By Eric Kaufmann

Recent data show racist attitudes and behaviors in the U.S. are on the decline; so why do Americans believe that our country is becoming progressively more racist? By analyzing a wide variety of scholarship and data sources—including original surveys of his own—Manhattan Institute’s (MI) adjunct fellow,  Eric Kaufmann, suggests that an important part of the reported experience of racism is ideologically malleable. But ideology, though arguably the largest factor, is only partially at fault for spreading the false narrative of growing racism. Partisanship, social media, and education have also inclined Americans to “see” more bigotry and racial prejudice than they previously did.  

In his new report, “The Social Construction of Racism in the United States,” Kaufmann finds that the solution to the public’s misinformed perception is to recognize first, that racism has been amplified by ideological and media construction; and second, that it is partly in the eye of the beholder.  

Across a range of surveys Kaufmann finds that:  

Ideology—and, to a lesser degree, social media exposure and university education—has heightened people’s perceptions of racism.

Depression and anxiety are linked to perceiving more racism.

The level of racism in society reported by whites appears to be driven more by political leaning than the level reported by blacks.

Liberal whites are more supportive of punitive Critical Race Theory (CRT) postulates than blacks, who aspire to agency and resilience.

CRT appears to have a detrimental effect on African-Americans’ feeling of being in control of their lives.

As much as half of reported racism may be ideologically or psychologically conditioned, and the rise in the proportion of Americans claiming racism to be an important problem is largely socially constructed. 

None of this means that racism has been eradicated, but the policy approaches that Kaufmann suggests diverge from those based on the narrative of “systemic” racism that is increasingly prevalent in professional settings. Rather than use shaming or punitive and virtue-signaling measures like CRT, Kaufmann suggests using race-neutral, less contentious initiatives like mentoring, nudges such as name=-blind CVs, and randomized control trials to ascertain which interventions work. 

As Kaufmann discusses, the dangers in overstating the presence of racism go well beyond majority resentment and polarization. A media-generated narrative about systemic racism distorts people’s perceptions of reality and may even damage African-Americans’ sense of control over their lives. While it is difficult to totally rid our society of racism, a change in our perception of it would benefit both our local communities and national social fabric. 

New York: The Manhattan Institute, 2021. 32p.

By The Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry.at Tel Aviv University,

The Antisemitism Worldwide Report for 2022 informs of both increases and decreases, some more meaningful than others, in the number of antisemitic incidents in different countries. The United States, where the largest Jewish minority in the world lives, saw a particularly alarming rise in anti-Jewish violence and slander. These data are not encouraging. The record-levels of 2021 were attributed in part to the exceptional social tensions created by the Covid-19 epidemic and the political tensions created by the Guardian of the Walls operation in Gaza. The data for 2022 suggest that the motivations for present-day antisemitism are not transient as some may have hoped. Despite the investment of substantial legal, educational, and political efforts, thousands of antisemitic incidents took place across the globe in 2022, including hundreds of physical assaults. Everyone who cares about human dignity and justice must recognize the need to prevent this reality from becoming normalized. Antisemitic incidents are not an abstract phenomenon. Whether physical or virtual, they affect real people in the real world. As with other hate crimes, fighting them requires a combination of broadly applied agendas along with tailor-made, targeted initiatives. It requires establishing who is attacked, who are the attackers, where the attacks occur, and what motivates the offenders. These questions must be treated with great caution and sensitivity. But they cannot be ignored if we are to achieve results. This year’s Report examines the location and affiliations of victims of antisemitic physical assaults in several cities that were major theatres for such incidents (p. 23). Our comparative study suggests physical attacks tend to occur in specific areas in major urban centers on streets and public transportation (rather than in or outside synagogues); usually do not appear to be premeditated; and target in the vast majority of cases visibly-identifiable Jews, particularly ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) Jews. Whether attackers are motivated by strong antisemitic sentiments, by hatred of Israel (which, ironically, in some cases preys on anti-Zionist Jews), or by a bullying impulse that targets those who appear most different and vulnerable, their offenses fall under the category of antisemitic hate crimes.

New York: Anti-Defamation League; The Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry.at Tel Aviv University, 2023. 86p.