By Patrick L. Mason
A good book, but as a read, it is more geared towards academics than for popular audiences. The book is dense with tables, which I would have preferred to have placed at the end of the book. Nonetheless, there is a lot of information that is useful and well documented. Throughout, Mason seems to rely on race-based outcomes (like inequality) to label the sources of those outcomes as de facto racist but backs up the assertion with historical facts. All else being equal, if the only likely explanation is racism, then racism is the most likely cause of racial inequality. He also posits that discrimination in general, and racialized discrimination in particular, are necessary in capitalism as inequality through discrimination within the labor pool is the source of profit maximization.
To counter complaints from those who believe racism is a thing of the past, he distinguishes between explicit racism and implicit “racialized” decision-making. For example, a person (mostly, White and male), may easily and without conscious bias make “racialized” decisions based upon manager-worker (race) affinity instead of openly anti-Black racist attitudes. An important aspect of his work comes from an analysis of Black achievement regarding education and compensation levels. The education gap between White and Black has essentially been eliminated through high school (mostly based upon free education), while reappearing for college education. “As the White male educational advantage was cut in half between 1965 and 2019, The White male employment advantage doubled.” The employment advantage trend was similar for White and Black females during the same period. During this period the wealth gap has not improved. It has remained steady, based upon the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and discrimination in general. “Even if all racism was eliminated from American society, the privileges of wealth will yield racial disparities in socio-economic outcomes in perpetuity.”
Mason distinguishes among three periods of capitalism: chattel capitalism, servitude capitalism, and managerial capitalism, all working to disfavor Blacks. The first period (slavery) extended through the period 1619 through 1865. The second period of servitude slavery (convict leasing, debt peonage, sharecropping, Jim Crow) lasted about 100 years, from 1865 to 1965. The author states there is overlap, with managerial capitalism evolving even as racial progress was made from 1941 to 1973. This period represented progress, but progress similar to the Reconstruction period. And just as the long economic downturn that began in 1873 led to Whites growing weary of being concerned about the “Negro Problem,” abandoning the progress made through Reconstruction, so too the recessions (along with government retrenchment) of 1973, 1980, 1991, 2001 and the 2008 Great Recession, followed by the COVID recession also halted further progress and turned the clock back on racial progress. For this reason, the author has managerial capitalism continuing to the present, framed not so much by specific policies, such as redlining, but through racism’s institutionalization.
“Chattel and Servitude Capitalism bequeathed to managerial capitalism a racist political legacy: massive racial wealth disparity, racialized manager-worker identity matches, a racially segregated society…and racial disparities in a range of socioeconomic outcomes…[creating] racial disparity norms.”
And as long as inequality exists, racism will continue to recreate itself. All of this leads the author to the conclusion that the only way that the racial gap in wealth will ever be eliminated except through reparations.
I appreciate the author’s distinction between racialization and racism, a difference that leads to the same outcome. However, even though the author touches on normative behavior towards the end, I would have appreciated a more comprehensive assessment of White norms and how they feed racialization. I agree with Mason. Racial association can dictate how we act, by default. For example, if a White manager is interviewing White and Black candidates for a job, the White candidate would automatically have a preference. Why? Mason points to the manager-candidate racial affinity as the reason, and I agree. However, I would add that without any anti-racist animus, hiring the White candidate would represent an unthinking advancement of an implicitly accepted White norm. Similar to how, without thinking, we would say thank you when someone holds a door or an elevator for us, we are also inclined to make decisions not on objective consideration, but on the advancement of norms. In holding a door, we formulate no judgment concerning the action. It is pro forma. Though hiring is a bit more complicated as a situation, the unconscious bias will prevail unless the Black (or other minority) candidate is substantially better qualified and, acting from a gatekeeper perspective, the minority candidate has successfully adapted to White normative behavior and has a shared White normative background to the hiring agent, or to the company culture. Mason touches on just such an analysis towards the end of the book and agrees: “All that is necessary is for managers to have racially influenced automatic associations, which is often called implicit racial bias.” Yes, but I would go further and state that the associations are derived from accepted norms. Change the norms, and we have a chance to change the outcome. Merely fight the association, other means may be employed to preserve and advance the norm.
For a further explanation of my position, see Racist Norms: When The Particular is Made Universal, at https://communitycivics.com/2025/10/24/racist-norms-when-the-particular-is-made-universal/ .
As tedious as this book can be to get through, it is a worthwhile read.