The Pitfalls of Citing Sources & Institutional Racism

[Socio84]

The Pitfalls of Citing Sources & Institutional Racism

Socio84

     Nobody could argue the importance of citing sources in academia. Sociology strongly encourages this discipline when the theories of this science are discussed. None-the-less, it is a soft science. The statistics and datasets that result from sociological studies, and are used to support or refute the foundational theories begging the questions asked by a particular study, are often open to interpretation and subject to bias. The question asked here is, "How does bias undermine reasonable determinations made by sociological studies?"

     For example: the killing of George Floyd is still considered a tragedy by all that examine the topic, though many still argue that the police in that situation were acting reasonably. Often when the topic of police brutality is debated, one side debates the seriousness of the issue, citing the verifiable statistic that less than 20 unarmed black men were killed by the police in a given year--less than the number of unarmed white people despite the fact that by proportion of encounters by police with white and black subjects, unarmed white people are at greater risk.

     That argument, while persuasive, ignores the fundamental issues identified by sociology. There is a legal doctrine that states, "It is better that 10 guilty people go free before one innocent person is convicted." Regardless of the frequency of events, or the interpretations of that data, citing that data in this particular instance ignores the societal issues identified within sociology by presenting it through a prism contrary to the scientific processes behind sociology.

      Much in the same way a negative, or undermining bias can distract from the important societal issues sociologist aim to identify.  A positive, or reinforcing bias can lead to determinizations that incorrectly attribute a societal problem to the wrong aspect of that society. This is especially true when examining the institutional policies that stemmed from the long history of racism and slavery in the United States--where the sociological determinations were seeking to justify societies treatment of African Americans.

     As a result, and more to the point of my question, American history and the millions of academics around the world have left behind a wealth of contradicting and ever evolving conclusions. This subjectivity, I propose, contributes to the tides of institutional racism and whiteness that has repeatedly corrupted American society while simultaneously reinforcing the deplorable ideals subconsciously maintained by white people. While their conclusions may be objectively reasonable based on their interpretation of data, those conclusions are still objectively wrong through a valid sociological prism. And those very ideas and conclusions make it very difficult, if not impossible, to change their perspective in the face of current valid sociological conclusions.

     A greater problem still is the difficulty in articulating this to people trapped in this vicious cycle. It is remarkably frustrating to encounter one of these people and try to have a genuine conversation. While you are trying to tell them what to think and why, they want to cite racist statistics that have no relevance on the conversation--as if in an attempt to draw you towards the conclusions their thought pattern produced. While they believe that they are being reasonable and well meaning, they are oblivious to their own engrained bias--often pointing out the emotionality of the sociological perspective.

     Society is already addressing this issue through educational programs--washing children of the ability to undermine societal goals through corrupt processes of critical thinking that plague older generations. The cultural influence of the ideas being bred by this education are becoming more and more predominant around the world. This influence is bringing a greater level of social responsibility in deciding who you listen to, work with, or support politically. Social media websites are restricting speech and the country on the whole is starting to question the integrity of free speech.

     No doubt many will go kicking and screaming, calling these changes fascist or authoritarian as they cling to their ideas of personal responsibility and liberty. They'll cite sources like the constitution, a living document, from that era of racism--blind to the apparent amendments from a woke and righteous ideology. Though their own ideology they will likely commit more atrocities, prompting a genocide that leads to total collapse of modern society, an economic collapse, and civil war.

     From these ashes, under the direction of the new democratic party, will rise a societal phoenix of wokeness. The country will be born again--unattached to the racist culture of this old world. Keep up the good work everybody!