the state and are no more
likely to use illegal drugs than whites.
• the aggressive pursuit
of welfare caseload reduction as a positive good in and of itself
without
concomitant efforts to
increase economic opportunity in poor black communities, where
it is not uncommon for less than half of the adult population
to be now be attached to the workforce.
• the disproportionate
investment of local public economic development funding dollars
to communities
that need assistance
the least
Ironically, covert, level
two, institutional racism may actually be deepened by civil rights
victories and
related black upward mobility into the middle and upper classes
(however limited) insofar as those victories and achievements
have served to encourage the illusion that racism has disappeared
and that the only obstacles left to African-American success
and equality are internal to individual blacks and their community – the
idea that, as Derrick Bell puts it, “the indolence of blacks
rather than the injustice of whites explains the socioeconomic
gaps separating the races.”
It’s hard to blame people for believing
that racism is dead in America when our public life is filled
with repeated affirmations of the integration ideal and our ostensible
progress towards achieving it and when we regularly celebrate
great American victories over level one racism. There are [now]
enough examples of successful middle-class African-Americans,
Sheryl Cashin notes, “to make many whites believe that blacks
have reached parity with them. The fact that some blacks now
lead powerful mainstream institutions offers evidence to whites
that racial barriers have been eliminated; the issue now is individual
effort….the odd black family on the block or the Oprah effect – examples
of stratospheric black success – feed these misperceptions, even
as relatively few whites live among and interact daily with blacks
of their own standing.”
Episodes and events like
the demotion of Trent Lott or the election of a black Mayor (Harold
Washington
in 1983) or a black U.S. Senator (Carol Mosley Braun in 1992
and Barack Obama in 2004) or City Hall’s criticism of racist
sentiments on the part of certain white firemen offer ample opportunities
for city, state, and national leaders to pat themselves on their
collective backs for advancing beyond the primitive state of
level-one racism even while they promote policies that dig the
hole of institutional and societal racism yet deeper.
For what it’s worth, this is something
Martin King worried about a great deal near the end of his life. “Many
whites hasten to congratulate themselves,” King noted in 1967, “on
what little progress [black Americans] have made. I’m sure,” King
opined, “that most whites felt that with the passage of the 1964
Civil Rights Act, all race problems were automatically solved. Most
white people are so removed from the life of the average Negro,” King
added, “there has been little to challenge that assumption.” This
was the same year that King issued his eloquent call for passionate
dissatisfaction.
It’s my observation over
many years of talking about race and race issues with Americans
and Chicago
area residents and suburbanites most especially that Caucasians
tend to know amazingly little about typical hard-working real-life
working- and middle-class or poor black Americans.
This has a lot to do, of
course, with separatism: the fact that there is still so little
actual contact
between blacks and whites in a metropolis and nation where blacks
and whites live in very significantly separate physical, mental,
social and moral worlds. Another part of it, I think, has to
do with the strangely dichotomized all-or-nothing image of black
Americans that television provides, basically offering two versions
of the typical African-American: on one hand, the super-successful
superstar like Michael Jordan or Oprah or Colin Powell or Condi
Rice; on the other hand, the super-predator black male gang-banging
perpetrator that is so ubiquitous on the 10 O’ Clock News and
which is a staple on these dangerously authoritarian police shows
like COPS and the like.
I hope there’s some press here to ask
questions about our study and that some of those questions will
be about our proposals and solutions. You know, they said in
our dominant corporate media the 2004 election was decided on
the basis of “moral issues.” I hope that 10 segregated black
neighborhoods with more than 55 percent of their children living
in poverty and 14 segregated black neighborhoods with more than
25 percent of their kids living in “deep poverty” qualifies as
a front-page MORAL ISSUE. I hope we can talk about some
of the predominantly white-managed and white-constructed structural
factors that produce the terrible facts we’ve uncovered. I hope
that discussion of “personal responsibility” for these facts
includes the personal responsibility of all concerned, including
those at the top as well those at the bottom of the city and
metropolitan area’s steep and interrelated racial and socioeconomic
pyramids. Thank you very much.
Paul Street ([email protected])
is Director of Research and Vice President for Research and
Planning at The Chicago Urban League. He is the author of Empire and Inequality: America and the World Since 9/11 (Boulder,
CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2004); and Segregated Schools:
Class, Race, and Educational Apartheid in the Post-Civil Rights
Era (New York, NY: Routledge, 2005 [forthcoming]). You can
order a copy of Still Separate, Unequal by e-mailing [email protected]. |