racism

is entirely different if viewed through the lens of the academic (i.e. As something implicit and unconscious rather than malicious and intentional) rather than through the lens of public understanding (i.e. As the product of malicious feelings or of hate).

But textbook racism, however useful it might be as rhetoric, comes into conflict with the more old-fashioned dictionary definition of the word. Last year, social scientist Patrick Forscher reviewed the most-cited studies on prejudice from the past quarter-century and found that almost every single one of them treats bias as something implicit and unconscious rather than malicious and intentional. This puts the literature at odds with a public understanding of prejudice as the product of malicious feelings, the source of hate crimes, and an ingredient of classic racist ideology. 'The gap between common and researcher understandings of 'prejudice,' ' Forscher wrote, 'can create problems when researchers attempt to communicate their findings to the public.' That's exactly what happened in the 2016 election. Journalist and even politicians like Paul Ryan examined Donald Trump and announced he was a racist. But millions of Americans looked at the same facts and came to a different conclusion. He was not a racist, at least as they understood the term.

Patrick ForcherThinkers

Patrick Forcher