Myth of the racist cabbie - rational discrimination versus racism

National Review, Oct 9, 1995 by Dinesh D'Souza

A generation after the civil-rights movement, Americans are once again engaged in a radical rethinking of their attitudes toward race. Racial preferences are now opposed by the vast majority of Americans; even among blacks, there is a new and vibrant diversity of opinion on the subject. Yet so far no one has questioned the very premises of the discussion. The basic assumption of our current racial debate is still that racism is the theory and discrimination is the practice. Racism is said to be based on "prejudices," which constitute judgments made in the absence of evidence, and "stereotypes," which are grossly misleading generalizations about groups. The obvious solutions, promoted by Martin Luther King and other activists, were twofold: statutes intended to outlaw racial discrimination, and social and educational programs to increase interaction between groups. As whites regularly lived and worked with blacks, their attitudes and actions toward them were expected to undergo a transformation, as ignorant prejudices gave way to enlightened acceptance.

As a result of these policies, state-sponsored segregation is dead; overt and arbitrary racial discrimination has greatly abated; white attitudes have undergone a revolutionary transformation in favor of equal rights in employment, housing, voting, and education; and there is a large and thriving black middle class. Yet, at the same time, the prevailing civil-rights model, and the laws and policies based on it, now seem irrelevant to contemporary problems, such as the lurid sufferings of the underclass, which have worsened over the past few decades. Consequently the debate seems to have been polarized and stalled by the crosscurrents of white backlash, black rage, and liberal despair. African American scholar Derrick Bell conveys some of the regnant frustration: "We have made progress in everything, yet nothing has changed."

Perhaps one way to gain an enlarged perspective on our current situation is to step back and turn our assumptions into questions. Are there circumstances in which discrimination actually makes sense? Are people who discriminate against people of other races by definition racist? Might prejudices reflect not ignorant predisposition but prudent judgment?

THE problems with the prevailing civil-rights paradigm become evident when we examine the most widely cited contemporary example of racial discrimination -- the refusal of many taxidrivers to pick up young African-American males. In a recent article, Gregory Wright commented in the Washington Post:

As an African American, I am fed up with having to flag down five cabs before finding one that will take me home, fed up with feeling anger, embarrassment, and frustration when cabdrivers swear they are off-duty and then pick up a white customer before I can get around the corner. Taxidrivers, many of whom come from Africa, the Caribbean, and the Middle East, say they don't want to pick up African-American passengers because they are afraid of being robbed, assaulted, or murdered. One Nigerian cabdriver told me he only picks up African Americans who are well dressed and look like businessmen. For African Americans, this discrimination can be inconvenient and downright humiliating.

It is easy to sympathize with the indignation expressed at such flagrant acts of racial discrimination. Yet according to Wright's own account, many of the cabdrivers who are reluctant to pick up young African-American males are themselves African, Caribbean, or Middle Eastern. Moreover, the Nigerian cited by Wright says explicitly that he will pick up blacks who are suitably dressed. His discrimination seems to be based not simply on skin color but on other aspects of appearance.

During my travels I took up the issue with a number of taxidrivers in New York, Washington, Chicago, and other cities. Most of them denied that they refuse to pick up every black male, and all ridiculed the notion that cabdrivers pass up black women. But many groused that African-American passengers frequently leave no tip and sometimes beat the fare, and virtually all acknowledged that as a consequence of previous threats, robberies, and assaults they employ a kind of heightened scrutiny before they will stop for a young black man.

"This racism stuff is all bull---- ," one African student who was driving to put himself through school, told me. "I'm not going to pass up a fare, which is money in my pocket. But I don't want to get robbed. You know what the black crime rate is in New York? Do you want me to risk a gun to my head, man? What's wrong with you?"

A white driver in Chicago told me, "No exceptions, pal. I never pick up niggers."

"You don't like blacks?" I asked.

"Not blacks. Niggers."

"That sounds like racism to me."

"Hey, that's c---. I pick up older blacks all the time. I have no problem with giving black women a ride. My black buddies won't pick up no niggers. I ain't no more racist than they are."

These concerns seem to be borne out by cabdriver muggings and killings. In August 1994, Keith Moore, a 38-year-old cabdriver and single father, was found with the keys in the ignition and two bullet wounds in his head. His friends told the Washington Post that he never worried about picking up passengers in questionable neighborhoods no matter what the time of day. If Moore had exercised prudence, his colleague Louis Richardson said, he probably would be alive today. The U.S. Labor Department recently reported that driving a cab is the riskiest job in America, with occupational homicide rates higher than those for bartenders, gas- station attendants, and policemen.