Glen C Loury writes about Affirmative distraction :
The United States has a problem with persisting racial inequality. It is, in part, a legacy of our ignoble past: the institution of chattel slavery and a century of unfreedom and unequal citizenship for African-Americans after emancipation. Americans have a moral imperative to redress the consequences of that past. But affirmative action isn't the remedy for this problem. It's a distraction.
That doesn't mean that affirmative action should never be practiced, that it's morally wrong, or that it can never be a suitable policy. Those are separate questions. Racial inequality is deep and abiding, showing no sign of going away, and we are a lesser nation for it. Yet while affirmative action helps to obtain an adequate representation of diverse ethnic groups at elite institutions of higher education, it imposes serious costs.
Institutionalizing the practice of preferential affirmative action when assessing African-Americans for selection into highly competitive arenas—in other words, using different standards when judging the fitness of blacks competing with others for access to certain venues—is inconsistent with the goal of racial equality. It invites us to become liars—to pretend that false things are true. It invites us to look the other way. It's not equality; it's the opposite of equality. Knowing that I'm being judged by standards that are different and less rigorous by virtue of the fact that my ancestors suffered some indignity is itself undignified. . .
Tim Worstall asks : At what point is structural racism self-inflicted?
We're told that black families are hardest hit, this is all structural racism:
Labour has reaffirmed its commitment to tackle structural racism after new analysis showed black households are five times more likely to struggle making energy bills repayments.
Black and minority ethnic people were already 2.5 times more likely to be in relative poverty, and 2.2 times more likely to live in deep poverty (defined as having an income more than 50% below the relative poverty line), than their white counterparts regardless of the energy crisis, figures from the Office for National Statistics show.
Labour analysis has revealed black households are also four times more likely to be behind on rent or mortgage payments than white adults. On top of this, more than two-thirds of black adults are finding it difficult to afford their energy bills, compared with 45% of all adults; and 21% of black adults saying they are behind on payments, compared with 5% of all adults.
It's certainly possible that this is all about structural racism. If we had significant structural racism then this might well be the sort of thing we'd see.
So, maybe.
It's also true that those of us who have been around the world a bit see Britain as a very less than normally racist place. Not the least or a place without any racism at all but one where, through a possibly jaundiced but internationally experienced eye, race has less to do with economic outcome than most to many other places.
So, is there an alternative explanation? One that Occam's shaving kit suggests might be the true explanation? . . .
Is racism - current or past - the problem or is it that these people are poor and poorly educated?
No comments:
Post a Comment