# data[].attributes.body
President Biden has stated that the United States is not a racist country, however, Vice President Harris contradicted President Biden. An American sociologist, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, states that there can be systematic racism without having any racists.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
South Carolina Republican Sen. Tim Scott shocked many people when, in response to President Joe Biden's congressional address, he stated that " America is not a racist country ." He admitted that he himself had experienced " the pain of discrimination, " and noted, " I know what it feels like to be pulled over for no reason, to be followed around a store while I'm shopping. " When asked o n ABC's Good Morning America the following day , Vice President Kamala Harris s eemed to agree with Scott when she s aid , "I don't think America is a racist country." Yet immediately following this sentence she quickly pointed out , "But we also do have to speak truth about the history of racism in our country and its existence today."

As Soledad O'Brien said, "It sounds like a racist country to me," in to Scott-but it seemingly applies to comments by Harris as well. President Biden, who seemed to not pull any punches during his speech, stated, "W e have a real chance to root out systemic racism that America ." However, Biden appeared to his remarks on The Today Show to align more with Harris and Scott (to a certain degree) by noting that slavery and Jim Crow laws had a cost.

It is almost as if simply saying America is not racist, but then turning the other cheek and saying it is racist in subtler terms and that racist things have been done to you makes it ok. It is confusing to Americans and the international community. To supporters, these comments are disappointing . To others, they were shocking. For me , the cognitive dissonance of some of our elected leaders is real and explainable . The re is an oversimplification of racism in America, because as sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva notes, there can be systemic racism without racists.

W hen a person critique s America for the racism that i s deeply embedded in our social institutions, some feel they are being personally attacked. This is because deep down they realize that they benefit from unearned assets associated with whiteness. Scott, Harris, and Biden recognize this and try to balance these varying perspectives as they worry about voters nationally and in a state like South Carolina.

Recently, a at a city council meeting had a meltdown when trying to explain why she does not want critical race theory taught in her children's school. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said that s ystemic racism as a concept is " a bunch of horse manure ." So, not only has Florida made it legal to harm people protesting, but he banned teaching critical race theory in schools. For a deeper dive on critical race theory , people should read the work of sociologists Victor and Ted , who lay out why DeSantis' perspective is problematic .

I conducted with Matt Hunt on what predicts who believes they are middle class. For education, income, and occupational prestige, Black people are less likely to identify as middle class compared to whites with comparable levels of these socioeconomic outcomes. Why? It is because social class is not just about what a person looks like on paper , but how people experience social class in everyday life and t he deference that one receives for their socioeconomic status. Black people are less likely to get that deference, while white people are often afforded more. It is so commonplace for white people that some cannot fathom living without it. This is because many white people, particularly white people with lower levels of education and income, realize that comes with a premium that extends beyond economics to include cultural and social capital. As Pr esident Lyndon Johnson said, " If you can the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and h e'll empty his pockets for you."

Harris and Scotts' comments are puzzling at a broader level as well considering how much of a collective memory their experiences with racism are- Harris reliving her systemic experiences with bussing and Scott recounting the nearly 20 times he has been pulled over by police, where being an elected official potentially made the interaction worse.

These stories acknowledge that life is different if you are Black, and unfortunately systemic racism seems to ripple through our social institutions and into our daily social interactions, whether in Congress or at a coffee shop down the street from the Capitol. These type s of experiences-racialized cuts and hurdles- have a cumulative effect on . Sociologist s Pam Jackson and Jason Cummings' research documents that middle-class Blacks have worse health profiles than working-class whites. They attribute this difference to the daily racialized trauma experienced in predominately white environments like work and neighborhood settings.

Systemically, we know that Black people compared to whites are more likely to attend schools with less funding per student, less likely to obtain a job because of our "Black-sounding" name or even when attending an Ivy League university , less likely to obtain a (even when having the same credit score ), have their homes appraised for equitable value, more likely to experience pregnancy complications and maternal mortality , and more likely to have contact with police and the criminal justice system .

Systemic racism inhibits (rather than prohibits like in the past) people's ability to actualize all aspects of the American Dream. This occurs  even for highly-educated Black people with high incomes and no criminal record. In fact, research documents that white people with a criminal record are more likely to get called back for a job than Black people without one.

Research documents that hard work (or lack thereof ), intellect, or criminality do not explain these outcomes. Instead, it is the embedded deeply within our social institutions' , rules, regulations, and laws that segment people's experiences along racial lines. It is the same for gender. Women can achieve but have a much harder time doing so. If not, America would have had a woman vice president and speaker of the House sitting behind the p resident long before 2021.

What people do not seem to realize is that being upwardly mobile does not negate encountering racist hurdles on the pathway to success. Our current system is set up for some people to have to jump over hurdles to succeed, while others get to simply run to the finish line without those sa me racial hurdles. Rather , it is about whether the pathways to success are equitable . This is what America says it is: an equitable democracy. People are pushing for America to reach its true ideal s and the only way this can properly occur is acknowledging the systemic barriers that prevent us from getting there. Moreover, it is not that racial progress has not been made. It is that the United States has yet to make enough progress. In this regard, comment s of our top elected officials are disappointing, yet predictable.

Black people who succeed often walk on pins and needles because they realize that their success, and more so maintaining it, is precarious.   As a result, some Black people aim to make white pe ople feel comfortable. Many of us are mostly socialized to do so. I t is often a survival strategy for our lives during police encounters or economic survival in boardrooms. Some of us who succeed may experience "survivor's remorse" because we are some of the few to "make it." We actually embody the American Dream and become the in-person example to people who do not want to admit that systemic racism exists. We may even convince ourselves that racism is more prominent on the individual level than the institutional level. We simultaneously represent racial progress but are also most likely to be subjugated to racial discrimination because of the predominately white spaces we are embedded within. We experience a chronic form of double-consciousness   and admitting as such can often lead us to being conscious of the slow death we often experience through the cumulative racist cuts and hurdles we encounter.   The American Dream being achievable for a few does not absolve the system and an imperfect union, even when some of those successful people try to rationalize systemic racism away.

In most instances: When Black parents worry about their straight-A student's traffic encounters with the police more than they do a potential accident, this is because of experiences with racism. When a Black couple is about to have a baby and has to think consciously about what hospital to deliver in so they can obtain equitable care, this is racism. When a Black parent worries about their child attending a prestigious university outside of an urban area, this is often because of the racism they worry about them encountering driving to the school and even once physically on the campus of the school. And even more urban universities are not absolved from .

Systemic racism is not simply a thing of the past. It is up close and personal in the present.

R acism may be no more transparent in an institution with the least representative racial progress like the Senate. There have only been 11 Black senators in roughly 232 years. Clearly, the Senate is the exact space we need people with the courage to say the blunt, honest truth about our nation's past and present. Only then can we actualize a future where systemic racism does not exist. It is imperative for a , reconciliation, and reparative process to commence. This starts with atoning for the enslavement of of Africans whose descendants contin uously fall systemically behind , whether they end up being the lone Black Republican senator or a Black police officer who might have the power to pull him over.   We must have the courage to speak truth to power and one of the places it starts is in Congress.   "If not now, then when?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
South Carolina Republican Sen. Tim Scott shocked many people when, in response to President Joe Biden's congressional address, he stated that " America is not a racist country ." He admitted that he himself had experienced " the pain of discrimination, " and noted, " I know what it feels like to be pulled over for no reason, to be followed around a store while I'm shopping.

# data[].attributes.body
The election of two biracial politicians will not change the problem but it can be a possible symbol. There a few people stated to be killed by police who are of African American descent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Greetings Recast family! It just keeps happening. Even with a renewed push for criminal justice reform on the federal level, Black and brown people continue to die at the hands of police with astonishing frequency. On Monday, loved ones laid to rest Andrew Brown Jr., who was killed by sheriff's deputies in Elizabeth City, N.C., last month. Police have yet to release the complete body camera footage. And on April 19, Mario Gonzalez died in the Los Angeles area. In this case, police released the video. Gonzalez did not seem to pose a threat to officers, one of whom appears to use a knee to pin him down for several minutes. Gonzalez gasps for air - and later dies. Is there any end in sight? Let's jump in.
"America is not a racist country."

That's the phrase du jour parroted by the nation's highest elected officials, thanks to South Carolina's Tim Scott.
Now, any politician facing the cameras has to answer the question: Is America a racist country?
And when answering that question, inexplicably, the nation's top two elected officials and the dean of South Carolina's congressional delegation all follow the Republican's script.

"No, I don't think America is a racist country," Vice President Kamala Harris told ABC News, adding, "but we also do have to speak truth about the history of racism in our country and its existence today."

Then there's President Joe Biden: "No, I don't think the American people are racist," Biden said last week. "But I think after 400 years African Americans have been left in a position where they're so far behind the eight ball in terms of education, health, in terms of opportunity."

And right on cue, there was Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), the House Majority Whip: "We should stop arguing about whether or not this is a racist country. It is not," , adding if it were, then neither former President Obama or Harris would have been elected to their respective offices.

None of it makes sense.

The election of two biracial politicians to the highest offices in the land doesn't eradicate the racial biases that permeate so many facets of American life - from education, to the criminal justice system, to health disparities to access to capital.
Even Scott admitted in an interview over the weekend that he's been stopped by police for Driving While Black, by his count, 18 times.
So with all that, how is it that nearly three quarters of Americans agreed the guilty verdict of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was the correct outcome, but America's top officials seem incapable of holding a nuanced conversation about the role systemic racism plays in our country?

Or are Democrats siding with Scott for pragmatic reasons?

The party is desperate not to squander the momentum from the Chauvin verdict as it pushes for a federal police reform overhaul. Leaders know that with slim margins in the House and a 50-50 tie in the Senate, any reform has to go through Scott.

And if the filibuster remains in place, the only way to achieve that is to keep him engaged - and remain hopeful that he can persuade nine other Republicans to join him.

We'll keep tabs to see how it all plays out. But one thing is clear: A robust discussion of American-style racism, at least among current elected officials, is not happening anytime soon.

All the best,
The Recast Team

Power dynamics are changing. With The Recast, you'll get a twice-weekly breakdown of how race and identity are the DNA of American politics and policy. Stay tuned for fresh analysis, scoops and new voices.

Was this forwarded to you by a friend? Subscribe to the newsletter here.

A newly released poll shows pretty stark divides between Black and white adults on policing.

The Benenson Strategy Group survey found that a majority of Americans don't consider police highly integral to public safety. They'd like to redirect funds to other areas, like youth recreation and deescalation training.

But Black adults were more likely than their white counterparts to say it's "very important" police are filmed by bystanders, use body cameras and held more accountable for excessive force.

By comparison, white adults were more likely than Black respondents to say it's "very important" police should be well-funded and armed.

President Biden urged lawmakers to pass police reform by the anniversary of George Floyd's murder later this month. Less than 24 hours later, Scott, Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.), and Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and others were negotiating behind closed doors.

While both sides remain optimistic a deal can get done, those reading the tea leaves on police reform talks are less bullish. Monica Bell teaches at Yale and has written extensively on sociology, law and policing. Isaiah McKinnon is a former chief of the Detroit Police Department and also formerly served as that city's deputy mayor.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
THE RECAST: What did you make of all these politicians declaring America was not racist? Do you think Democrats wanted to provide cover so talks could continue on police reform? Or is it that if you are a high-ranking elected official, you simply can't come out and say America is racist?

MONICA BELL: I think both are true. Across the spectrum, saying that America is racist is read by people saying that Americans are racist. We don't have a good way in our society of thinking about the difference between structural and systemic racism and individual racism. This is the big problem. So all of them have to separate themselves from that narrative. And so, yeah, I think it plays two roles. [The other] is to try to get Tim Scott to move and to provide cover on some of the police reform stuff.

THE RECAST: Is police reform possible without a change in qualified immunity? Certainly progressives and activists that are trying to push lawmakers on this and likely won't be satisfied with anything less than altering qualified immunity.

ISAIAH MCKINNON: I don't know if this Congress is going to approve removing qualified immunity. I think that the unions and others will be so powerful they won't let that go.

MONICA BELL : I understand why for some progressives qualified immunity is a sticking point. I would just encourage us to not fetishize qualified immunity and to instead come back with a bolder agenda when the politics are ready for it.

In May 2020, Intel announced ambitions for the next decade to accelerate the integration of responsible, inclusive, and sustainable practices and innovative approaches in its operations and supply chain, across the technology industry, and beyond. This week, Intel released its 2020-21 Corporate Responsibility Report which provides detail on Intel's 2030 RISE strategy and goals, including progress made since they were launched a year ago. Read more at https://www.intel.com/responsibility

THE RECAST: Do you think the politics of this moment that it's possible to get Scott and nine other Republicans to sign on to a bill to pass a police overhaul bill?

MONICA BELL: I think it is possible. There is a narrative that is robust right now that to support police reform is the same thing as supporting and being a part of Black Lives Matter, which is the same thing as hating the police. I think Tim Scott needs to work to try to separate out those views [for his colleagues]. And the real question is whether enough Republican senators have the room to be able to adopt [that] sort of message.

ISAIAH MCKINNON: I don't think there's a meaningful path. I think if they were serious, they would look at having a national standard of law enforcement agencies.

I hope that this is a true calling for change in America. But when we see people saying there's no racism ... it'll slide back under the covers and nothing will happen.

The fastest-growing and yet, the most poorly represented: Meet the Asian American and Pacific Islander population.

Our very own Rishika Dugyala got the exclusive on a new report from the Reflective Democracy Campaign. It reveals that - as of mid-2020 - AAPI people account for just 0.9 percent of all elected leaders, but make up 6.1 percent of the U.S. population.

Even among states with high Asian concentrations (think New York, California, Nevada), representation drops off. There's only one state that can claim its share of AAPI elected leaders is nearly equivalent to its population: Hawaii.

When it comes to the criminal justice sector, the lack of AAPI representation is ... particularly stark. Overpolicing and deportation are key issues for Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders and Southeast Asians - but by mid-2020, just 0.24 percent of elected prosecutors and 0.07 percent of county sheriffs identified as AAPI.

Given ongoing conversations of police reform, the rise of AAPI political sway and the rise of pandemic-related hate crimes, the report is a step toward more data transparency on a much-discussed and wide-ranging demographic group, said Brenda Choresi Carter, the Reflective Democracy Campaign's director.

"Voters, regardless of party identification, really want to see reflective leadership," Choresi Carter said. "Political power has been concentrated in the hands of white men in the United States since the very beginning. And I think we are seeing the limitations of that."
Read more here.
Groups Push Biden Administration on "Good Data" - Nearly a dozen racial justice advocacy groups (including the NAACP, the Asian and Pacific Islander American Health Forum and the National Conference of American Indians) sent a proposal to the White House on Monday. They want the Biden administration to form an Equitable Data Working Group to adopt standard definitions of race/ethnicity across federal agencies, encourage community involvement in data collection and mandate transparency at levels of government.

Without this data, they argue, "localities, states and even the federal government are less able and less accountable for responding appropriately to the full scope of the problem."

What's the play? Dems Confused on Voting Rights Strategy - Constrained by both the filibuster rules in a 50-50 split Senate and disagreement within their own ranks, Democrats set out to chart a path forward on voting rights legislation. POLITICO's Burgess Everett and Marianne LeVine report some are questioning the strategy moving forward.

A McAuliffe Win Means Thwarting History - Terry McAuliffe is opening a wide lead in his quest to be the first governor to win a second term in Virginia since 1973. POLITICO's Maya King reports: "Democratic primary voters in Virginia have prioritized pragmatism over racial representation." In other words, if any other Democrat were to topple McAuliffe for the party's nomination - in particular two who many feel have the chops to become the nation's first Black female governor - time is running out to make a move. The party primary is June 8.

Caitlyn Weighs In - Former Olympian and reality-TV star Caitlyn Jenner raised some eyebrows over the weekend for her stance on transgender girls participating in amateur sports. POLITICO's Quint Forgey reports her remarks come less than two weeks after Jenner announced her candidacy to challenge California's Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. She's not backing down in the face of controversy, either.

On this day 60 years ago, May 4, 1961, the original Freedom Riders - 13 white and Black activists from the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) and Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC ) departed Washington, D.C. The group, which included the young John Lewis, was on a mission to test whether states in the Jim Crow South were adhering to the Boynton v. Virginia Supreme Court decision that ruled segregation of busing terminals and other ports of interstate transportation was unconstitutional.

Among those "tests" the Freedom Riders would conduct were to use whites-only waiting rooms and lunch counters, and for whites and Blacks to sit together on the bus as it drove through the South.

Intel has a long history of transparency, driving global impact and value through corporate responsibility as well as focusing on integrating environmental, social and governance strategies across its business. In May 2020, the company announced ambitionsfor the next decade to accelerate the integration of responsible, inclusive, and sustainable practices and innovative approaches in its operations and supply chain, across the technology industry, and beyond. This week, Intel released its 2020-21 Corporate Responsibility Report which provides detail on this strategy, including progress made over the past year. For example, Intel increased renewable energy use from 71% to 82% and conserved 7.1 billion gallons of water in 2020. Additionally, it launched the Alliance for Global Inclusion to drive collective impact in four key areas: leadership representation, inclusive language, inclusive product development, and STEM readiness in underserved communities. Initial members include Intel, Dell Technologies, Nasdaq, NTT DATA, and Snap Inc. Learn more at https://www.intel.com/responsibility

The Freedom Rides grew in size and at one point had more than 400 participants. Angry white mobs attacked them with rocks and bricks. They even firebombed a bus.

In Rock Hill, S.C., Lewis and two others were beaten for entering a whites-only waiting room. Nearly half a century later, one of the white attackers, Elwin Wilson, apologized to Lewis.

The American Constitution Society is holding an event exploring "our Constitution's establishment of a racial caste system." The panel, "Founding Failures: Reckoning with Our Constitution's Generational Impacts on Health and Well-Being," starts at 3 p.m. ET today. Sign up here.

The Atlantic is out with its second installment of a multiyear project called " Inheritance," which focuses on Black contributions to shaping American culture. Two features explore the future of Black history and what lessons can be learned from the nation's first Black inhabitants.

We recommended Jhumpa Lahiri's new book a few weeks ago - but we're back to recommend this profile of the iconic author by BuzzFeed's Scaachi Koul.

Check out this project from NBC News with generations of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders talking about the discrimination they've experienced. It attaches faces to names, to stories - and is well worth the read.

For this month's issue of Harper's Bazaar, Yo-Yo Ma curated a playlist themed around beauty. It's an eclectic mix of classical (Pablo Casals playing Bach), country (Rhiannon Giddens) and classic (Stevie Wonder). Worth a listen, for sure.

We're big fans of Lion Babe, the musical duo helmed by Jillian Hervey (daughter of Vanessa Williams) and Lucas Goodman. (So good when you're on deadline and you need some musical inspiration to bang things out.) Their latest song, "Frida Kahlo," is one big ol' dose of happy. So is the video.

Finally, we know the week *just* started but... ugh Zoom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Greetings Recast family! It just keeps happening. Even with a renewed push for criminal justice reform on the federal level, Black and brown people continue to die at the hands of police with astonishing frequency. On Monday, loved ones laid to rest Andrew Brown Jr., who was killed by sheriff's deputies in Elizabeth City, N.C., last month.

# data[].attributes.body
America has had a terrible history with the forceful movement of people in and out of their homes and land. This country has mixed white nationalism and God together and it is destroying the country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Credit: Commondreams.org. Some rights reserved.

I constantly battle a myth within me. It formed me-as ancient stories do-and its logic crops up unbidden as I go about my life. I notice it as I walk along the shore of the Tennessee River in Chattanooga and the land vibrates with history. Making my way over the bridge to the business district, the streets swarm with students and tourists visiting an aquarium, a museum, a theater, and restaurants. In the midst of business, I remember that my city is known for being a Bible-based city. It is one of the most Christian towns in the nation.

When I descend the steps to the river's edge, another story emerges. Native symbols line the stairs, and murals mark our essential elements of wind, fire, earth, and sun. The walls call to the four corners of the earth, lending me a compass that grounds me as I honor the Cherokee Nation that once thrived on this land, before their forced removal created a Trail of Tears along which thousands of people died from disease, starvation, and exposure.

As I stand at the water, I remember how I've prayed along these shores with their members and elders. Our chants matched the rhythm of beating drums as they scattered ash into the flowing river, lifting up those who died along the terrible path. When I walk along the river, my internal mythic battle ensues.

As a white woman who grew up as a conservative Christian, the European colonizers' story mixed with my theology in awkward ways. I internalized those triumphant ideas of Manifest Destiny-that the American people hold special virtues, that we are exceptional, and that it is our divine right and destiny to remake others in our own image. In our history, as settlers moved west to take more land, Manifest Destiny reverberated through pulpits, proclaiming that we were a Christian nation, a ' shining city on a hill.'

Growing up, the Religious Right echoed this message and I often heard it. We co-opted the stories of the Jewish people. In our Sunday school classrooms, we learned under the glowing visage of Warner Sallman's Jesus. The curriculum recounted narratives with flannel-graph figures in the shape of a blonde Moses leading his pale-skinned followers through the wilderness to the Promised Land. As our teacher tried to make the lessons of an ancient nomadic people applicable to our 10-year-old 1980s lives, we understood that the U.S. was our Promised Land, given to us by God, so that we could have religious freedom.

As we moved from our classrooms into the sanctuary to hear the pastor expound, our national narratives became more confused with the stories of the Bible. We learned that God blesses certain nations, and God was blessing America. It was our duty to defend our country, fight for its Christian identity, and inspire its people to uphold the highest moral purity.

The clear evidence of God's favor was our wealth as a country. We were to be a light to all nations. In my pew, the words of Jesus began to sound a lot like Ronald Reagan's addresses. When we belted out, "Onward Christian Soldier" and "God bless America," our hearts soared and our eyes watered, because we believed that we were exceptional. We had reached the Promised Land, and we intended to defend it against any physical, religious, or moral threat.

Now, thirty years later, I have broken with my Religious Right heritage and have written about healing from the damage it has caused. I became a social justice Christian and a pastor in the Presbyterian Church (USA). As I walk along the shores of the Tennessee River, I realize how mixing God and white nationalism together has had devastating effects on my country, particularly when it comes to inciting wars, suppressing religious freedom, and encouraging the spread of unbridled capitalism.

First, in the military actions of the United States, we have heard the echoes of crusader language coming from those who want to use religion to frame armed missions abroad. Conjuring God to ignite warfare has been an effective mobilizing tool since the days of the Emperor Constantine, but peace between nations is impossible when suspicious politicians drag faith onto their battlefields. President Trump's ban on immigrants from seven Muslim countries shows how the war on terror has been set up as a religious war, and how politicians have used 'God and country' rhetoric to incite public support for it.

In order to stop this flagrant use of Christianity to foment violence, we must realize that American soil is not the Promised Land. Instead of allowing faith to be dragged into war, we have to unravel our deepest beliefs from the possession of property and economic gain. Only then we can look to the ancient wisdom of different religions to inspire peace, forgiveness, and dignity between faiths.

Second, the concept of religious freedom-the right of people to practice their faith and not persecute people of any other faith or none-has long been upheld by the religious Right. Yet instead of understanding this right as celebrating all faiths in a diverse country, they perceive themselves as persecuted. Conservative Evangelical Christians often understand the idea of religious freedom to mean that they have the right to uphold certain beliefs, even if that belief causes discriminatory action or physical harm to another citizen.

For example, they might explain that a baker should not be forced to bake a cake for a couple's religious ceremony if the baker does not agree with same-sex marriage. Or they might maintain that a business owner should not have to provide insurance coverage for a woman's reproductive health. But when the rights of Muslims are severely curtailed, many of these Christians don't seem to feel the same passion to defend religious freedom.

When we understand that American Christians are not God's chosen people we can begin to uphold the right of all people to practice religion, or not to practice it. If we begin to uphold the religious convictions of all people, then we must recognize the dignity of those who celebrate a religious ceremony, women who need access to reproductive health, and refugees who travel across borders for sanctuary, because above all, we are people who have been called to lives of love.

Third, the idea of a God that blesses people with wealth has seeped into our national dialogue so deeply that many Christians do not begrudge an economic system that encourages the increasing disparity between rich and poor. In fact, they have baptized it as holy, because they imagine people with wealth and health are blessed by God. On the other hand, those who struggle to pay their debts or cannot access medical care are seen as morally flawed. But the American system of high student loans, limited access to healthcare, and low wages makes solvency untenable for most of the population. As U.S. influence expands to other countries, the economic interests of the USA have taken on a missionary fervor.

Yet Christians must know that their faith has been co-opted. When they go back to their texts, they see that Jesus claimed that the poor were blessed, and he compels us always to be looking after the "least of these." Jesus said that when we feed a hungry person, clothe a naked person, or welcome a stranger, we welcome God.

As I look over the Tennessee River and stand with the ghosts of the past, I'm reminded that Christianity does not condone wrapping Jesus in the American flag so that we can wage wars, claim exceptionalism, and justify the expansion of U.S. business interests. America is not the Promised Land. Instead, Jesus calls out over troubled waters in a nation which still has to recognize its great atrocities, and he encourages love for our neighbors as for ourselves.

When faith is used by its most pernicious elements to incite violence, oppress religious diversity, and create economic disparity, we need to reclaim the truth of our moral core: we need to relearn love.

Carol Merritt's new book is Healing Spiritual Wounds: Reconnecting with a Loving God after Experiencing a Hurtful Church.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Credit: Commondreams.org. Some rights reserved. I constantly battle a myth within me. It formed me-as ancient stories do-and its logic crops up unbidden as I go about my life. I notice it as I walk along the shore of the Tennessee River in Chattanooga and the land vibrates with history.

# data[].attributes.body
Immigrants have changed this country more in a positive way than it has in a negative way. Many immigrants have been coming to the US for new opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The subject of immigration has always been a hot political topic in the United States. The DNA of our nation is comprised of people from many different lands, many who have fought and died to make this country great.

In their honor this Memorial Day, HISTORY is taking a journey back to the inception of the United States in the new, two-day, four-part docudrama "America: Promised Land," which tells the stories of the everyday heroes who helped transform this great nation.

"One of the things I find inspiring is that when you look at this special, you realize the great things that our ancestors accomplished," Mike Stiller, VP Development & Programming, HISTORY and executive producer of "America: Promised Land," told Fox News. "If you're Dutch, who knew that you saved New York City? If you're German, you were 10 percent of the Union Army and you helped keep the union together during the Revolutionary War."

From early days when the Puritans established the Massachusetts Bay Colony in a town they named Boston, through the telling of historical events such as the Dutch Fur Trade, the effect the creation of the postage stamp had on Irish immigrants, the California Gold Rush, Germans coming to the aid of the Union Army in vast numbers during the Civil War, and more, "America: Promised Land" looks at how immigration transformed America as different people brought different ideas and skills to the new country.

An interesting point of "America: Promised Land" is that, despite belief to the contrary, the reality of immigration is that it is not passive. The people who come to the U.S. tend to be risk takers. They tend to be people who are willing to take a journey, especially back in the early years of our nation when the voyage was just too arduous for them to return home, so they were making a once-in-a-lifetime trip to a new world.

Another case in point is that many of the immigrants are among the best and brightest, who in bringing new ideas to the new world fueled growth and developed new inventions, things such as mail-order catalogs, the Franklin Stove, the automatic flour mill, the cotton gin, the swivel chair, cupcakes and coffee percolators, to name a few.

"The number of patents taken out are disproportionally higher among immigrant groups," Stiller says.

Additionally, the docudrama looks at the struggles and hardships that some populations endured during their journey to America, such as the transport of people during the transatlantic slave trade, the illness that struck the Puritans cooped up on tiny ships, and Italian communities in New York being targeted by criminal organizations.

"Newly arrived immigrants had a lot to prove, and one of the reasons they came to the United States was the availability of jobs and the availability of opportunity," says Stiller.

Truth be told, the U.S. has received more immigrants since its inception than any other society, and even today it is still considered by those hoping to emigrate here the land where dreams can true.

"In the last hundred years alone, there's been a new American every 57 seconds," Stiller says. "Right now we're in a time when immigration is very controversial, but what you realize is immigration has always controversial. There's always an aspect of people wanting to come to the United States and people who are already here having angst about that, but one of the reasons they come is the dream, whether it's the dream of land, the dream of work, or it's the dream of religious freedom."

"America: Promised Land" premieres Monday, May 29 and Tuesday, May 30 on HISTORY.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'America: Promised Land' reveals how immigrants made the country great

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The subject of immigration has always been a hot political topic in the United States. The DNA of our nation is comprised of people from many different lands, many who have fought and died to make this country great.

# data[].attributes.body
More people who are races other than white are stating that former president Trump is making the racial problems worse than they previously were. Blacks show or express the negative views on state relations than any other race in the US.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A majority of Americans say race relations in the United States are bad, and of those, about seven-in-ten say things are getting even worse. Roughly two-thirds say it has become more common for people to express racist or racially insensitive views since Donald Trump was elected, even if not necessarily more acceptable.

Opinions about the state of race relations, Trump's handling of the issue and the amount of attention paid to race vary considerably across racial and ethnic groups. Blacks, Hispanics and Asians are more likely than whites to say Trump has made race relations worse and that there's too little attention paid to race in the U.S. these days. In addition, large majorities of blacks, Hispanics and Asians say people not seeing discrimination where it exists is a bigger problem in the U.S. than people seeing it where it doesn't exist, but whites are about evenly divided on this.

This chapter also explores Americans' views of intergroup relations; whether they think the better approach to improving race relations is to focus on what different groups have in common or on the unique experiences of each racial and ethnic group; whether they have ever heard friends or family members make potentially racist or racially insensitive comments or jokes and, if so, did they confront them; and views about white people and black people using the N-word.

Majorities of whites, blacks and Hispanics say race relations are bad

About six-in-ten Americans (58%) say race relations in the U.S. are generally bad, a view that is held by majorities across racial and ethnic groups. Still, blacks (71%) are considerably more likely than whites (56%) and Hispanics (60%) to express negative views about the state of race relations.

Democrats have more negative views of the current state of race relations than Republicans. About two-thirds of Democrats (67%) say race relations are bad, while Republicans are more evenly divided (46% say race relations are bad and 52% say they are good). These partisan differences are virtually unchanged when looking only at white Democrats and Republicans.

Overall, 53% of the public says race relations are getting worse. Views are particularly pessimistic among those who say race relations are currently bad: 69% of this group says race relations are getting even worse, and 22% say they're staying the same. Just 9% think they're getting better. Among those who say race relations are good, 30% see things getting even better, while 30% say they're getting worse and 40% don't see much change.

Majority of Americans say Trump has made race relations worse

Two years into Donald Trump's presidency, 56% of Americans say Trump has made race relations worse. A relatively small share (15%) say the president has made progress toward improving race relations, and 13% say he has tried but failed to make progress; 14% say Trump has not addressed race relations.

Assessments of the president's performance on race relations vary considerably along racial and ethnic lines. Most blacks (73%), Hispanics (69%) and Asians (65%) say Trump has made race relations worse, compared with about half of whites (49%).

Democrats and Republicans have widely different opinions of the president's handling of race relations. Fully 84% of Democrats say Trump has made race relations worse, compared with 20% of Republicans. And while 34% of Republicans say Trump has made progress toward improving race relations, virtually no Democrats (1%) say the same. Among Democrats, views on this don't vary much along racial or ethnic lines, but white Democrats (86%) are somewhat more likely than black Democrats (79%) to say Trump has made race relations worse.

Most Americans say it's become more common for people to express racist or racially insensitive views since Trump's election

Majorities across racial and ethnic groups say it has become more common for people to express racist or racially insensitive views since Trump was elected, but blacks (76%) and Hispanics (75%) are more likely than whites (60%) to say this is the case. Whites are more likely than blacks and Hispanics to say expressing these views is about as common as it was before Trump's election.

Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to say it has become more common for people to express racist or racially insensitive views since Trump was elected (84% vs. 42%). Half of Republicans - vs. 12% of Democrats - say people expressing these views is about as common as it was before, while small shares in each group say it is now less common than before Trump's election. These partisan differences remain when looking only at white Democrats and Republicans.

Among whites and blacks, the view that expressing racist or racially insensitive views is now more common is particularly prevalent among those with more education. Some 84% of blacks with a bachelor's degree or more education and 86% with some college experience offer this opinion, compared with 66% of blacks with a high school diploma or less education. Among whites, the difference is between those with at least a bachelor's degree (71% say expressing these views has become more common) and those with some college (55%) or no college experience (53%).

More than four-in-ten say it's now more acceptable for people to express racist or racially insensitive views

While most Americans say it's become more common for people to express racist or racially insensitive views since Trump's election, fewer (45%) say this has become more acceptable. About a quarter (23%) say it's now less acceptable for people to express these views, and 31% say it's about as acceptable as it was before Trump was elected.

Overall, blacks (53%) are more likely than whites (43%) or Hispanics (45%) to say it's become more acceptable for people to express racist or racially insensitive views. Among Democrats, however, whites are the most likely to say this (70% of white Democrats vs. 55% of black and 57% of Hispanic Democrats).

Again, educational attainment is linked to these views. Among whites, blacks and Hispanics, the view that it has become increasingly acceptable for people to express racist or racially insensitive views is more prevalent among those with more education. Overall, 58% of adults with at least a bachelor's degree say this has become more acceptable since Trump's election, compared with 44% of those with some college and 36% of those with a high school diploma or less education.

Views on whether it's become more acceptable for people to express racist views since Trump was elected are also strongly linked with partisanship. More than six-in-ten Democrats (64%) say this is now more acceptable; 22% of Republicans say the same. Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to say this is about as acceptable as it was before Trump's election (50% vs. 15%).

For the most part, Americans see positive intergroup relations

Despite their generally negative assessments of the current state of race relations, Americans tend to say that most racial and ethnic groups get along well with one another. Among those who gave an answer, about six-in-ten or more say this is the case for whites and Asians (88% say these groups get along very or pretty well), Hispanics and Asians (73%), blacks and Hispanics (65%), whites and Hispanics (63%) and blacks and Asians (62%). Relatively large shares do not know enough about how some of these groups get along to give an answer.

Assessments of how well blacks and whites get along are more divided. Among those who gave a rating, 51% say these groups generally get along well, while 49% say they don't get along too well or at all. Whites are far more positive than blacks in their views of how the two groups get along. About six-in-ten whites (58%) say blacks and whites get along well; the same share of blacks say these groups do not get along well.

There's a significant age gap among blacks on this issue: Blacks ages 50 and older express more positive views of black-white relations than do their younger counterparts. Among those in the older group, 53% say blacks and whites get along very well or pretty well, compared with 33% of black adults younger than 50.

Whites and Hispanics also offer considerably different views of how their groups get along, though majorities of each say they get along very well or pretty well (70% of whites vs. 54% of Hispanics). And while large shares of blacks and Hispanics say their groups generally get along, blacks (83%) are more likely than Hispanics (69%) to say this.

While those who say race relations are good are consistently more positive about how these groups get along, more than half of those who say race relations are bad also say intergroup relations - with the exception of black-white relations - are also generally positive. When it comes to how blacks and whites get along, just 36% of those who say race relations are bad say these groups get along well, compared with 76% of those who say race relations are good.

No consensus on best approach to improving race relations

More than half of Americans (55%) say that, when it comes to improving race relations, it is more important to focus on what different racial and ethnic groups have in common; 44% say it's more important to focus on each group's unique experiences.

Asians (58%), blacks (54%) and Hispanics (49%) are more likely than whites (39%) to say it's more important to focus on the unique experiences of different racial and ethnic groups. Still, about four-in-ten or more of these racial and ethnic minorities say the better approach to improving race relations is to focus on what different groups have in common.

Among whites, opinions vary considerably across age groups. Younger whites are the most likely to say that, when it comes to improving race relations, it's more important to focus on what makes different groups unique: 54% of those younger than 30 say this. In contrast, majorities of whites ages 30 to 49 (57%), 50 to 64 (63%) and 65 and older (67%) say it's more important to focus on what different racial and ethnic groups have in common. Age is not significantly linked to views about this among blacks or Hispanics.

Opinions about the amount of attention paid to race vary across racial and ethnic groups

About four-in-ten Americans (41%) say there's too much attention paid to race and racial issues in the country these days; 37% say there's too little attention, and 21% say it's about right. Whites are far more likely than other racial and ethnic groups to say there's too much attention paid to race, while blacks are more likely than other groups to say too little attention is paid to these issues.

Half of whites say too much attention is paid to race and racial issues these days, while smaller shares say there is too little (28%) or about the right amount of attention (21%). In contrast, about two-thirds of blacks (67%) and half of Hispanics say there's too little focus on race. Asians are more divided, with similar shares saying there's too little (39%) and too much (36%) attention paid to race and racial issues. A quarter of Asians say the amount of attention paid is about right.

Among whites, the view that the country is too focused on race is more common among those who are older and without a bachelor's degree. Opinions also differ considerably across party lines: Three-quarters of white Republicans think there's too much attention paid to race and racial issues, compared with 21% of white Democrats. About half of white Democrats (48%) say there's too little attention paid to these issues and 29% say it's about right. Black Democrats are far more likely than their white counterparts to say there's too little attention paid to race: 71% say that's the case.

Majority of Americans say racial discrimination is overlooked

When it comes to racial discrimination, a majority of Americans (57%) say the bigger problem for the country is people not seeing discrimination where it really exists, rather than people seeing racial discrimination where it really does not exist (42% say this is the bigger problem).

More than eight-in-ten black adults (84%) and somewhat smaller majorities of Hispanics (67%) and Asians (72%) say the bigger problem is people not seeing racial discrimination where it really exists. Among whites, about as many say the bigger problem is people overlooking discrimination (48%) rather than seeing it where it doesn't exist (52%).

Younger whites, as well as whites with a bachelor's degree or more education, are more likely than older and less-educated whites to say the bigger problem for the country is people not seeing racial discrimination where it really exists. Views also differ sharply by party, with white Democrats and white Republicans offering views that are the mirror image of each other: 78% of white Democrats say the bigger problem is people not seeing discrimination where it really exists, while 77% of Republicans say the bigger problem is people seeing discrimination where it doesn't exist.

One-in-five black adults say all or most whites in the U.S. are prejudiced against black people

Relatively small shares of Americans overall think all or most white people in the country are prejudiced against black people (9%) or that all or most black people are prejudiced against whites (13%). But majorities say at least some whites and blacks are prejudiced against the other group (70% say this about each group).

Among blacks, one-in-five say all or most white people in the U.S. are prejudiced against black people; 6% of whites say the same. The difference, while significant, is less pronounced when it comes to the shares of blacks (10%) and whites (14%) who say all or most black people are prejudiced against white people; 12% of Hispanics and 16% of Asians say this.

Whites (46%), blacks (44%), Hispanics (47%) and Asians (47%) are about equally likely to say they often or sometimes hear comments or jokes that can be considered racist or racially insensitive from friends or family members who share their racial background. About half in each group say this rarely or never happens.

Among those who say they hear these types of comments, even if rarely, majorities of whites (64%) and blacks (59%) say they have confronted a friend or family member who shares their racial background about this; 50% of Hispanics and 43% of Asians say they have done this.

While many say they have confronted a friend or family member who has made a racist comment, the public is skeptical that others would do the same. Only 6% of all adults think all or most white people would confront a white friend or family member who made such a comment about people who are black, and 3% say that all or most black people would do the same if a black friend or family member made a racist comment about people who are white.

Seven-in-ten say a white person using the N-word is never acceptable; about four-in-ten say it's never acceptable for blacks

Most Americans (70%) - including similar shares of blacks and whites - say they, personally, think it's never acceptable for a white person to use the N-word; about one-in-ten say this is always (3%) or sometimes (6%) acceptable. Opinions are more divided when it comes to black people using the N-word: About half say this is rarely (15%) or never (38%) acceptable, while a third say it is sometimes (20%) or always (13%) acceptable. Again, black and white adults offer similar views.

Among blacks, opinions about the use of the N-word by black people vary across genders and age groups. Black women are more likely than black men to say this is never acceptable (43% vs. 31%). And while half of blacks ages 50 and older say it's never acceptable for black people to use the N-word, 29% of blacks younger than 50 say the same.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Americans see the state of race relations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A majority of Americans say race relations in the United States are bad, and of those, about seven-in-ten say things are getting even worse. Roughly two-thirds say it has become more common for people to express racist or racially insensitive views since Donald Trump was elected, even if not necessarily more acceptable.

# data[].attributes.body
The Black society are rising in the social class and they now have become the social middle class. There has become a greater distrust between black and white societies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
American Racial and Ethnic Politics in the 21st Century: A cautious look ahead | Brookings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Brookings Review article by Jennifer L. Hochschild (Spring 1998)