Racism is the view that (1) the human species is composed of different racial groups, (2) these groups are arranged hierarchically from least to most superior, and (3) superior groups have the right to use inferior groups for the benefit of the superior group. Sexism and speciesism are similarly defined, justifying the right of men to dominate women, and the right of human beings to dominate other species of beings. Before Darwin, racial groups were typically defined in terms of lineage and type: a racial group was the progeny of certain original types, each of which exemplified a distinctive physiognomy and pattern of behavior. The current status of a racial group was then explained by reference to its ancestral sources. Thus, the democratic and enterprising nature of the English was the result of their Anglo-Saxon heritage, whereas the servile position of Africans was the result of their being the progeny of Ham, cursed by Noah to be servants of servants. Some argued that Africans were not the progeny of Adam and Eve, but were a pre-Adamite lower species to be used for human benefit.
Post-Darwinian biology favored the notion of race as a sub-species—a group within a particular species that is isolated genetically from other members of that species, and as a result develops distinctive morphological and/or behavioral attributes. Africans, Asians, and Europeans look different because they have evolved on different continents and have developed different body types and personalities.
Social Darwinism portrayed evolution as a struggle for existence in which superior races survived and inferior ones perished. Eugenicists hoped to enhance natural selection by using our knowledge of natural phenomena to reproduce superior human beings and avoid reproducing inferior ones. Polygenecists considered the "lower" races to be of a different species than the "higher" races, and therefore subject to the interests of the higher races. They believed that, like the offspring of horses and donkeys, racial "hybrids" were likely to be infertile and dysfunctional. Even when races were acknowledged to be of the same species, "race mixing" was considered dysgenic and debilitating to the "higher" races. Miscegenation laws prohibiting intermarriage and procreation between different races were considered to be in society's best interests and therefore good social policy.
The claim that Africans and African Americans have diminished cognitive and moral capacities compared with Europeans and European Americans was often used to justify slavery and segregation. This claim continues to attract adherents who seek naturalistic explanations of skewed racial achievements such as J. Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray (1994), Michael Levin (1997), and Stephen Kershnar (2003). According to Allan Chase (1980), Malthusians held that the diminished intelligence of the "lower races" lead them to bad choices and immoral behavior that worsened their plight and made them among the least well off wherever they were.
Some have argued that research on racial differences perpetuates harm by reinforcing racist assumptions and should be curtailed. But while the results of research on racial differences could be used to harm, such knowledge could also be used to help. If, for instance, it were found that people with high melanin content in their skin responded to a particular chemical compound that affected mental functioning, then it might be possible to manipulate that compound to either boost or retard intellectual performance. Research on racial differences degenerates into racism only when racial differences are believed to establish a hierarchical ranking that is biologically fixed and immutable.
Many now consider the very concept of a race to be an artifact of European expansionism, justifying European domination of African, Asian, and Native American people. On this view, Europeans classified "others" as different races to further the ends of domination, and continued use of racial categories merely reinforces that original aim. Rejecting European economic, political, and cultural imperialism requires that we reject both racism and racialism (i.e., classification by races). In a similar fashion, Marxists consider racism to be an ideological ploy that divides the lower classes so that the European and non-European proletariat fight one another instead of fighting capitalists.
The Nazis portrayed Jews as an inherently acquisitive and parasitical race that threatened the evolution of mankind. Their mission was to exterminate the "Jewish race" and establish the unchallenged hegemony of the "Aryan race." In reaction to the atrocities of the holocaust, many scientists and leaders such as Joseph Graves (2001) and Ashley Montagu (1997) and marshaled evidence to show that race was a pseudoconcept with no biological validity. On this view, neither the Jews nor the Aryans were races defined by distinct biological differences. Jews typically were biologically more similar to contiguous non-Jews than they were to Jews in distant locales. Moreover, classifying people into races by skin color, hair texture, and other observable characteristics ignores many other features (such as internal proteins and DNA sequences) that could also be used to classify them. Those who argue that there are no races typically cite evidence that genetic variation is greater within traditional racial groups than between them, thus showing that racial groups aree not reproductively isolated gene pools.
But other biologists and social scientists, such as Phillip Kitchner (1999), Robin Andreasen (2000), and Neil Risch (2003), have insisted that there is compelling biological evidence for the existence of races. These researchers assert that when human populations are classified in terms of their ancestral geographic origins, there is a high correlation between traditional racial groups and genetic clusters.
However, the question of whether or not races exist is independent of whether racism exists. Just as it is possible for witchcraft to exist even though there are no witches, so it is possible for racism to exist even if there are no races. Some, such as Naomi Zack (2002), argue that if we are to move beyond "racial" animosities of the past, we must cease using racial categories, because they have no biological validity. For Lucius Outlaw (1996) and Alain Locke (1999), continued consciousness of racial distinctions may be linked to pride in cultural achievements made under extreme duress, or to demands for restitution for past and present harms. Whether or not races exist, it should be possible to agree that racism is morally wrong, and that racism should be eliminated.
Racist behavior elevates the interests of members of allegedly superior races over the interests of allegedly inferior races. The existence of racist behavior may be independent of individual intent, as is often the case with institutional racism, where certain procedures and practices harm groups historically considered inferior, even if the implementers do not explicitly intend such harm. Thus, requirements that are unnecessary for successful performance and recruitment limited to traditional networks often serve to perpetuate the effects of overt and egregious racist acts of the past, even if this is not currently intended by those who implement such policies.
