Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Understanding systemic discrimination to address inequality

Understanding systemic discrimination to address inequality
Getty Images

Niki is an Associate Professor of Public Policy at Pennsylvania State University and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network. She has served as a consultant for the U.S. Departments of Labor and Commerce and the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. She has contributed to the New York Times debates on low-wage workers.

Persistent racial and ethnic inequality in the United States necessitates a comprehensive understanding of systemic discrimination. Despite substantial investments in under-resourced schools and well-intentioned social experiments, Black unemployment rates remain twice as high as those of whites, while racial gaps in wages, income, and wealth continue to worsen. It is imperative to determine whether these issues stem from inadequate funding or deeper-rooted factors. In order to address these issues, we must understand how systemic discrimination is at the root of these issues, and how to tackle them.


Why Systemic Discrimination?

It’s essential to recognize that even Black people and white people with the highest levels of education and occupational status experience significant wage and wealth disparities. These disparities challenge the validity of traditional narratives which attribute racial inequality solely to individual choices and behavior. It leads us to demand alternative explanations. Although recent endeavors such as anti-racism and critical race theory have made significant contributions, further clarity and specificity are needed to drive meaningful change.

Understanding Systemic Discrimination

Systemic discrimination encompasses a network of racialized structures, including segregation, mass incarceration, and political disenfranchisement. All of these collaborate to generate and perpetuate inequality. By viewing social issues like food insecurity as components of a larger system, rather than isolated problems, we can address them more effectively. Food insecurity, for example, is influenced by segregation, poverty, employment discrimination, zoning policies, and the economic decisions made by national and local food suppliers. The framework of systemic discrimination allows for a comprehensive examination of these interconnected factors.

The Mechanisms of Systemic Discrimination

To comprehend how systemic discrimination operates, an analysis was conducted on a unique database of structural characteristics in metropolitan areas, considering residential segregation, school segregation, wealth distribution, incarceration rates, policing, joblessness, health disparities, occupational segregation, racial attitudes, minimum wage, political ideology, and unionization.

Through this research and studies conducted by others, several key findings have emerged:

● Measurability of Systemic Discrimination: Metrics have been developed to identify and quantify systemic discrimination, facilitating the determination of prevalent racial structures within specific geographic areas. This knowledge enables policymakers to devise precise strategies to combat it effectively.

● Stability of Racialized Structures: These structures persist due to their consistent defense and reinforcement. Consequently, interventions must be disruptive to dismantle the system effectively.

● Interdependence of Racialized Structures: The efficacy of efforts to hinder minority voting rights, for instance, relies heavily on other structures such as residential segregation and incarceration. Understanding these interdependencies is crucial in dismantling systemic discrimination.

A Systems Approach to Combating Systemic Discrimination

Adopting a systems approach necessitates policy prescriptions that address systemic racial inequality at the community, organization, and institutional levels. The following examples highlight ongoing initiatives at each level, demonstrating their potential to effect significant change if properly scaled up:

● Community-Level Initiatives: Operation Ceasefire, a successful homicide-reduction program, employs a 360-degree approach. By engaging rival gang members, respected community figures, social service agents, and law enforcement officials committed to halting arrests, violence reduction is achieved. This community-wide involvement addresses issues comprehensively, attacking them from multiple angles.

● Institutional-Level Initiatives: Numerous federal agencies collect essential data for monitoring and assessing systemic discrimination. For instance, the Federal Reserve Bank mandated the collection and reporting of race data on all loan applications, uncovering racial disparities in loan approvals and predatory lending practices. Such data informs policy development and legal remedies. It is imperative to support and demand similar data collection across federal agencies, breakdown by race, and utilize it to refine policies and coordinate efforts.

● Academic Initiatives: Researchers are developing tools and scoring metrics to track systemic discrimination in metropolitan areas and states. These tools assist changemakers by identifying interconnected subsystems relevant to specific social problems. Collaboration with other advocates addressing related issues enhances the development of more effective solutions, ultimately eradicating racial inequality.

To address persistent racial and ethnic inequality, it is crucial to grasp the dynamics of systemic discrimination. By recognizing its interconnections and adopting a systems approach, policymakers can design comprehensive strategies that effectively combat multiple racialized structures. Initiatives at the community, institutional, and local levels can disrupt the stability of systemic discrimination, leading to a more equitable society. By implementing policy solutions grounded in systemic discrimination theory, organizations, communities, and institutions can work together to dismantle these structures and eliminate racial inequality once and for all.

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., January 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Summary

On June 9, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), dismissed all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Secretary Kennedy claimed the move was necessary to eliminate “conflicts of interest” and restore public trust in vaccines, which he argued had been compromised by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. However, this decision strays from precedent and has drawn significant criticism from medical experts and public health officials across the country. Some argue that this shake-up undermines scientific independence and opens the door to politicized decision-making in vaccine policy.

Background: What Is ACIP?

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is a federal advisory group that helps guide national vaccine policy. Established in 1964, it has over 60 years of credibility as an evidence-based body of medical and scientific experts. ACIP makes official recommendations on vaccine schedules for both children and adults, determining which immunizations are required for school entry, covered by health insurance, and prioritized in public health programs. The committee is composed of specialists in immunology, epidemiology, pediatrics, infectious disease, and public health, all of whom are vetted for scientific rigor and ethical standards. ACIP’s guidance holds national weight, shaping both public perception of vaccines and the policies of institutions like schools, hospitals, and insurers.

Keep ReadingShow less
MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border
Way into future, RPA Airmen participate in Red Flag 16-2 > Creech ...

MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border

FT HUACHUCA, Ariz. - Inside a windowless and dark shipping container turned into a high-tech surveillance command center, two analysts peered at their own set of six screens that showed data coming in from an MQ-9 Predator B drone. Both were looking for two adults and a child who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had fled when a Border Patrol agent approached in a truck.

Inside the drone hangar on the other side of the Fort Huachuca base sat another former shipping container, this one occupied by a drone pilot and a camera operator who pivoted the drone's camera to scan nine square miles of shrubs and saguaros for the migrants. Like the command center, the onetime shipping container was dark, lit only by the glow of the computer screens.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

As Trump’s second presidency unfolds, rural America—the foundation of his 2024 election win—is feeling the sting. From collapsing export markets to cuts in healthcare and infrastructure, those very voters are losing faith.

Getty Images, ablokhin

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Daryl Royal, the 20-year University of Texas football coach, once said, “You've gotta dance with them that brung ya.” The modern adaptation of that quote is “you gotta dance with the one who brought you to the party.” The expression means you should remain loyal to the people or things that helped you succeed.

Sixty-three percent of America’s 3,144 counties are predominantly rural, and Donald Trump won 93 percent of those counties in 2024. Analyses show that rural counties have become increasingly solid Republican, and Trump’s margin of victory within rural America reached a new high in the 2024 election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules
white concrete dome museum

Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules

Trust in elections is fragile – and once lost, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many election policies, there is broad bipartisan agreement on one point: executive branch interference in elections undermines the constitutional authority of states and Congress to determine how elections are run.

Recent executive branch actions threaten to upend this constitutional balance, and Congress must act before it’s too late. To be clear – this is not just about the current president. Keeping the executive branch out of elections is a crucial safeguard against power grabs by any future president, Democrat or Republican.

Keep ReadingShow less