White Americans endorse individual hierarchy but reject group-based hierarchy

Evidence

The greater support for group than individual equality is even clearer concerning differences that may affect people’s life chances. Most White Americans comfortably accept such differences among individuals. For example, in one national survey, 93 percent agreed that “Some people are better at running things and should be allowed to do so,” and 85 percent that “Some people are just better cut out than others for important positions in society” (Sears et al., 2000, p. 93). Unequal life chances are simply accepted as the way of the world. But almost all Whites feel that imposing inequalities among groups is unacceptable. When these same questions were reworded to refer to racial groups rather than to individuals, only 14 percent agreed that “some Whites are better at running things than Blacks are and should be allowed to do so” and 8 percent that “some Whites are just better cut out than Blacks for important positions in society.” That is, a broad consensus of Whites repudiates privileged access for advantaged groups. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2182 (#expands, via linked claim)

In sum, three main points seem clear about the contemporary status of the egalitarian side of Allport’s inner conflict. First, a majority of Whites do support general principles of equality for all individuals, but support for formal group equality is far broader, and indeed overwhelming. Second, almost all Whites recognize that individual differences in abilities naturally affect life chances, but almost none are willing to endorse privileged access for Whites or for men as groups. Third, dominance of subordinate groups, in terms of “keeping them in their place,” is now almost entirely repudiated by White Americans, and plays little role in either conventional partisan or racial politics. Thus, and in contrast to Allport’s day, the politics of intergroup relations today begin with the near-universal support for equal treatment of all groups, not explicit support for a racial caste system. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2185 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Hypothesis 2 suggested that symbolic racism would prove the strongest of the racial attitudes. And it does, quite handily. It has by far the strongest bivariate correlation with policy preferences, averaging . across the nine tests shown in Tables 20.1–20.3. The average correlations for the other racial attitudes are lower: antiblack affect, r=.27; antiblack stereotypes, r=.23; and old-fashioned racism, r=.16. In the regression analyses, the strength of symbolic racism emerges still more clearly. In all nine cases its effects are at least double the size of any other, with an average coefficient of .39. Antiblack affect also has significant effects in every case, though substantially weaker, averaging .13. Stereotypes and old-fashioned racism have virtually no residual effect, with significant effects in only two of 12 cases (and average coefficients of only . and −.01, respectively). All racial attitudes are not alike; symbolic racism has consistently more political power than do antiblack affect, stereotypes, or old-fashioned racism. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 3647 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: People prefer elevated rank within hierarchy over egalitarian equal respect — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 61; Most white Americans hold a racial status profile toward the middle, not the extremes. — Erin Cooley, Jazmin L. Brown-Iannuzzi, Nava Caluori, Nicholas Elacqua, and William Cipolli, White Americans who perceive themselves…, 41; Modern White Americans broadly support group equality while rejecting explicit racial dominance — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2185 (+7 more)

Broader Connections