Panelists sharply disagree at forum

By Alvin Powell

Contributing Writer

"Gloom and doom" about American race relations met "mean-spirited optimism" Tuesday night at the Kennedy School of Government's ARCO Forum as four authorities on the topic clashed over their views of national progress toward racial equality.

Drawing the most fire were Abigail Thernstrom, a fellow at The Manhattan Institute, and Winthrop Professor of History Stephan Thernstrom, co-authors of America in Black and White: One Nation Indivisible. The two argued in the book and on Tuesday night that much progress toward equality has been made and warned that today's gloomy attitude about race relations is not warranted and can be harmful to efforts to bridge the gap between American blacks and whites.

"Gloom is a self-fulfilling prophecy and I want a new self-fulfilling prophecy. It would say much has been done but there's much more to do," Abigail Thernstrom said.

The Thernstroms were opposed by the other two members of the panel, Lawrence Bobo, Harvard professor of sociology and Afro-American studies and co-author of the book Racial Attitudes in America, and Keith Reeves, assistant professor of public policy at the Kennedy School and author of Voting Hopes or Fears?: White Voters, Black Candidates and Racial Politics in America.

Bobo and Reeves argued the nature of racism has changed, but it hasn't disappeared. Talk of progress, they argued, is premature as long as blacks lag behind whites in earnings and education, as long as black political candidates are rejected by white voters because of race, and as long as programs intended to level the playing field, such as affirmative action, come under attack.

The hour-and-a-half panel discussion drew about 200 people to the Kennedy School on a windy, rainy night. The discussion, called "The Politics of Black-White Relations in America," was held in honor of Black History Month and moderated by Institute of Politics Director Alan Simpson, a former U.S. senator.

The Thernstroms cited a variety of statistics they said showed remarkable progress in race relations since the 1960s. The rise of the black middle class, they said, has prompted the migration of 7 million blacks to the suburbs, a movement dwarfing the 4.5 million blacks who migrated to the North between the 1940s and 1970s.

They also cited progress in integrating neighborhoods, saying that in 1964, one in five white Americans said they had black neighbors. Today that figure is three in five, and five of six blacks say they have white neighbors.

Bobo countered, calling the Thernstroms' view "mean-spirited optimism." Blacks have moved to the suburbs, he acknowledged, but that has been accompanied by the rise of more all-black suburbs. Wide gaps in wealth still exist between black and white families, he said, with blacks being three times more likely to have incomes at 50 percent or less of the federal poverty line.

Reeves' presentation centered on voting patterns, reasoning that the anonymity of the voting booth could give a real view of America's patterns toward race. Those patterns, he said, show that black candidates with qualifications equal to those of their white opponents have trouble getting elected in white districts. The results, he said, are an indication of the "uneasy truce" across the racial divide and show that racial bias is a considerable problem.

"Far too many white Americans are resistant to the election of black Americans solely on account of race," Reeves said. "Too many white Americans still see black."

Bobo and Reeves said the nature of prejudice and racial discrimination have changed in recent decades. Stereotypes of violent, lazy, ignorant blacks keep whites out of black neighborhoods and the races apart, effectively replacing laws that previously ensured racial segregation.

Premature talk of racial equality, they said, just discourages the difficult work that still needs to be done to bring about true equality.

The ThernstromsÕ attack on the accepted view that race relations are bad and deteriorating drew the ire of many in the crowd. The question-and-answer session following the panel's presentations consisted largely of hostile questions directed at the Thernstroms and denunciations of their book.

One student said she wasn't surprised at the tone of the questions, but said they detracted a bit from what might have been a more free-flowing discussion.

"I was not surprised that the Thernstroms elicited such hostility. Their views are controversial and people react strongly to them," said Meredith Harper Bonham, a master's degree student at the Graduate School of Education.

The discussion didn't satisfy everyone, but students agreed that different views need to be aired on this difficult topic.

"It is an important conversation to have happen," said Philippa Scarlett, a doctoral student in history.