Most Racist States

Racism—defined by prejudice, discrimination, and systemic disparities directed at marginalized racial groups—is a complex and multifaceted sociological issue. Because prejudice is often an internalized belief, measuring it on a geographic scale requires moving beyond individual opinions and instead tracking observable, quantifiable data. 

To determine the regional prevalence of these issues, a holistic Racism Index was synthesized using five core data inputs tracked between March 1st and June 30th, 2023. Adjusted for state populations, this index evaluates both systemic infrastructure and behavioral prejudice by measuring:

1. The frequency of racial profiling incidents in publicly available crime data.
2. Housing and employment data indicating discriminatory patterns.
3. Quantifiable racial disparities in education and healthcare outcomes.
4. The frequency and usage of racial slurs on localized social media networks (Twitter/X).
5. The search volume of racially derogatory terms via Google search data.

By combining digital hate-speech tracking with hard socioeconomic disparity data, the resulting map provides a clinical look at where systemic and social prejudice is most prominently measured across the United States.

When analyzing the states categorized as having "Much More Than Average" levels of measured racial disparity, the data points to four specific states. 

The presence of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Georgia at the top of the index aligns with long-standing historical and economic challenges in the Deep South. In these regions, the data frequently reflects deep-rooted systemic issues, particularly regarding extreme racial disparities in healthcare outcomes, generational wealth, and public education funding. 

However, the inclusion of Delaware highlights that severe racial divides are not exclusively a Southern phenomenon. Delaware's position in the highest tier is largely driven by its socioeconomic inputs, reflecting distinct divides in housing and employment access that plague several highly developed corridors in the Mid-Atlantic.

The "Above Average" Rust Belt

The data further shatters the misconception that severe racial disparity is confined strictly to the South. When looking at the "Above Average" tier, the map is heavily populated by the Rust Belt and the Midwest.

States like Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania all register "Above Average" scores on the index. Sociologists and urban planners attribute this to the lasting legacy of 20th-century "redlining"—discriminatory housing practices that legally segregated Northern and Midwestern cities. Today, those historical boundaries continue to reflect massive ongoing disparities in property values, localized school funding, and employment opportunities between white and minority neighborhoods, triggering high scores across the index's socioeconomic metrics.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, a distinct geographic cluster emerges among the states exhibiting the lowest measurable rates of systemic disparities and digital hate speech. 

Idaho, New Hampshire, and Vermont are the only three states in the country to achieve a "Much Less Than Average" categorization. They are immediately followed by a "Below Average" tier composed primarily of the Pacific Northwest and the Upper Midwest, including Washington, Oregon, Utah, Minnesota, and Maine.

While these states score favorably across all five metrics, demographic context is vital when analyzing the data. The states anchoring the bottom of this index are historically the most demographically homogenous, majority-white populations in the United States. In regions with exceptionally small minority populations, the sheer volume of measurable racial profiling incidents, housing discrimination complaints, and comparative healthcare disparities is mathematically lower. While these regions undoubtedly exhibit lower frequencies of digital hate speech and visible prejudice, their scores are inherently influenced by a lack of the population density required to generate high volumes of discriminatory friction.