Structures or attitudes, the chicken or the egg?

A lot of time and resources have been invested in changing or creating attitudes and values related to inclusion, diversity, and anti-racism. However, some focus has been placed on laws, but little on structures for regulations and enforcement. Still often, when the question of whether an action or statement is racist or discriminatory is raised, the discussion tends to revolve around whether it is punishable by law, rather than whether it is socially unacceptable.

Personally, I am unfortunately a smoker. I had my first cigarette at 13, which was 32 years ago. I was well aware that smoking was harmful; around that same time, I was coughing and gagging through my first couple of cigarettes we had a school-project on the subject where we looked at black lungs and heard about the dangers of death and impotence. Still, we sneaked into the smoking sections of cafes, where even the custard in pastries tasted like ashtrays. Today, I smoke significantly less, and I can't remember the last time I had a cigarette indoors. I wouldn't even consider doing it if it suddenly became legal. My teenagers would never pick up a lit cigarette, and those in their peer group who insist on bad habits prefer to vape, while slightly older ones use snus. Cigarettes are on their way to becoming obsolete.

When I was a child, I could hear the N-word shouted at me on the street, even in front of the police. My father, who had a university degree, had to work as a chef here in Norway. The only Black people I saw on TV were the Huxtables, with Bill Cosby as a sole male role model.

Through institutions like the Melafestival, Nordic Black Theater, and the Center for African Culture, musicians, actors, and other performing artists have created visibility and acceptance in Norway, leading to the national treasure and cultural institution Karpe, and Leo Aijkic is celebrated for his documentaries. The same can be said for most European countries, all have their cultural-festivals displaying diversity, and cultural icons with an immigrant background. Diversity is flourishing in many visible areas. In the cultural sector, there appears to be an inclusive diversity, although the reality behind the scenes or the camera can be different. Nonetheless, cultural practitioners and awareness campaigns, have fostered acceptance for visible minorities in society.

However, the tolerance and positivity towards diversity in the cultural field do not necessarily seem to have extended to other areas. In Norwegian schools where "everyone" sings along to Karpe, Arif, Myra and Kendrick Lamar over 60% of children and young people still experience racist bullying. In politics and among state and municipal agencies and enterprises, there are only a handful of politicians with minority backgrounds, while individuals with immigrant backgrounds rarely hold top positions or directorships. The situation is not better further down the ranks; reports of discrimination in recruitment, promotions, and workplaces persist, with ethnic minorities facing lower wages and a higher risk of long-term unemployment. Yet, few people shout the N-word as an insult on the street now, due to the risk of criminal punishment.

This is where smoking comes into the picture. Through a relatively straightforward measure—a law that many found intrusive and was strictly enforced—Dagfinn Høybråten laid the groundwork for a complete change in attitudes toward smoking. This shift did not arise from campaigns focused on the dangers of death, black lungs, throat cancer, and impotence.

It may be difficult to determine what's the chicken and the egg of attitudes or structured regulations, but we can say with certainty that attitudes toward smoking changed after laws limiting smoking and the structures to enforce them were put in place. Could the same be true for racism, discrimination, and the inclusion of diversity?