Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1084
THE INTERNALIZATION OF ANTI-RACIAL
DISCRIMINATION NORM IN THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA
Honest Dody Molasy
1
, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
2
12
International Relations, University of Jember, Indonesia
[email protected].id
1
, citratunjung31@gmail.com
2
KEYWORDS
African-American, Norm
Internalization, Racial
Discrimination
ABSTRACT
Racial discrimination is one of the most crucial global issues to be
addressed because it is against democracy principles and human rights.
One of the countries that still faces the problem of racial discrimination is
the United States of America (USA). This article discusses the reasons
why racial discrimination against African-Americans persists in the United
States of America in this 21st century. This study applies an explanatory
qualitative approach and a literature study data collection. By using the
concept of the norm life cycle by Kathryn Sikkink and Martha Finnemore,
this study argues that the internalization of anti-racial discrimination norms
in the United States (U.S.), especially adopted from the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(ICERD), has not been fully completed. This research analyzes three
aspects of norm internalization: actors, motives, and mechanisms. From
those aspects, this study found that the actors’ efforts to internalize norms
are hampered by the RUDs (Reservations, Understandings, Declarations)
in the ratification of ICERD. The existence of white supremacy in the
United States also disrupts the conformity (motive) needed for
internalization. The last, in the aspect of mechanism, especially when it is
viewed within the scope of the issuance of laws, there are certain legal
decisions or policies which indirectly interfere with the implementation of
the mechanism in the form of laws and regulations made by the United
States before. The results of this study will benefit by providing a
reflection on the issue of racial discrimination that also occurs in
Indonesia.
INTRODUCTION
When the values of democracy and human rights have spread widely in this world,
racial discrimination should no longer exist. However, this old issue continuous to exist in
many parts of the world, including the United States of America. In general, racial
discrimination in the United States occurs against minorities based on race, gender, and
others. Particularly in this article, the discussion focuses on discrimination against African-
American race.
Racial discrimination against African-Americans has occurred since the 18th century
in the era of slavery (Washington Post, 2019). At that moment, the United States was a North
American colonies belonging to the British Empire. Many black people from Africa were
traded and sent to North American colonies as slaves (Britannica, 2021b). They were
Volume 3, Number 11, September 2022
e-ISSN: 2797-6068 and p-ISSN: 2777-0915
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1085
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
stigmatized as inferior people and were treated like a property by the slaveholders. Since
then, white people have discriminated against black people in almost all aspects of life.
Although the United States had achieved its independence and enslavement had been
abolished, racial discrimination against African-Americans keeps occurring in various forms,
such as segregation in public accommodations, discrimination in job recruitment,
discrimination in education, and others (Pager & Shepherd, 2008, p. 182).
The United States government has tried to eliminate racial discrimination by releasing
some regulations and policies. For example, Civil Rights Act 1965 which eliminates racial
discrimination in jobs, Voting Rights Act 1965 which eliminates racial discrimination in
voting, and Fair Housing Act 1968 which eliminates racial discrimination in housing. Those
regulations give significant impacts on African-Americans, especially when they can vote
and be voted safely in elections. Since the Voting Rights Act 1965 was issued, many African-
Americans have been elected as a governor, police chief, and even president like Barack
Obama.
Although African-Americans have obtained access to the public sector, racial
discrimination against African-Americans has occurred in many places in the United States in
this 21st century. For example, African-Americans are twice more likely to become
unemployed than white people. Besides, while working, African-Americans only get around
25% lower salaries than white people (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004, p. 991).
In response to the racial discrimination against African-Americans, one big movement
was driven by Black Lives Matter (BLM) in 2020. Black Lives Matter is an international
organization headquartered in the United States whose mission is to eliminate racial
discrimination and build local power to intervene government’s violence against black people
(Black Lives Matter, 2020). Black Lives Matter was formed in 2013 and started their action
from social media (Yonita & Darmawan, 2021, p. 2).
On May 26, 2020, the BLM and its supporters protested police violence and
discrimination against George Floyd, an African-American, who died on May 25, 2020 (The
New York Times, 2021). This movement received a lot of support from other countries, such
as France, the United Kingdom, Australia, and others. They held the same protest as they feel
the same issue happens in their own country (BBC, 2020).
There are many cases similar to Floyd's case in earlier period in the United States
protested by the BLM. The existence of BLM indicates that racial discrimination, especially
against African-Americans, persists in the United States.
Despite the prolonged issue of racial discrimination in the United States and the
government has done a lot of actions to eliminate this problem, racial discrimination persists
against African-American race in this 21st century. Some previous researches has discussed
the racial discrimination against African-Americans in the United States, such as research by
Kullaszewicz (2015), Hinton et al. (2018), Pallok et al. (2019), and Lang & Spitzer (2020).
They analyzed the racial discrimination issue through historical perspectives, social
structures, and psychological in the form of prejudice and implicit bias. In contrast to
previous studies, this study discusses the reasons for racial discrimination within the scope of
implementation of international norms. This study uses the norms life cycle concept from
Kathryn Sikkink and Martha Finnemore which explains three steps in which international
norms can emerge and be implemented in a country. By using the concept, this article tries to
find which step the United States has missed or less fulfilled in accepting a new norm, which
is the international anti-racial discrimination norm. It should provide data to answer why
racial discrimination against African-Americans persists in the United States in this 21st
century.
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1086
The concept used in this research is the norm life cycle by Sikkink and Finnemore.
This concept derives from the international norm’s perspective. There are three stages or
processes for an international norm can emerge and be implemented in each state party.
These three stages are explained below:
This study will benefit by providing a reflection of racial discrimination or
discrimination by ethnicity that also occurs in Indonesia.
1. Norm Emergence
In this stage, there are two important elements used to create norms: norm
entrepreneurs and organizational platforms. Norm entrepreneurs are the actors who try to
convince countries to become norm leaders in the world and adopt the new norm, while
organizational platforms are the vessel where the norm entrepreneurs do their act to emerge
the new norms (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
Norm entrepreneurs are the subjects or the people who have a strong understanding of
what behavior is appropriate for the community (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998). Their strong
understanding has a significant role in observing phenomena and even in “creating”
problems. It means, they can frame issues to emphasize which problems should be prioritized
in the world. Whenever norm entrepreneurs succeed to frame a new problem, the problem
will spread and create public understanding. Then, it will be adopted and solved by the
society immediately.
While doing their duties, norm entrepreneurs are usually pushed by some motives,
such as empathy, altruism, and ideational commitment. Empathy arises when actors can
participate in the other's feeling or idea. Meanwhile, altruism arises when actors take actions
to benefit others even at the very high risk of loss to the actors’ well-being. Then, ideational
commitment arises when actors put a norm or ideas forward just because they believe in the
ideal and values contained in the norm (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
The next element is organizational platforms. Organizational platforms become the
place needed by the norm entrepreneurs to promote their designed norms. One of the
predominance of many modern organizational platforms is their expertise and their beneficial
information to change other people's behavior. However, in order to successfully change
people's behavior, the actors and their organizations need other parties’ support, especially
from the state actors to implement the norm. Furthermore, they also need other different
organizations to provide various types of mechanisms for norm entrepreneurs to promote new
norms (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
Source: Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political
Change,” International Organization 52, no. 4 (1998): 887–917
Figure 1 The Tipping Point of The Norm Life Cycle
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1087
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
After the norm entrepreneurs succeed to influence some state parties to become norm
leaders and adopted the new norm, the norm will arrive at a tipping point. A tipping point
occurs when a minimum of 1/3 of state parties have adopted the new norm (Finnemore &
Sikkink, 1998). After it is achieved, the process of norm emergence can continue to the next
stage: norm cascade, to start the implementation.
2. Norm Cascade
After the tipping point is achieved, usually the countries that have not adopted the
norm will adopt it faster than the other countries did before. It happens because there are
active international socialization and "peer pressure" in international relations (Finnemore &
Sikkink, 1998). The norm entrepreneurs seek to change the violators of the norms to become
the followers by socializing the new norms. While peer pressure influences the country to
follow the norms because other states have adopted the norms.
In response to peer pressure, states are often pushed by the motives of international
legitimacy, conformity, and esteem. International legitimacy becomes an important aspect to
form the perception of domestic legitimacy. In order to get international legitimacy, states
shall interact with other states in international organizations. The international organization
plays an important role in establishing and ensuring state compliance with norms. If any state
does not comply with the norms, the state will potentially get a stigma as a rogue state in
international interaction. That kind of stigma may throw the reputation, trust, and credibility
of the state (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
Besides, there are conformity and esteem motives that usually push actors in the norm
cascade. According to Robert Axelrod, conformity becomes social proof that the state has
adopted and complied with the norms. While the esteem motive is a deeper motive than the
others. With the esteem motive, state leaders can show that they have complied with the norm
so that people can think positively of them
3. Norm Internalization
This stage has a characteristic of the "taken for granted" stage. It means the norms that
are being promoted by actors have already been accepted and implemented. The conformity
with the norms almost occurs automatically (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
The actors in this stage are the governmental entities or the norm experts, such as
policymakers, scientists, police, bureaucrat, and many more. The motive that is needed here
is conformity or the willingness of people to conform to the new norm. The mechanism in
this stage is a habit. After the new norm is accepted, it requires trust to create a habit for the
internalization process. After that, people can influence identity and then norms will change
(Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
METHOD RESEARCH
This article applies a qualitative method and literature study data collection technique.
Qualitative research method refers to "meanings, concepts, definitions, characteristics,
metaphors, symbols, and exposure of everything" (Salim & Syahrum, 2012, p. 28). The study
collects and analyzes non-numerical data. The data source used in this research is from
secondary sources including books, journal articles, websites, online news, magazines, and
others (Scribbrs, 2020). The data is analyzed by organizing the data and choosing which data
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1088
that is important and can be studied, as well as making conclusions so that it can be easily
understood by others.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The Norm Life Cycle of Anti-Racial Discrimination
Norm Emergence
The norm emergence of an international anti-racial discrimination norm is started
with The Declaration of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination on November
20, 1963. The declaration is held by the United Nations to call on the issue of racial
discrimination which violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN General
Assembly, 1963). After that, the United Nations released more actions to eliminate racial
discrimination because it happens in many countries.
One of the actions taken by the United Nations is holding the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) on December
21, 1965 (OHCHR, 1996). Through the mechanism of persuasion, the actors interact each
other in the convention meeting in New York to align the understanding and take action
towards it together. At the same time on December 21, 1965, ICERD is adopted by the UN
General Assembly through the General Assembly Resolution 2016 (XX). Then, this
convention came into force on January 4, 1969, right after the tipping point is achieved when
27 state parties ratified the convention (OHCHR, 1991).
Norm Cascade
In general, the norm cascade of ICERD started after the tipping point of this
convention is achieved on January 4, 1969. The deployment of norms through international
socialization is carried out by the United Nations with the support of networks like Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs) or International Non-Governmental Organizations
(INGOs) as well as other countries that aspires to become norm leaders (Finnemore &
Sikkink, 1998).
In the case of the United States, the ICERD started to institutionalize when the United
States signed the ICERD on September 28, 1966. After signing, many local demonstrations
were held in order to push the U.S. government to ratify it immediately. For example, SNCC
(Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee) urged the implementation of ICERD to the
U.S. government by demonstrating and sending a position paper to the United Nations in
1967 which stated the conditions of racial discrimination in the United States (ABA, 2020).
After facing much pressure, both national and international, the United States ratify
ICERD on October 21, 1994, under the administration of Bill Clinton. At that time, the U.S.
Senate had just reached 2/3 votes in terms of the ICERD (Congress Government, 2021). In
ratifying ICERD, the United States declared its willingness to be the norm leader (ABA,
2020). The statement aims to increase its international legitimacy and esteem as one of the
world leaders.
However, the United States ratified the ICERD with proposing Reservations,
Understandings, Declarations (RUDs). RUDs are some rights of the state parties in the
United Nations to modify or clarify the text of a treaty or change its legal consequences for
the countries that ratify it (Swaine et al., 2015, p. 4). It gives the rights to protect the state’s
sovereignty. The RUDs are submitted to the UN General Assembly to be considered on its
suitability for the purpose of the convention. When the RUDs are agreed upon by the UN
General Assembly, the RUDs will be applied to the country proposed (ABA, 2020).
The United States ratified ICERD by proposing the following RUDs:
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1089
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
1. Reservations:
The United States proposed three reservations, including:
a. The United States will not accept any obligation through the application of laws or other
measures under articles 4 and 7 that potentially restrict freedom of speech, expression and
association. It is because the Constitution and the United States Law protect those rights.
b. The United States will not accept any obligations through the application of laws or other
measures under Article 1 of personal conduct due to the rights of individual privacy and
freedom from the government interference.
c. The United States concerning Article 22 and states that there is no dispute involving the
United States can be brought into the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice
before the United States approved the specific consent about it.
2. Understandings:
The United States understands that this convention will be implemented by the Federal
Government.
3. Declarations:
The United States declare that the convention is ratified as a not self-executing agreement
or do not apply alone.
Since the RUDs were approved by the UN General Assembly, it means that the
United States decides to not fully adopt the new norms on anti-racial discrimination under
ICERD. The United States claims that the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Law, which
includes the Civil Rights Act 1964, Voting Rights Act 1965, and others, have embodied
the norms or provisions contained in ICERD (ABA, 2020). Thus, the United States feels
unnecessary to add some new norms to its domestic laws. Therefore, racial discrimination
problems will be first addressed with the U.S. domestic law, not ICERD. If at any time
there is a legal case that cannot be handled by the U.S. Court, then the convention
mechanism can be applied by the UN.
Norm Internalization
After going through the norm cascade, the next stage is norm internalization. In this
stage, the actors or agents of norms who play a more dominant role are domestic actors. The
actors are usually experts, governmental entities, and law. The stage is characterized by being
"taken for granted" in implementing these norms. With the "taken for granted" characteristic,
the mechanism at this stage is a habit or a repeated action in conforming to the norm
(Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).
The process of internalizing anti-racial discrimination norms, especially ICERD, in
the United States has begun after the ratification. About 25 years after the United States ran
the internalization, racial discrimination against African-Americans remains high in various
regions. This phenomenon shows that there are obstacles faced by the United States in
internalizing the norms. The obstacles can be traced from these three aspects in this stage:
1. Actors
In international relations, ICERD is the norm that countries have agreed on to
overcome racial discrimination. The United States ratified it on October 21, 1994, by
proposing several RUDs (OHCHR, 2021b). RUDs are things that are legally allowed as long
as they are in accordance with the objectives of the convention, but RUDs can indirectly limit
the efforts of actors to internalize norms. As previously mentioned in the norm cascade, there
are several RUDs proposed by the United States, one of them is reservations under the
provisions of article 4 and article 7 of the ICERD.
Article 4 of ICERD contains the prohibition for all propaganda and all organizations
that are founded on the ideology of a particular racial superiority and which promote racial
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1090
hatred (OHCHR, 2021a). Meanwhile, article 7 of ICERD contains a call for states parties to
take immediate and effective steps, especially in education and culture to combat the
prejudice leads to racial discrimination (OHCHR, 2021a). The reason for the United States to
submit reservations on these articles is to protect the rights of freedom of speech, expression,
and association as stated in the Constitution and the U.S Law (OHCHR, 2021a).
The principles of freedom of speech, expression, and association in the United States
are one of the fundamental values. However, the reservations on article 4 and article 7 to
protect these freedoms end up biasing the process of internalizing anti-racial discrimination
norms. Under article 4 of ICERD which prohibits propaganda and organizations that promote
racial hatred, the principles of freedom of speech, expression, and association may result in
hate speech being allowed. This is because hate speech is basically speech. If there is a legal
case that claims the existence of hate speech, while it has not led to a hate crime, then the
hate speech is still within the scope of the freedom of speech and expression which is
protected in Article 1 of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (American Library
Association, 2017).
This can be proven by examples of hate speech and hate rhetoric done by the
president of the United States, Donald Trump. When there was the case of George Floyd's
death due to police brutality, President Trump called the Black Lives Matter’s demonstrators
as terrorists, anarchists, and thugs (NBC news, 2020). Besides, Trump ever called the Corona
virus as Chinese flu and Kung-flu as a slur to Chinese people (The Guardian, 2020).
In addition, the right of association can give rise to the meaning that all organizations,
including racial hate organizations or organizations with white supremacist ideology, can
exist in the United States. It is also because they are protected by the U.S. Constitution. The
police will not conduct further investigations or action if: no threats or advocacy of violence
are found, the organizations are not found to have the actual capacity to carry out the
dangerous actions proclaimed, and their actions do not have the potential to violate federal
law (American Library Association, 2017).
This can be proven by the existence of white supremacy organizations in the United
States, for example, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). The Ku Klux Klan is an extreme right-wing
and racist organization based on white supremacist ideology (Britannica, 2021a). Based on
data from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Ku Klux Klan exists in several states
in 2020. See the map below,
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1091
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
Source: SPLC. “Ku Klux Klan.” splcenter.org. Last modified 2020.
https://www.splcenter.org/hate-map?ideology=kkk.
Figure 2 Ku Klux Klan Map
From the map image, it is known that in 2020 there were 25 Ku Klux Klan
organizations standing in the United States. The areas that currently have an active Ku Klux
Klan organization as seen from the image are Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Texas,
Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Maryland
and Virginia (SPLC, 2020).
The Ku Klux Klan and other extreme right-wing organizations often hold parades to
express their ideology. They also often participate in black people's parades to disturb them.
One of the parades that was held by the KKK was the Roxboro Parade, North Carolina in
2016. The agenda was to celebrate the election of Donald Trump as a president. The KKK is
proud of Trump's election because Trump brings agenda which are in line with their aims,
such as immigration restrictions and tackling terrorism both domestic and international (The
Huffington Post, 2016).
In the parade, participants waved the United States flag, the Confederate flag, the
Donald Trump's flag, and conveyed "White Power" and racist things that sparked other
people's emotions (The Times-News, 2016). The polices as professionals working in the legal
bureaucracy who is in charge of guarding the parade saw the insults against certain races.
However, the police did not stop the parade, because they did not have the official authority
to stop the parade that is protected by the freedom of speech, expression, and association
(The Huffington Post, 2016).
Besides, the United States also makes reservations under Article 7 of the ICERD
regarding measures in education and culture to reduce racial prejudice (OHCHR, 2021a). The
reason for this reservation is still the same, which is to protect the freedom of speech,
expression, and association. The United States does not want the measures in Article 7 to be
determined by the UN, especially the CERD (Committee of the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination) without the freedom of the domestic actors. With the reservations in article 7,
teachers in the United States have the freedom to teach what materials are important to be
learned by the students as long as it is aligned with the existing curriculum.
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1092
However, the protection of freedom of speech, expression, and association in the
reservation of Article 7 has gone contradictive by government policies in several states. In
2021, several states enacted legislation and took administrative action to abolish curricula
related to Critical Race Theory or those related to discussing specific concepts of race and
gender in public schools (BBC, 2021). From the latest data in July 2021, 28 states in the
United States have legislated restrictions on education related to race and gender. Examples
of such states are Arizona, Iowa, Tennessee, South Carolina, Texas, Oklahoma, and others
(Chalkbeat, 2021). States that decide to abolish race-related curricula argued that teaching
critical race theory potentially embarrasses the white community for its past and ultimately
divide the United States into racial groups (AP news, 2021).
Because of those policies, many teachers in public schools are afraid to speak and
explain things related to race in the classroom due to its risky nature. In the legislation,
teachers who are judged teaching improperly about race or saying that racism is ingrained in
the system in the United States can be legally prosecuted with suspension, dismissal, and
reduced funding for the school concerned (AP news, 2021). This is seen by many teachers as
oppression of free speech.
In Oklahoma, a coalition of teachers and civil rights groups such as the ACLU have
sued the state of Oklahoma in the federal state over the House Bill of 1775 (US news, 2021).
The lawsuit states that the decision to remove Critical Race Theory material in public schools
limits the teaching of racism and gender to students (AP news, 2021). In addition, the
decision violates the teachers and the students’ freedom of speech, denies students of color
and women from studying their history (US news, 2021).
Apart from the reservations in article 4 and article 7 of ICERD, the United States also
declare that the ratifications are not self-executing (Congress.Gov, 1994). The purpose of a
not self- executing agreement is that an international agreement or convention cannot be
enforced directly in the U.S. domestic court because it needs to be converted into domestic
law first (Gise, 1998, p. 2297). Therefore, in handling cases such as a claim to the U.S. court
that the provisions of ICERD have been violated due to racial discrimination, the U.S. court
cannot act or make decisions regarding punishment or anything against the perpetrator and
victim, except the claim also has implications for the U.S. domestic law.
The declaration for not self-executing is also similar to the United States reservation
at the third point in the U.S. Senate ratification text which refers to Article 22 of ICERD. The
article contains that before any case or dispute involving the United States can be submitted
to the International Court of Justice, it requires special approval from the United States in
each case (Congress Government, 2021). As a result of the RUDs, the international anti-racial
discrimination norm, ICERD, cannot do much to decrease racial discrimination in the United
States.
2. Motives
According to Sikkink and Finnemore, the motive for the internalization of norms is
conformity (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998). In this case, each actor in the internalization of
norms needs the same motive to comply to the new norms so that the goals of internalization
can be achieved. In fact, the motive to conform to anti-racial discrimination norms is
hampered by the White Supremacy that has persisted in the United States. The persistence of
White Supremacy, consciously or unconsciously, affected the conformity motive needed to
internalize the anti-racial discrimination norms. It is because the society is divided into racial
groups: in-group (white racist) and out-group (other than white people, in this case, African-
Americans).
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1093
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
There is some evidence that racial discrimination due to white supremacy has
occurred against the African-American racial community in the United States. One of them
can be seen in the use of weapons by police in police operations in the United States.
A scientific journal, Nature, presents data from Mark Hoekstra’s research that analyzes the
police use of force based on race. He compared responses to the 911 emergency call sourced
from the data of more than two million calls in two cities in 2020 (Nature, 2020). The results
of his research can be seen in this figure below,
Source: Nature. “Brutality and Racial bias: What the Data Say.” Nature, 2020.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z.
Figure 3 Police Answers to the 911 Call
Based on the graph, it shows that the greater the number of African Americans in an
area, the greater the number of white police officers carrying guns into the area rather than
the number of black police officers carrying guns. It also concludes that white police officers
who are sent to conduct operations in African-American or black communities fired five
times more guns than black police officers sent to the same area on similar calls (Nature,
2020).
3. Mechanisms
The mechanism for internalizing norms is a habit or a repetitive action to conform to
the new norm (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998). The mechanism in this context is how the actors
of internalizing norms in the United States carry out various ways or actions in the domestic
sphere to implement norms so that these norms can become a habit. One way that can be
done by the state government is to issue laws and regulations regarding the prohibition of
racial discrimination.
Looking at the issue of racial discrimination in the United States, especially against
the African-American race, the mechanism for internalizing norms carried out by
internalization actors in the United States has been carried out quite well. The United States
has issued laws and regulations in the effort to overcome racial discrimination in its country.
The mechanisms that has been done by the government in the form of the issuance of
legislation can be seen in the following table,
Table 1 Racial Discrimination Legislation
Era
Issuance Year
Legislation
Content
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1094
Pre-ICERD
1865
13
th
Amendment
Abolishing slavery in the
United States
1866
14
th
Amendment
Granting citizenship status
to African Americans
(black people)
1870
15
th
Amendment
Granting the right to vote
to all citizens of the
United States (The first
time African Americans
have the right to vote)
1964
Civil Rights Act 1964
Prohibiting discrimination
in the field of work
1965
Voting Rights Act
1965
Prohibiting discrimination
in elections
After the
ICERD
Signing in
1966
1968
Civil Rights Act
1968/Fair Housing Act
1968
Prohibiting discrimination
in housing
After the
ICERD
ratification in
1994
2013
Amendment to the
Voting Rights Act
1965 under section
4(b) and section 5
Removing section 4 (b)
and Section 5 of the
Voting Rights Act 1965
regarding the requirement
to obtain preclearance on
any changes to election
procedures in areas that
have been designated by
the United States federal
government as areas
prone to racial
discrimination.
Source: Patterson, T. E. (2010). The American Democracy (M. Ryan (ed.); 10 ed.). McGraw
Hill.
From the table above, it can be seen that the United States has implemented a
mechanism or method to overcome racial discrimination even before the ICERD was held in
1965. From the first, there are 13th Amendment, 14th Amendment, 15th Amendment, Civil
Rights Act 1964, Voting Rights Act 1965, and Civil Rights Act 1968. The United States as an
independent country since 1776 has had self-awareness of the problems.
However, these laws and regulations have become less than perfect with the existence
of other legal decisions or policies that affect the effectiveness of the laws that have been
issued. One of the legal decisions that have an indirect negative impact on African Americans
is the 1965 Voting Rights Act Amendment in section 4(b) and section 5 which was passed in
2013.
The decision to abolish section 4(b) and section 5 which contains the "preclearance"
requirement for any changes to the general election procedure in areas that have been
designated by the United States federal government as areas prone to racial discrimination,
resulting in less supervision from the federal government. As a result, racial discrimination
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1095
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
practices in elections can still be carried out by some individuals and ultimately undermine
the norm internalization process in the United States. This article argues that racial
discrimination continues to occur in the United States because of the obstacles faced in the
process of internalizing anti-racial discrimination norms. This is in contrast to previous
research which has explained implicit bias and prejudice as reasons why racial
discrimination, especially against African Americans, persists in the United States in the 21st
century.
This research can reflect the problem of racial discrimination that also occurs in
Indonesia. Since the founding of the state of Indonesia, Indonesia has not escaped the
problem of racial discrimination that occurs against certain races or ethnicities in Indonesia.
One example is the riot or major conflict between Chinese and Javanese ethnic in Surakarta
in 1972 to 1998 (Atmaja & Sodiq, 2017, p. 66). The conflict occurred because one of the
factors was the gap in economic welfare between ethnic groups. The incident caused great
chaos and claimed many lives. Currently, inequality in the field of public life is still
experienced by some Indonesians. Economic inequality and lack of access to education, for
example, are experienced by people in eastern Indonesia, such as Papua and its surroundings.
Therefore, if the issue of racial discrimination is not immediately addressed gradually by the
government and community support, it can have a negative impact on human life.
CONCLUSION
This research finds that the reason why racial discrimination against African-
Americans persists in the United States of America in this 21st century is that the process of
internalizing anti-racial discrimination norms, especially adopted from ICERD, has not been
fully implemented. There are obstacles in all aspects at the stage of norm internalization.
First, from the aspect of actor, the actors' efforts to internalize the norm are hampered by the
RUDs in the ratification of ICERD. RUDs can change the legal consequences of the
conventions or treaties. Therefore, the existence of RUDs limits many aspects in the
application of ICERD provisions in the United States. Second, from the aspect of motives,
the conformity motive to comply with the norm that is needed in the norm internalization
process is hampered by the existence of the white supremacy ideology in some areas in the
United States. The existence of the white supremacy ideology and white supremacy
organizations, such as the Ku Klux Klan, causes the division of the community identity into
in-group (white) and out-group (other than white, including black or African-American)
groups in the United States. Third, from the aspect of mechanisms, there are certain legal
decisions or policies which indirectly interfere with the implementation of the mechanism in
the form of laws and regulations made by the United States before, even before signing the
ICERD. For example, the decision of the 1965 Voting Rights Amendment Act to remove
sections 4 (b) and section 5. The decision resulted in the potential for re-emergence of racial
discrimination practices in state or local elections due to less supervision from the federal
government.
REFERENCES
ABA. (2020). The United States’ Hollow Commitment to Eradicating Global Racial
Discrimination. Human Rights Magazine.
American Library Association. (2017). Hate Speech and Hate Crime.
AP news. (2021). Tennessee Bans Teaching Critical Race Theory in Schools.
BBC. (2020). George Floyd death: Why US protests are so powerful this time.
BBC. (2021). Critical Race Theory: The Concept Dividing the US.
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin | http://devotion.greenvest.co.id
1096
Bertrand, Marianne, & Mullainathan, Sendhil. (2004). “Are Emily and Greg More
Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market
Discrimination.” The American Economic Review, 94(4), 991–1013.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003071709-20
Black Lives Matter. (2020). About Black Lives Matter.
Britannica. (2021a). Ku Klux Klan.
Britannica. (2021b). Transatlantic Slave Trade.
Chalkbeat. (2021). Efforts to Restrict Teaching About Racism and Bias Have Multiplied
Across the U.S.
Congress Government. (2021). International Convention on The Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination.
Finnemore, Martha, & Sikkink, Kathryn. (1998). International Norm Dynamics and Political
Change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.
https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789
Gise, Robin H. (1998). Rethinking McClesky v. Kemp: How U.S. Ratification of the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Provides a Remedy for Claims of Racial Disparity in Death Penalty Cases. Fordham
International Law Journal, 22(5), 2270–2323.
Nature. (2020). Brutality and Racial bias: What the Data Say. Nature, 583, 22–24.
NBC news. (2020). “Not by accident”: False “thug” Narratives Have Long Been Used to
Discredit Civil Rights Movements.
OHCHR. (1991). Fact Sheet No. 12 , The Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination.
OHCHR. (1996). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination.
OHCHR. (2021a). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination.
OHCHR. (2021b). Status of Treaties.
Pager, Devah, & Shepherd, Hana. (2008). The Sociology of Discrimination: Racial
Discrimination in Employment, Housing, Credit, and Consumer Markets. Annual
Review of Sociology, 34, 181–209.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131740
Salim, & Syahrum. (2012). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Citapustaka Media.
Scribbrs. (2020). What is Qualitative Research? Methods & Examples.
SPLC. (2020). Ku Klux Klan.
Swaine, Edward, Chertoff, Emily, Crootof, Rebecca, Dominguez, Lara, Hessel, Daniel,
Manfredi, Zachary, Shu, Julia, & Tzeng, Peter. (2015). General Principles Regarding
the Legal Validity of RUDs.
The Guardian. (2020). Donald Trump Calls Covid-19 “kung flu” at Tulsa Rally.
The Huffington Post. (2016). Ku Klux Klan Members Drive Through North Carolina Town
To Hail Trump Victory.
The New York Times. (2021). George Floyd Protests: A Timeline.
UN General Assembly. (1963). United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms
of Racial Discrimination. https://doi.org/10.18356/c34284ee-en
US news. (2021). Federal Lawsuit Poses First Challenge to Ban on Teaching Critical Race
Theory.
Washington Post. (2019, April). A Symbol of Slavery and Survival. Washingtonpost.Com.
Yonita, Sonya Rino, & Darmawan, Arif. (2021). The Role of Anonymous Cyberactivism in
the Black Lives Matter Movement in the United States (2014-2020). Insignia Journal of
Vol. 3, No. 11, 2022
[ The Internalization of Anti-Racial Discrimination Norm in the
United States of America]
1097
http://devotion.greenvest.co.id|Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin
International Relations, 1–15(Januari), 1–15.
Copyright holders:
Honest Dody Molasy, Citra Tunjung Sari Samsudin (2022)
First publication right:
Devotion - Journal of Research and Community Service
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International