Note:
Gunnar Myrdal died in 1987, less than 70 years ago.
Therefore, this work is protected by copyright,
restricting your legal rights to reproduce it.
However, you are welcome to view it on screen, as you do now.
Read more about copyright.
Full resolution (TIFF) - On this page / på denna sida - VII. Social Inequality - 28. The Basis of Social Inequality - 5. Beliefs Supporting Social Inequality - 6. The Popular Theory of “No Social Equality”
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
586 An American Dilemma
thought of, but will often qualify those rationalizing beliefs by hopes for
improvement in Negro status toward greater equality and will actually also
bend the behavior patterns considerably away from the crudest forms of out-
right exploitation.
But as yet we have not discussed the most powerful rationalization for
segregation, which is the fear of amalgamation. It is this fear which gives
a unique character to the American theory of “no social equality.”
6. The Theory ok “No Social Equality”
In his first encounter with the American Negro problem, perhaps nothing
perplexes the outside observer more than the popular term and the popu-
lar theory of “no social equality.” He will be made to feel from the start
that it has concrete implications and a central importance for the Negro
problem in America. But, nevertheless, the term is kept vague and elusive,
and the theory loose and ambiguous. One moment it will be stretched to
cover and justify every form of social segregation and discrimination, and,
in addition, all the inequalities in justice, politics and breadwinning. The
next moment it will be narrowed to express only the denial of close personal
intimacies and intermarriage. The very lack of precision allows the notion
of “no social equality” to rationalize the rather illogical and wavering
system of color caste in America.
The kernel of the popular theory of “no social equality”’^ will, when
pursued, be presented as a firm determination on the part of the whites to
block amalgamation and preserve “the purity of the white race.”^® The
white man identifies himself with “the white race” and feels that he has a
stake in resisting the dissipation of its racial identity. Important in this
identification is the notion of “the absolute and unchangeable superiority
of the white race.”“® From this racial dogma will often be drawn the direct
inference that the white man shall dominate in all spheres.®^ But when the
logic of this inference is inquired about, the inference will be made indirect
and will be made to lead over to the danger of amalgamation, or, as it is
popularly expressed, “intermarriage.”
It is further found that the ban on intermarriage is focused on white
women. For them it covers both formal marriage and illicit intercourse.
In regard to white men it is taken more or less for granted that they would
not stoop to marry Negro women, and that illicit intercourse does not fall
under the same intense taboo.®^ Their offspring, under the popular doctrine
that maternity is more certain than paternity, become Negroes anyway,
and the white race easily avoids pollution with Negro blood. To prevent
“intermarriage” in this specific sense of sex relations between white women
and Negro men, it is not enough to apply legal and social sanctions against
*We have already touched the notion of **no social equality” in Chapter 3, Sections
3 and 4.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
