STRUCTURAL RACISM OF BLACK PEOPLE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN BRAZIL AND THE UNITED STATES

Abstract

Structural racism constitutes one of the most persistent and complex forms of social inequality in contemporary systems, affecting multiple dimensions of life in society. This form of discrimination does not only manifest itself in individual actions or explicit prejudices, but is rooted in institutional and normative structures that perpetuate the exclusion and marginalization of certain racial groups. In the Brazilian and North American context, the marks left by slavery, legalized segregation and systematic social exclusion create a scenario in which racial inequalities are perpetuated, even in the face of legislative and institutional advances.

This dissertation proposes to carry out a comparative analysis of the legal and political ways of confronting structural racism in Brazil and the United States, based on constitutional systems, relevant jurisprudence and public policies implemented in recent decades. The choice of these two countries is justified both by the centrality they occupy in international debates on race and justice and by the specificity of their historical contexts. In Brazil, the myth of racial democracy coexists with alarming indicators of inequality between whites and blacks, while in the United States the legacy of legalized racial segregation still reverberates in exclusionary institutional practices, notably in the criminal justice system and in access to educational and economic opportunities.

The historical absence of compensatory measures after the abolition of slavery resulted in the perpetuation of the subalternization of the black population in Brazil. This process highlights what Almeida (2019, p. 26) defines as structural racism “racism is not an anomaly of the system, but rather one of its fundamental pillars”. In this sense, the marginalization of formerly enslaved people and their descendants was consolidated as a systemic phenomenon, sustained by institutional practices that denied access to land, education and decent work. Silva (2020, p. 45) reinforces this analysis by stating that “the social marginalization of former slaves and their descendants gave rise to racialized structural poverty, reflected in the absence of minimum subsistence conditions and access to basic rights”.

The absence of public policies aimed at historical reparation highlights the State's failure to combat the persistent effects of racism, contradicting the principles of distributive justice. According to Rawls (1971), social inequalities are only justifiable if they result in benefits for the least favored, which is not observed in the Brazilian case. Therefore, the perpetuation of these inequalities reflects not only a historical legacy, but a political and institutional choice that reinforces structures of exclusion and discrimination.

The problem that guides this research can be summarized in the following question: how do the legal system and judicial decisions contribute to confronting or reproducing structural racism in Brazil and the United States, and what lessons can be drawn from this comparison to improve public policies to promote racial equality? This question implies a critical and multidimensional approach, which considers not only normative and institutional frameworks, but also the social and cultural dynamics that influence the effectiveness of mechanisms to combat racial discrimination.

Given this scenario, the general objective of this dissertation is to comparatively analyze judicial decisions and public policies aimed at confronting structural racism in Brazil and the United States, seeking to identify advances, limits and possibilities for articulation between the two contexts. As specific objectives, we intend to: (i) map the historical and legal evolution of combating racism in both countries; (ii) examine paradigmatic judgments that influenced the formulation of anti-racist public policies; (iii) evaluate the concrete effects of affirmative actions in promoting racial equality; and (iv) propose recommendations to strengthen the fight against structural racism based on dialogue between the two legal systems.

The methodology adopted is qualitative in nature, with a bibliographic and dialogic approach, focused on the analysis of legal documents, emblematic judicial decisions, reports from international organizations and specialized literature. The bibliographical research will be complemented by a comparative analysis of current jurisprudence and public policies, based on the dialogical method, as proposed by Paulo Freire (1996), which values ​​the collective construction of knowledge and the dialogue between legal, historical and social knowledge. This perspective allows us to understand the specificities of each system, without losing sight of the common elements and shared challenges.

With this path, we hope to contribute to the deepening of the debate on

re the effectiveness of institutional responses to structural racism and the formulation of strategies that promote substantive racial justice in societies marked by deep historical inequalities.

The proposed comparative analysis is not limited to observing legal norms and decisions in the abstract, but seeks to understand how these institutional responses operate in concrete social reality, shaped by historical, cultural and economic inequalities. In this sense, the proposal aligns with what Crenshaw (1991, p. 122) calls "structural intersectionality", that is, the way in which multiple oppressions are articulated in systems of domination. By adopting this approach, the dissertation proposes a critical reading of law, recognizing its limits and possibilities in promoting significant social transformations.

In the United States, the fight for racial equality has been marked by paradigmatic Supreme Court decisions, such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional. Such decisions, although symbolic, do not always translate into effective changes, revealing the gap between the formal recognition of rights and their material implementation. This tension is also present in the Brazilian context, where, despite regulatory advances such as Law No. 12,288/2010 (Racial Equality Statute), the effectiveness of public policies still faces political, institutional and cultural resistance.

Furthermore, the choice of the dialogical method provides a more plural epistemological approach, which recognizes the value of the knowledge produced by black social movements and intellectuals committed to racial justice. Authors such as Angela Davis (2016) and Lélia Gonzalez (2020) point out the importance of listening to historically silenced voices to reconfigure power structures and build a more democratic society. Thus, this dissertation not only analyzes norms and decisions, but critically incorporates the experiences and discourses of resistance as an integral part of the legal and political process of combating racism.

The centrality of the Judiciary in the construction and application of public policies aimed at racial equality is another relevant aspect of the research. In contexts marked by the omission or slowness of the Executive Branch, the Judiciary has been urged to play an active role in guaranteeing fundamental rights. This action, however, raises important debates about the limits of the judicialization of politics and the risks of judicial activism detached from social dynamics. As Streck (2014, p. 87) observes, “law cannot be reduced to a mere technique for applying the norm, but must be understood as a historically situated interpretative practice”.

By exploring the connections and divergences between the legal-political models of Brazil and the United States, the dissertation aims to contribute theoretical and empirical support for the formulation of more effective public policies, based on a broad understanding of racism as a structural phenomenon. This comparative approach aims not only to identify good practices, but also to inspire new paths for the construction of a law committed to social transformation and the promotion of racial equity in democratic contexts.