America in Black and White:
One Nation, Indivisible
By Stephan Thernstrom and
Abigail Thernstrom
Simon and Shuster
(704 pp., $32.50)
Race-conscious affirmative action
is on life support, and the only
remaining questions are who
will pull the plug and when. This
past autumn, the husband and wife
team of Harvard University historian Stephan Thernstrom and political
scientist Abigail Thernstrom of the
Manhattan Institute posted their
own "do not resuscitate" order with
the publication of their book America
in Black and White.
One of the most eagerly awaited
and extensively reviewed books on
race in years, America in Black and
White was treated roughly by liberals, conservatives, and others who
defy ideological labels. Even President Clinton weighed in during his
panel discussion on race in Akron,
Ohio, when he pressured his invited
guest Abigail Thernstrom to answer
yes or no whether she favored "the
United States Army abolishing the
affirmative action programs that produced Colin Powell." (True to her
combative form, she responded that
racial preferences were not responsible for Powell's success. "Preferences
involve racial double standards," she
said, "picking people on the basis of
the color of their skin. It's not affirmative action that's the issue, it's
racial preferences, Mr. President.")
The intense reaction to the book
from all points of the political compass makes one wonder whether the
Thernstroms might have discovered
a path to common ground between
blacks and whites. The conservative
Dinesh D'Souza accused the Thernstroms in The Weekly
Standard of posturing to get positive reviews from
liberal commentators. Liberal writer
Nicholas Lemann wrote in The New
York Times Book Review that the
"book veers back and forth between
two sensibilities, one reasonable and
large-spirited, the other pugnacious
and angry to the point of occasional
bitterness and sarcasm." Law professor Christopher Edley Jr.
confessed in Harvard Magazine that he
would read several seemingly reasonable paragraphs and then hit a
passage "that boils the blood." Perhaps the most thorough
and devastating review came from a close
friend of the Thernstroms, economist Glenn Loury, who
in The Atlantic Monthly raised fundamental
questions about their data interpretations, especially as they relate to
crime, education, and poverty.
What do the Thernstroms say
that generates such reactions? Are
the couple being treated unfairly by
their critics? Without a doubt, the
Thernstroms have produced a rich
source of archival data documenting
racial trends in America and the
often unnoticed progress of African-
Americans. The book starts with an
overview of the Reconstruction era,
documents the socioeconomic
progress African-Americans have
made since the 1940s, and concludes
with a critique of the racial climate
in America. The authors argue that
race-conscious affirmative action,
black crime, and black racism are
among the major impediments to
improved relations between black
and white Americans.
Part I of the book offers a historical survey of black experiences in the
Jim Crow South that will be familiar
but fascinating to many readers. Describing the brutality of Southern
whites in their efforts to preserve
white supremacy, the Thernstroms
recount the horrific nature of lynchings.
"Lynchers displayed a savagery that most Americans today
find difficult to believe," they write.
"They dragged blacks to death tied
to the bumper of a car; they tortured
the life out of them with a blowtorch
or a hot iron; they burned them to
cinders in bonfires a Mississippi
paper called 'Negro barbecues.'"
Further illustrating the depth of
Southern racism, the authors quote
Mississippi Gov. James K. Vardaman
who in 1909 argued that "money
spent today for the maintenance of
public schools for Negroes is robbery
of the white man, and a waste upon
the Negro." Quotations like these
help the authors make their point
that our nation has come a gigantic
distance in race relations between
whites and blacks. White Americans
are no longer fixated on subjugating
blacks, they say, and there has been a
notable decrease in overt white
racism across the country.
Part II examines social, economic,
and political trends since the 1960s,
including the rise of the black middle class,
suburbanization, poverty, crime, and changing black politics.
The authors attribute black progress
since the 1940s to a combination of
factors, including a booming economy after World War II
and black migration to the North. According to
the Thernstroms, African-Americans
made more progress before the
adoption of affirmative action than
they have since. But as fate would
have it, just as their book was being
published late last summer the Census Bureau released data showing
that the number of African-Americans living in poverty had dropped
to a record low. In apparent contradiction to the Thernstroms' belief, all
minority groups are prospering in
today's race-conscious society. In
fact, they are doing better than ever.
Part II's greatest contribution is
the Thernstroms' cogent attack on
the 1968 Kerner Commission report,
which warned of growing racial
apartheid. In this section, the
authors identify key changes in
American society that have belied
the report's dire predictions. These
trends, some of which were already
in motion while the commission
was at work, include a reversal of
black migration patterns from North
to South, the rise of black suburbanization, and the passage of the
Immigration Act of 1965, which
revitalized many cities with new
immigrants.
Part III focuses on the Thernstroms' negative assessments of
Supreme Court rulings on affirmative action and related programs in
school admissions, jobs, and voting
rights. It is the book's weakest link
because the authors do not use readily available data to support their
claims, as I elaborate below. The
claims come across as unsupported
assertions. Moreover, the authors
undermine their case by criticizing
moderate and widely accepted
Supreme Court decisions such as
Griggs v. Duke Power, in which the
Court ruled that seemingly race-neutral business practices such as
standardized testing could be
deemed discriminatory if they disadvantaged
minorities disproportionately. The book concludes with
the obligatory appeal for a color-blind society.
America in Black and White has
many redeeming qualities. I found it
especially difficult to review because
I share many of the authors' concerns.
Nevertheless, I am not persuaded by the proof they offer for
many of their contentions. Despite
the book's extensive bibliography,
many of the studies both pro and
con that one would have expected to
see cited are noticeably absent.
Moreover, the authors' interpretations
of data often come across as
unscholarly or unfair.
For example, the Thernstroms
base many of their claims of more
favorable white attitudes toward
African-Americans on anecdotal evidence and public opinion polls that
are open to challenge. In citing such
evidence, the authors fail to discuss
the well-known disjuncture between
white Americans' endorsement of
racial equality in principle and their
corresponding lack of support for
public policies that might bring
about such equality. Elsewhere in
the book, the authors argue that support for affirmative action is weak
by citing responses to survey questions about affirmative
action practices that have been deemed illegal,
such as using numerical quotas to
enhance racial diversity. Few people
support quotas as a general remedy
for minority under-representation.
But as political scientist Laura Stoker has shown, a substantial number
of Americans support the use of
quotas in the few situations in which
the Supreme Court has permitted
them -- for example, as a remedy for
proven discrimination.
One of the book's most disturbing
features is its angry tone. The couple's purpose in writing America in
Black and White was to refute liberals
who were arguing emphatically that
black Americans were worse off than
ever and actually losing ground. The
left demonized Abigail Thernstrom
for writing her award-winning book
Whose Votes Count? Affirmative Action
and Minority Voting Rights, which
criticized federal voting rights law.
Stephan Thernstrom was criticized
for comments he made during class
lectures that enraged minority students. One wonders if their book's
hard edge is a consequence of this rough handling.
The Thernstroms are obviously
sincere integrationists and sensitive
toward African-Americans, as the
book's moving historical section
amply demonstrates. But elsewhere
in America in Black and White they
come across as angry conservatives
lacking the milk of human kindness.
As a result, I fear that their labor of
love will bridge no gaps between
whites and blacks and may actually
widen existing fissures.
The Thernstroms' single policy
recommendation is the abolition of
race-conscious affirmative action,
something already destined to
occur. I wish they had used their
book to explore alternatives to affirmative action and to delve deeper
into what Americans believe about
equal opportunity. The impending
death of affirmative action need not
mean the end of opportunity for
America's least advantaged. Given a
chance, whites and blacks can and
do agree on a host of issues pertaining to fairness and opportunity.
I believe we can harness this agreement
to build widespread political support for policies
that address the lingering effects of the racial horrors
America in Black and White so vividly
describes.
