The F.B.I. released its 2008 data on hate crimes in the U.S. The figures suggest that American hatred is on the rise, but not my much: only about 2 percent. The highest upticks occurred for hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation (up 11 percent) and religion (up 9 percent).
A few other patterns in the data:
A “victim” could be a person, installation, building, or “society” in general. However, the F.B.I. doesn’t provide a good definition of “society” as victim. Interestingly, only three hate crimes had multiple biases, meaning that the offender was expressly targeting a victim for more than one reason. (You can hear Andy Rooney‘s voice: “Apparently those who commit hate crimes can’t multi-task.”)
Hate crimes seem to go up in the spring and summer months (hibernation?). Hate crimes against whites do occur, though they make up only one-fourth as much as anti-black crimes; the hate crimes against blacks make up nearly three-fourths of all race-based hate crimes. Whites make up about 79 percent of the American population: they commit about 60 percent of all hate crimes. (Six percent of the offenders had “multiple races.”)
The geography of hate crimes varies considerably. Thirty-two percent occurred near homes, 17 percent on highways and streets, 12 percent near schools and colleges, and 4 percent near churches/synagogues/temples. Regionally, it is difficult to make definitive assessments because the number of reporting agencies varies by states. In 2008, there were 2,145 agencies that reported, up from 2,025 the year before. California does a good job of tracking, while Pennsylvania and Georgia are lax. Hard to say whether there is more racism in one place than another, and there is little mentioned about the reasons why reporting (or resources to respond to incidents) might vary.
Indeed, overall, the significant differences in reporting make the F.B.I. report illuminating but limiting. Comparing hate crimes across years would be futile. Nevertheless, the reports are useful as they yield a snapshot portrait of one form of violence at one point in time.
President Obama signed a new law covering hate crimes against those who are attacked for reasons based on gender, gender identity, disability, and sexual orientation. One wishes the law could also have prompted more systematic reporting and data collection.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
What Alfred Adler once classified as “anti-social” crime (thus coining the term) we might call hate crime today. The lashing out against social institutions, or some segment of society, is the key. Call it hatred, resentment or anti-whatever-you-are-that-I-ain’t.
“And, @2, Hispanic is not a race. Hispanics can be of any race.”
True, but how are “mexicans” categorized? Probably under the umbrella term “hispanic”, which is probably included with whites. I’m farily sure whites don’t make up 79% of the population, so he’s throwing some other group in there, and FBI stats often throw Hispanics (or Mexicans) in with whites, which really doesn’t help if that’s the case.
Anyway, there are entire gang infested neighborhoods in LA where Mexicans will assault a black for being black (not sure if it works in reverse), so I imagine this would make a significant difference in the numbers if “hispanic” was separated from white.
I looked at the tables. It looks as though there is no castegory for mexican or hispanic. That explains the bogus number of “whites” (79%) in the data.
So when you have a a group of Mexican gang members assault a black person in LA, you’ve just had a hate crime(s) that will be categorized as white on black. Most people don’t see things that way, so it’s sort of silly. My guess is the white perp numbers are greatly inflated due to this bias in the reporting.
@Jim
It doesn’t sound like you’ve known a victim of a hate crime or read about a case of it. It’s not an issue of confession, but self-righteousness.
Most criminals know what they did is wrong whether they choose to do it or repeat it, but someone who commits a hate crime typically thinks they’re right – justified.
Recently, for instance, in Chicago a man (who wasn’t Muslim) was beaten for being Muslim by someone who claimed he was “helping the fight against terrorism”. Confess? Or declare and preach?
@Jason
Bravo. Someone noticed that forms ask if you are Hispanic White or Non-Hispanic White and possibly knows the difference between Latino and Hispanic.
—
I’m not surprised there is a rise in hate crime.
The decade the KKK had the highest membership was also the great depression. Then again, it didn’t help back then that Woodrow Wilson saw them as a patriotic organization of Democrats.
Vincent Chin was beaten to death in Detroit during the crash of the American car industry.
There’s also the fact that hate crimes, much like schoolyard bullying, is definitely correlated to perceived peer sentiment. Not as simple as beat on someone different, but that “everyone you know” feels the same way.
Prop 8 saw a surge of both gay rights supporters and anti-gay activists – if I hated gays, I’d feel both like my opinion is the majority and being ignored. It’s pretty easy with the way the media and government works to simultaneously feel like you belong to a powerless majority.
Absolutely fascinating!
Another interesting study would be the rise in discrimination based on religion/gender specially at work. Though these are not particularly “hate” crime, as they don’t cause any physical damage to the person or his property they do cause a lot of stress in person’s life. Which according to a lot of studies the as damaging as some physical injury.
I’m sure a crime against a non-white is more likely to be considered a hate crime than a crime against a white.
“I’m sure a crime against a non-white is more likely to be considered a hate crime than a crime against a white.”
I can’t imagine a double standard at work. The shock!