Addressing Racism
In an 8- to 10-page paper (2200 to 2500 words), please address the following: Referring to our course materials and your own independent research, define in your own words the ideology of racism. Be specific and cite your sources. Explain in detail the ways in which racism has been historically supported through inaccurate reasoning. For example, how was junk science used to justify the superiority of one race over another?
Analyze in detail the ways in which understandings of racism have changed over time. For example, how do we understand racism today in the United States now that we no longer live in the era of Jim Crow? Focusing upon one key marginalized cultural/ethnic/racial group studied in this course, specifically outline the way that racism has impacted the experience of this group in the United States.
You may want to refer to specific federal, state, and local laws. Focusing upon this same marginalized cultural/ethnic/racial group, explain how this group has responded to racism and discrimination in the United States. For example, have they succeeded economically in spite of racism? Or, conversely, has their situation worsened over time? Has it remained relatively unchanged?
There are a host of topics to address here, including: the demands of equal rights, demonstrations of group pride, the preservation of culture, integration into U.S. culture, and alliance building. Explain in detail. Using the specific group that you discussed in number 4 and 5, analyze at least one specific federal, state, or local policy that has been implemented in order to alleviate the discrimination against this group. The policy you address here may be broad and sweeping, rather than narrowly focused on this particular group.
For example, a particular affirmative action policy might apply to multiple marginalized groups. Finally, examine in greater detail the policy mentioned in number 6, and explain what improvements need to be made to this policy to better alleviate the impact of racism in the future. Offer a thoughtful critique of the components of this policy.
