The Problem with Race Studies
These days every time you turn around, someone does an observational study correlating race to some behavior. And then they jump to the conclusion, that there is a causation link between race and behavior. So, if violent crime rates are higher among African Americans, does that automatically mean people are more violent because of their skin color? What if average incomes are lower among African Americans? If the former is not true (which I don’t believe it is), then the latter is not true.
The presumption is when a negative correlation exists, that the causation is racism, yet people are quick to point out that the correlation between violent crime and skin color is more likely due to poverty than skin color. And therein lies a deep problem in our society, it seems to many people are looking for correlations to confirm their bias, rather than truly understanding the underlying drivers of the matter under consideration.
Let’s look at one example, racial pay gap between whites and blacks. If you control many of the non-race-based variables (like education, age, experience, geography, etc.) that predict income, the racial pay gap disappears. Why is important to “tease” out the non-race-based variables? Simply because, knowing that race is not the culprit behind the “racial pay gap, changes the focus to something society can live with or address. Let’s continue with the example of the racial pay gap as an example.
Age and experience should resolve themselves on their own. The median black person in this country in 2021 was 35. The median of a white person is 44. We would all hope to be earning more at 44, then we did at 35. So, it is hard to get upset that an “age” gap explains a good bit of the “racial” pay gap.
Geography is another interesting variable. The black US population remains highly concentrated in the southern states where slavery once existed. Not surprisingly, the cost of living in those southern states average around 80% of the national cost of living, so it is not surprising pay rates are lower in those states. Let’s use on example, the cost-of-living index in Philadelphia is 101.2, the cost-of-living index in Jackson, MS is 83. If someone moved from Jackson, MS to Philadelphia and got a 15% wage bump to do so, they would actually be losing ground.
Now let’s look at education. About 73% of blacks graduate high school, while about 87% of whites graduate high school. 59% of whites enroll in college, compared to 51% of blacks. While it is possible to earn a good living without finishing high school or going to college, statistically average incomes for those that did not finish high school or enroll in college are lower. Now here is something, society can focus on and influence. In other words, is there are an “educational” pay gap disguised as a racial pay gap and while society may not be interested in eliminated an “age” gap or “even a cost living” gap based on geography, it may well be interested in addressing the “educational” pay gap, by ensuring African Americans have similar access to education.
More importantly, it shifts the discussion away from “racism” where in this example, it does not belong, is divisive, and you really can’t change the color of one’s skin, to something most people can get behind and support. Most Americans think all children should grow up having access to a good high school education and even post high school education at an affordable cost. On the other hand, if the debate focuses purely on the “racial” pay gap because we never get past “skin color” in understanding the variables that contribute to the racial pay gap, then while it might serve the purposes of politicians, civil rights leaders, and other people who benefit from racial division, it does not serve Americans as a whole and African Americans in particular.
I used the “racial” pay gap as an example of what is wrong with “race” studies. But this problem applies to nearly everywhere “race” studies are done identifying a positive relationship between “race” and some other measurement criteria. In crime, it is used to prove racism by police towards blacks and it shows blacks are more likely to commit crimes. But is skin color the real reason for both correlations. Are blacks more likely to commit crimes because of their skin color? I doubt it. Likewise, if 33% of the time, a white police officer encounters a violent criminal, who happens to be black, and studies show that encounters with violent criminals produces the highest chance of a violent police encounters. Then shouldn’t a study of violent police encounters between white police officers and black criminals occur 33% of time rather than the oft quoted 13% of the time? These statistics come from the FBI UCR program.
“Based on data compiled by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, it found that while Black people make up 13% of the U.S. population, they were 33% of persons arrested for non-fatal violent crime (NVC), which includes rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and other assaults.”
But even here, the statistics can be misleading. Are African Americans “born” more inclined to commit violent crime or is the higher crime rate “learned” behavior. An older study noted that 45% of black children grow up in neighborhoods with concentrated poverty. I am pretty sure; this variable (concentrated poverty) contributes to the racial criminal behavior gap more than skin color.
So, where am I going with this? Too much money and power is tied to racial politics. And so, I believe an industry is emerging to support narratives that promote racism or in some instances the absence of racism by showing correlations that while interesting or not causative factors. However, they do support (if not examined more closely) the increasing tendency to define our world between the oppressed and oppressors, the privileged and the victims, the good and the bad. I think these studies cause problems rather than addressing them.
Having a more granular understanding of these “racial gaps” and their true causes would provide our society a roadmap to continue the goal of expanding opportunities for all Americans rather than promoting distrust.
