The Ferguson Test

This week’s events in Ferguson have tested all of us, not just police and politicians.

In a classic South Park bit, Stan’s Dad is on Wheel of Fortune. The category is “People Who Annoy You”, and the letters showing are


The solution is naggers, but Mr. Marsh is so overwhelmed by the horror/forbidden-pleasure of saying “niggers” on TV that he can’t think of anything else. Watching for the first time, neither could I. Surely no TV-game-show puzzle could have niggers as its solution, but it instantly jumps to mind anyway. And once you’ve had that thought, calmly running through the other vowels to find a more probable solution doesn’t seem like an option any more.

By the time he blurts out “Niggers!”, Mr. Marsh even seems proud of himself for having found the courage to overcome political correctness and speak the truth as he sees it. But it isn’t truth. It’s just an idea that shines so brightly in his head that he can’t see any alternatives.

That’s how unconscious racism works.

Stan’s Dad is not an I-hate-black-people kind of racist, and undoubtedly he would be offended to be described as any kind of racist at all. In most ways, he’s a fairly typical middle-class white parent. He didn’t wake up that morning thinking, “I’m going to say ‘nigger’ today, and don’t let anybody try to stop me.” He knows what attitudes and behaviors are acceptable and unacceptable in today’s society, and he does his best to pretend that his mind really works that way.

But it just doesn’t. Whatever his conscious intentions, his mental reflexes have been passed down from another era, when racism was as common as air.

Reacting to presidents. Earlier this year, I described how unconscious racism figures in people’s responses to President Obama. Being president and living in the White House has always been a pretty sweet ride. Protocol requires everyone to defer to you. Wherever you go, no expense is spared to keep you and your family comfortable and safe.

The public has known and accepted this for a long time. The President symbolizes the United States, so of course the Kennedys or Reagans or Bushes should be treated with utmost respect. But when the First Family became black, all that luxury and deference suddenly looked different. Why were the Obamas lording it over us like this?

So, those white folks who didn’t even notice when Reagan’s or JFK’s feet were on the desk, but who see Obama’s and think “He was raised so badly.” — are they also secretly thinking “Who does that uppity nigger think he is, acting like he’s a real president or something?” Maybe a few here or there, but mostly no. They aren’t consciously hating Obama because he’s black. But they can’t look at a black president the same way they looked at the 43 white presidents. Things just look different when Obama does them.

And once the thought “Why are the Obamas lording it over us?” pops into your head, it’s genuinely difficult to back up and think: “Wait a minute. Are there other ways to look at this? Would I be interpreting the situation this way if he were white?” In fact, not voicing that bright and shiny “truth” feels like cowardice. The racial influence is long forgotten: Who does this Obama guy think he is, acting like he’s President of the United States or something?

Unconscious racism in the police. At this point, we don’t really know what Darren Wilson was thinking when he killed Michael Brown, sparking more than a week of civil unrest in Ferguson, Missouri. But we know that there’s a long history of police officers reacting differently to black citizens than to whites. Ezra Klein put it bluntly:

Incidents of excessive force are commonplace, and increasingly, there’s a list of young black men who have died for no other reason than that they ran into a police officer at the wrong time and in the wrong way.

Earlier this month, for example, 22-year-old John Crawford was killed by police in a WalMart in Ohio. After he picked up a realistic-looking air rifle from the shelf, another customer called police about an armed man in the store. Crawford was talking to his girlfriend on the phone when police demanded he drop the weapon. While he tried to explain that it wasn’t a real weapon, they killed him.

By contrast, white open-carry activists have been showing up in public places like Target or Home Depot, prominently displaying actual deadly weapons. None of them have provoked a similar misunderstanding. In Aurora, Colorado (site of the 2012 movie-theater massacre) an 18-year-old white man was carrying a shotgun down a public street. When stopped by police, he argued with them and refused to turn over the gun or show any ID. They let him continue on his way, gun in hand.

Most of this disparity, I suspect, is unconscious. I sincerely doubt that Crawford’s killers went to work that morning thinking, “I hate those young black bucks. I’m going to shoot me one today if I get the chance.” But police have to deal with emergency situations that may require quick action. Somebody seems to have a gun and people might be in danger — do you calmly talk him down or go in shooting? There may be no time to work through a checklist and make an objective decision; you have to go with your gut.

But what if your gut is prejudiced? What if seeing a young black man in an emergency situation is like seeing N-_-G-G-E-R-S on the puzzle board? One possibility — that he’s a dangerous criminal and innocent people will die unless you shoot him right now — pops to mind and blots out all others.

The Ferguson test.This is a test,” Missouri Governor Jay Nixon said. But it’s not just the people of Ferguson or the police or Nixon himself who are being tested this week. It’s all of us. As we watch events unfold, in how many ways do they just look different because of race? How hard is it to back up, re-examine our initial framing, and ask ourselves what we’d be thinking if race were not a factor?

The Ferguson police as an organization. Looking at their initial treatment of the Brown shooting, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Ferguson police didn’t think killing a black teen-ager was a big deal, or that his family or the community deserved any answers about how it happened or who did it or why. Shielding the shooter appeared to be the paramount concern.

When protests did erupt, police seemed to see only the public order and safety issues rather than the community relations issues. Instead of working with community leaders to balance public safety concerns with the public rights of assembly and free expression, police attempted to dictate to the community, and to enforce their edicts with overwhelming force.

The fact that the police version of the shooting was at odds with the accounts of eye-witnesses, including at least two who did not know Michael Brown, did not seem to bother them. Witnesses and the family’s private autopsy (results of the police autopsy haven’t been revealed) paint the picture of an intentional, unnecessary killing: shots aimed at Brown’s back while he attempted to run away, and then more shots after Brown turns with his hands in the air. After interviewing one witness, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell assesses her testimony as a description of first degree murder, and the legal experts on his show agree. And yet the officer has not been arrested or charged with any crime at all.

When police finally released Wilson’s name, they simultaneously released video of Brown apparently stealing cigars from a convenience store. That video has no relevance to the legal case — officers can’t shoot down suspects trying to surrender, no matter what they are suspected of doing — but it did have public relations value. It fed the storyline that focuses on black lawbreaking and violence to the exclusion of police misconduct.

Political leaders. It was obvious early on that local officials in Ferguson were making the situation worse, and yet higher authorities were slow to intervene or comment. The swing voters in Missouri are rural or suburban whites, and Governor Nixon has been careful not to look too pro-black. You have to wonder: If police were treating a white community like an occupied war zone, and if large numbers of local whites and their elected representatives were protesting, would it take that long to get a response?

Media. Some reporters are doing their best to get the facts out and portray them fairly, but it is far too easy to treat Ferguson residents as one big black blob. If there is looting and violence, then the citizens of Ferguson are violent looters. No wonder police are shooting them in the street and riding around in tanks and paying no attention to their concerns. Let them stop breaking the law and then maybe we’ll listen to them.

It’s hard to imagine a white community getting this kind of treatment. Whites who break the law are typically presented in the media as aberrations. Often they are portrayed as crazy loners, even when they belong to groups that promote precisely the kinds of crimes they commit. If you’re a law-abiding white homeowner with complaints about your local government, you stand very little chance of being lumped together with thieves and vandals who live in your neighborhood and also happen to be white.

Again, maybe a few journalists or TV personalities are thinking, “Here’s a chance to smear blacks”, but I doubt that’s the primary motivation. I think rioting black ghetto is another one of those bright shiny notions. Get it in your head and it’s hard to get it out.

Also, I can’t count the number of times I’ve run into the comment that we shouldn’t “jump to conclusions” because “we don’t know all the facts” or “we don’t know what really happened”. If several white eyewitnesses gave consistent accounts of excessive force by a black police officer, would we be instructed to ignore them in the same way? Or does the fact that the witnesses are black make it easier to discount their testimony? Does the whiteness of the police chief make his version more authoritative?

All of us. We can blame the police for laying out self-justifying and community-diminishing narratives, and we can blame the media for promoting them. But why do we fall for them?

And I do mean we. Like Randy Marsh, I was raised at time when racism was common as air. When I take a step back, I can see the effects of that training in the way my pre-conscious processes shape the perceptions that my conscious mind then wants to treat as facts.

Situations involving black people just look different. Their lives seem less consequential, their deaths less tragic. When I hear of their misfortunes or the injustices they suffer, part of me is waiting for the explanation of how they brought this on themselves. Their stories and testimonies are easily discounted. The thought, “I need to do something about this” does not arise on its own, unless the something involves defending myself and other respectable white people. A crowd of blacks easily stops being a collection of individual humans and becomes a malevolent unit. I expect violence and lawlessness, and when it appears it dominates the picture I see. “Well, there you go,” I think.

I can see how unfair those thoughts are, when I take a step back. But it’s so easy not to.

Unitarian Universalist minister Meg Riley writes:

As a white person in the U.S., I am conditioned from birth to see whiteness as safety — white neighborhoods, white people, white authority figures. My lived experience, my conversations with people of color, and my study of history have shown me over and over that this is a wild and cruel perversion of the truth. But the cultural conditioning is strong. Unless I fight it every day, white superiority seeps into my brain in slow, almost undetectable ways.

A lot of whites get offended by the suggestion that America is a racist society. They know that the vast majority of whites are not KKK-style racists, actively plotting evil against non-whites. (Some are, of course, but it’s not fair to judge the many by the misdeeds of the few — at least not when we’re talking about whites.)

My point is: We don’t have to be KKK-style racists. We can maintain a racist society quite well just by letting our minds do what they do: assemble age-old stereotypes into the narratives we’ve been hearing all our lives.

We can do that, or we can “fight it every day”. I invite you to take the Ferguson Test and see how you’re doing in that fight.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • Irene Gravina  On August 18, 2014 at 10:00 am

    The autopsy has shown the boy was hit with two bullets in the head, four in the arm. The ones in the head killed him. Also residents of Furguson who are black are 39 percent more likely than whites to be apprehended by police. But in the state of MO as a whole, that figure is 59 percent. So professors who study this didn’t expect Furguson to blow. Find this info in The Daily Beast.

  • laroquod  On August 18, 2014 at 10:09 am

    Kindly do not presume to speak for me, thank you. If you have those kinds of thoughts when you think of people of another race, simply admit that you are a racist, but by ascribing your impulsively racist thoughts to everyone else with a similar hue of skin, all you are doing is compounding your racism with more racism of another kind.

    • Chris  On August 18, 2014 at 4:20 pm

      You should reread the post you are commenting on. His exact point is that he does not have those thoughts and only understands how racism works if he steps back and critically examines his own preexisting assumptions.

  • Anonymous  On August 18, 2014 at 10:26 am

    The human brain responds automatically to patterns, searches for them in fact.
    Thus n-ggers leads to an automatic response (true, it’s part of our social unconscious as well) the way a series of questions, “How do you pronounce joke?” followed by “How do you pronounce folk” followed by “What’s the white of an egg?” Most everyone answers the third question “yolk” when the correct answer is “albumen”
    So jumping to conclusions is something we all do as we search for patterns, just as people jump to conclusions about racism in others. This is not to say there is not deep-seeded racism in us, but it’s important to examine matters further. Jumping to conclusions is not that different from a policy of SHOOT FIRST, ASK QUESTIONS LATER.

  • Philippe Saner  On August 18, 2014 at 11:01 am

    This reminds me of another article by you. Namely this one:

    As for the robbery video, apparently the store owners don’t think it was him ( But one of Brown’s friends says he did it ( So maybe the police are lying about the robbery or maybe not.

    Regardless, it’s known that the robbery wasn’t a factor in the shooting. The police actually said the shooter didn’t know Brown was a suspect in anything. So even if it was okay to field-execute suspected robbers (which is obviously isn’t) it wouldn’t matter.

  • Kevin @ AFI Challenge  On August 18, 2014 at 11:05 am

    Bravo, I completely agree with you regarding America’s problem with “subtle” racism. People don’t want to admit it, but it’s so clear. I was lucky to be raised almost completely clear of any form of “subtle” discrimination, but even I can relate with some of what you’re saying. I expect people aren’t going to react kindly to this article, but I think it’s spot-on

    • Carol Wheeler  On August 18, 2014 at 1:50 pm

      Just want to add my own Bravo! The person who responded with “Kindly do not… ” etc.etc. needs to really look a little more closely at himself. I too was raised the way Kevin was, but come one, white privilege is in the very air we breathe, how can anyone not relate to this.

  • kimsiebert  On August 18, 2014 at 11:09 am

    I agree that racism underlies many of society’s assumptions. As the ongoing tragedy in Ferguson rolls out, it occurs to me that another contributing factor to over-reaction by the police–there and elsewhere– is the understanding that much of the populace could be/probably is armed.

    And, while the number of white gun owners far exceeds the number of black gun owners, we –as whites–still feel a higher sense of threat from blacks, as Doug has argued. Yes, there are more guns generally at large, but they do not belong to black people and should not increase fear associated with this specific group of people.

    But, then, the whole thing isn’t rational to begin with. It’s emotional.

  • irrevspeckay  On August 18, 2014 at 12:09 pm

    This is a compelling engagement with what is going on in Ferguson and how white people ~ me, the author, maybe you ~ see things differently because of our race privilege, how it “colors” our interpretation of events, raises suspicions and skepticism that belittles the experience of people of color. In my experience, some of the courage and daring we with race privilege must find is to notice that subtle-racist voice we “decent” people are taught to suppress or deny, but then it twists our interpretations and observations. Thank you, Doug Muder, again for this cogent and challenging piece, and your own vulnerability/culpability in it.

  • Helen in CA  On August 18, 2014 at 7:09 pm

    Appreciating the author naming something I’ve been noticing. I’m old enough that I was raised in a time before the Civil Rights Act. I’ve been shocked to notice (at times) racists thoughts. And I don’t think of myself as racist at all. I suspect it’s unconscious interior backlash to work I’ve been doing to notice my invisible white privilege. Working on bring the invisible to visible-to-myself has brought the language of race to my consciousness again. What matters is how I act, how I respond to this (whether in internal dialogue or actual actions). Thank you for this naming.

  • lemoed  On August 19, 2014 at 2:39 am

    You are rather brave to not only reflect on your innate thought processes (who wants to find out that kind of thing about themselves?!?) but also to then write them down and share them with the public and, well, the world (I live in germany and i read this!). Really, i am impressed, Thank you for that!

  • orionblair  On August 19, 2014 at 8:29 am

    You asked for thoughts about screening comments. How about asking several of your most thoughtful readers to do this for you?

  • Anonymous  On August 19, 2014 at 6:50 pm

    “If police were treating a white community like an occupied war zone, and if large numbers of local whites and their elected representatives were protesting, would it take that long to get a response?”

    Whoa I have to stop you right there.

    You obviously closed your eyes at the entire militarized treatment by police towards various Occupy movements. Around the entire United States the people began to rise up in grievance against the rise of corporate welfare used to purchase political candidates and in return were met with the same, and worse, treatment happening in Ferguson.

    And to this day where is the social conversation about the fact police threw a flash grenade on the body of a young man who they already shot and beaten to the ground in order to disburse the wave of people who who to assist this young man?

    They treated us like a war zone, wherewithal the leaders? They sure she’ll did NOT rise up to protect us, they have the order to beat us down.

    • weeklysift  On August 21, 2014 at 11:19 am

      I should have mentioned the Occupy connection. I covered the police over-reaction at the time:

    • chemire  On August 21, 2014 at 11:44 am

      Ah, but you see, those whites who participated in Occupy were largely working class or poor. Such whites may benefit from white privilege generally, but they also suffer from CLASS prejudice. You have to be both upper middle class, minimum, AND white to be assured of protection by the establishment.

      • Anonymous  On August 21, 2014 at 1:14 pm

        Oh yeah? Let’s see how much outrage this creates:

        The point i was trying to make is the police have used extensive military tactics on us all the damn time, occupy being a prime example, and there’s no outrage by the general community. In fact the general community will often side with the police.

        Its this hypocrisy that disgusts me about this society. Perhaps it will change in the publics mind after this, we shall see but I have little faith in my fellow Americans.

      • chemire  On August 21, 2014 at 1:25 pm

        I wasn’t saying you were wrong – I was just supplying the reason why you were right. Although it’s also true that the bar for ‘guaranteed protection’ seems to be going up… Most people find it easier to allow themselves to be distracted because seeing what really is hurts too much. It’s too scary, too challenging, too overwhelming. Easier to put your blinkers on and be a good workhorse. But for what it’s worth, over time, if you look around, things do tend to get better. Either that or the society dies out for good. That’s been the historical precedent, anyhow. So in the long run this sort of thing can’t last forever… we’ll either have to shape up, as a society, or die off. (I don’t mean just in regard to racism, classism, and other institutionalized prejudice, but it’s definitely a huge part of the problem.)

        As to what you linked… that sort of thing happens sometimes, too. It’s not only the disadvantaged who get screwed over. In many places the police are poorly trained, and even where they are well-trained, use of guns is very dangerous, inherently. I’ve read that some studies show that even the best shots among police officers miss or hit the wrong target a whole lot – a success rate of 50-something percent, if I remember right? I’d have to find it again to get the specific figures… can’t remember anymore. And who knows how angry people will get over it? Likely most people will find ways to justify or ignore it – ‘people are human, mistakes happen’… because it’s easier to accept our childhood training that the police are our friends and here to help us than to view them as fellow humans with just as much potential for good and bad as anyone else, but with the consequences of their negativity being potentially far worse than most people’s given their institutional power and the right to carry firearms.


  • By Conditioning | The Weekly Sift on August 18, 2014 at 12:04 pm

    […] week’s featured article is “The Ferguson Test“. Rather than focus on breaking news (something a one-man weekly blog can’t hope to do […]

  • […] Muder provides an overview of the subtle (and not-so-subtle) forms of racism at work in […]

  • By The Monday Morning Teaser | The Weekly Sift on August 25, 2014 at 7:55 am

    […] Party“, which is now over 100K page views and still running. Last week’s “The Ferguson Test” looks anemic by comparison at 1.9K, but that’s actually pretty good by normal […]

  • By Unwarranted | The Weekly Sift on August 25, 2014 at 11:30 am

    […] of the Privileged” at 332K. (Those numbers make the 2,000 views of last week’s “The Ferguson Test” seems puny, but it’s actually quite good by normal Weekly Sift […]

  • By The Yearly Sift: 2014 | The Weekly Sift on December 29, 2014 at 8:33 am

    […] But (in addition to being discussed in many weekly summaries) Ferguson also figured in “The Ferguson Test“, “Infrastructure, Suburbs, and the Long Descent to Ferguson“, “Five […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: