Race Relations in the City JOE T

In multi-racial societies, racial conflict often occurs in cities. However, it is not the fact that multi-racial groups are living in cities that gives rise to conflict. It is conceivable that multi-racial groups could live in harmony. Thus, to understand why racial conflict occurs, one must probe deep into the ideology and behaviour of the dominant racial group. Smith (1989: 4) argues that ideology is a fundamentally political, prescriptive medium through which the popular legitimacy of iniquitous social and economic arrangements are secured. Ideology involves collective decision-making and serves as a way to gain popular support for strategies adopted by the dominant group, particularly in democratic societies (Smith, 1989: 4). Ideology provides a means by which one group of people carve out a certain vision of how things are and ought to be (Reeves, 1983: 3a). Giddens (1981) believes that ideology refers to the modes in which exploitative domination is legitimized. It is the dominant racial group that makes most decisions and establishes the racial climate, policies, practices and structure of the society. Cities are merely organizational constructs designed to accommodate the ideology of the dominant group. The role of the dominant group is examined in this chapter in two countries – the USA and Britain. Although spatial separation has resulted in some minor societal differences, the dominant group in the two countries share a common belief when the issue of race is involved. Whether in the USA or Britain, there is a widespread belief among the dominant group in the ideology of white supremacy. In order to understand race relations in cities in Britain and the USA, it is necessary to understand this ideology which is held by most people of white European descent – that is, the dominant group in the two multi-racial industrial countries. The ideology of white supremacy holds that in any relations involving people of colour, the white race must have the superior position (Rose and Associates, 1969: 68). Thus, in economic relations, political relations and social relations, most whites believe that they must have the advantage. Any other arrangement, such as racial equality or control by people of colour, would threaten the ‘white comfort zone’ and therefore be unacceptable to most whites. The intensity to which most whites in Britain and the USA hold these views varies from very intense to passive (Figure 11.1). Indeed, there is a segment of the white population in each country that does not hold these views at all, but rather detests them and is actively working in the area of race relations to bring about racial equality. It should be clear, however, that such views of white supremacy are not merely a fringe element of white society in Britain and the USA; the belief in white superiority is held by a large segment of white society. Depending on events in cities and the society involving people of colour, the degree of white support for racial equality or white supremacy may shift from a greater percentage of supporters for racial equality to a greater percentage of supporters for maintaining white supremacy (Figure 11.1). Events that may influence such shifts may involve black immigration, black movement into predominantly white areas, changes in the structure of the economy resulting in white insecurity, and black competition for white-held jobs. Such changes threaten the nature of race relations. The core of race relations in cities of Britain and the USA has been and continues to be that of inequality between whites and people of colour. Thus, changes which may result in reducing racial inequality or threatening the extent of white control or demographic dominance often lead to a shift in the percentage of supporters for maintaining white supremacy. 11