CB: I would argue that it is precisely the difference in crime rates among the two that can be attributed to racism. The Black crime rate is _higher_ because of the institutional and general impact of racism.
[WS:] That was undoubtedly one of several contributing factors, particularly segregation and housing policies of the 1950s that led to "warehousing" of poor racial minorities in urban centers. There was also institutional racism in lending and housing making it difficult to buy into the "middle class" lifestyle.
But I think that the main cause is the emergence of the "deviant subculture" in those segregated housing projects that adopted deviant norms of behavior - violence, use of drugs, illicit activities etc as "social norms." The paradox is that the kids who shoot each other over drug deals or gang rivalry are not "deviant" from the standpoint of their environment - they are "normal" in the sense of following the norms of their subculture, which itself is deviant. Calling those kids 'delinquent' misses an important point - that they behave normally in an abnormal environment. In the same vein, somebody from a culture that proscribes usury would miss the point by calling Americans deviant because they pay and receive interest income. What is deviant in one culture in a norm in another.
I may add that there are other factors than racism - or segregation to be more precise - that contributed to the development of this deviant subculture. I think that a big part of it is a "trickled down" version of the mainstream culture that glorifies greed, individualism, violence, guns, and intolerance of differences. Then there is the drug subculture glorifying the substance abuse. Then there is the militant subculture that legitimizes violent acts as a form of 'political struggle." Then there is the 'gangsta rap culture.'
Another important factor is the family structure - especially the weakening or dissolution of extended families, again as a result of housing policies, which basically left women with very little support networks to raise their kids. As a result, a large number of those kids were raised by the streets and internalized the deviant subculture.
Still other factor is cherry picking - again related to housing policies. As more successful families moved out of the housing projects, that deprived those "left behind" of positive role models. As result, the deviant gang culture was the only role models that those kids were exposed to and consequently internalized.
However, I think that at this point debating what caused it and weighing the contribution of each factor is quite counterproductive. It will not make any difference in dealing with the consequences and will not provide any insights into possible solutions. Quite frankly, I do not think that there are any short-term solutions for the eradication of this deviant subculture. As I already said, the social work vs policing debate is largely a finger pointing and a distraction from the fact that we as society have no effective means of solving this problem. Even the best policies may produce results in two or three generations, but the problem is here and now.
Of course, the problem is not limited to the US - Eastern Europe has it, Latin America has, Africa has it, Asia has, and Australia / New Zealand have it. None of them were able to solve it. I am quite pessimistic about where it will lead. Under the best scenario, the deviant subculture will collapse under the weight of its own burden and the survivors will be integrated to the mainstream society. Under less optimistic scenarios this will lead to some form of permanent institutionalized division into "normal" and "deviant" societies - a throwback to a pre-modern past.
Wojtek