Thanks for the Sowell recommendation. I’ll take it out next time I’m at the University library. When I was in KY a few years back, I had a long conversation with someone who had been a State senator. (He was good enough to have me commissioned a Kentucky Colonel - the certificate hangs proudly in my den.) His experience of a decade at Frankfort resonates with what you write of realpolitik.
And anyone whose username is “Bober” backwards can’t be all bad!
Roger, Sowell is a great read. His views on race come from his studies of worldwide racial patterns and they give a much better perspective than you get by simply looking at racial issues in the U.S. He’s also written some fine work in other areas, such as *Vision of the Annointed, talking about the clash of ideologies in the U.S., and his autobiography, A Personal Oddyssey.
As far as politics, as mentioned, my views come from working in the area. One time we were discussing trying to help some builders victimized by the Fair Housing Act. It’s a fine law, but there are some nasty unintended consequences that come with it, and builders can easily break the law and not know it and not intend to “discriminate” against people with disabilities. While discussing how to fix it, it was ultimately decided not to do anything. After all, I was told, we don’t want a dozen people with wheelchairs protesting around the office and making my boss look bad. So while it would have been the right thing to do, we just didn’t want to be labeled “anti-disability.” It’s not a stretch to think that a lot of good legislation is not considered because politicians don’t want to be considered “anti-black.”
And, just to let you know, I have always admired the username Roger Thornhill. I love North by Northwest.
Exactly. It’s essentially become not allowed to even bring up the possiblity of racism. As Renob demonstrates, there’s always an alternate explanation - and the ultimate sin is for a black person to point out racism. Which, according to Renob and a whole lot of other people I’ve talked to, is always a false accusation, because racism doesn’t exist.
I realized I even have been inculcated with this attitude to some extent when a black professor related an incident in which he had (pretty clearly) been discriminated against, and said that he’d filed a complaint with the school for racial discrimination. I was shocked - and I realized that I was surprised because it seems kind of outrageous for someone to complain about racial discrimination, even when it’s clearly true. There’s this attitude that it’s not even okay to bring up the possibility of racism in any instance, which is the thing that makes it impossible to discuss it.
You say it over and over. I’m getting bored with hearing you repeat the same thing. You haven’t come up with any evidence here. Why should I believe that individual instances of racism don’t make a difference? What’s the evidence that the playing field is level? It never used to be - so how did it change so dramatically?
I checked last night, and I stand by my earlier statement: clearly Levitt believes that names don’t make a difference, but his reasoning is not convincing. He did not even remotely question the results of the study. He did not “debunk” it or claim that it was “false”. You may post quotes from the book if you like in order to argue that he did, but you will lose that argument, as that’s not what Levitt said.
False. I never claimed once that there was a “vast . . . conspiracy” of any sort going on. You’re blatantly making up arguments and assigning them to me. So besides your mendacity regarding Stephen Levitt, your twisty attempts to avoid answering questions, your refusal to provide evidence, we can add strawman arguments to the list.
First, it’s “Boner”, not “Bober”. And secondly, you disappoint me, roger. It seems you only want to find people to confirm your own attitudes - that seems like a very poor way to approach a subject that you don’t really understand well. I guess for you this is a replay of the GQ thread that started this one.
Sad.
Perhaps a remedial course in reading comprehension is in order. I never said that racism doesn’t exist or that people aren’t affected by racists. I’m saying that racism isn’t holding back black people. The problems that blacks face today is not because of racism. That is not to say that some people do not face obstacles because of racism or that some people have been very negatively affected by racism. Read what I actually wrote.
Because there is no evidence that racism actually holds blacks back. If you are going to make the assertion that racism is a real force that is somehow responsible for the failures of blacks in America, then you should have proof for it. As Levitt’s work points out, the type of parents you come from (class-wise, not race-wise) is the most important factor. As Thomas Sowell’s work points out, cultural characteristics are most important for determining a race’s success. Blaming failure on outside forces, such as you are doing, requires proof. A few flawed studies that show that some people have problems because they are black does not indicate that racism is holding black people back.
Let me just post this again, in case you didn’t read it the first time (from a Levitt interview on NPR):
Then how would you define the prevalent racism that seems so important to you? If it is not vast, then how could it affect so many people? If it’s not a conspiracy, then how can it have such widespread support among whites? Sure, you never said “vast conspiracy,” but that sure seems to be what you believe. If I misunderstood you, then I apologize. But then please explain exactly what you believe.
It seems that if I have done this, you are equally as guilty.
(This post is a response to Renob’s post… all quotes are from there.)
This… is rife with so many problems I don’t even know where to start. Okay, we have the premise that individuals face racial discrimination. I think we all can agree to that.
What does this mean? People of color experience racial discrimination in housing and employment (see here). Many others have offered similar evidence in other arenas. These experiences are what, exactly? Minor annoyances? I’m not clear how the first two sentences match the third.
What “situation” are Black Americans in today, exactly? You are able to ascertain the status of 12 million people and generalize… anything? What are you trying to say here, exactly?
I think you’re overstating the case on governmental contracts and affirmative action. As the above quote states, affirmative action programs must be very narrowly tailored or risk legal challenge.
Wait. You reject the contention that racism doesn’t hold people back, based on a lack of evidence, but you make the above claim without evidence… because you say “it’s ridiculous to expect one?”
Just what is the fear or damage incurred when an institution, whether it be the White House, or Congress, is labelled “racist?” We have free speech in this country. Anyone can call anyone (or anything) else racist. The federal government’s reaction to Hurricane Katrina was called into question by many commentators of - I’m only aware of Michael Brown’s removal from FEMA.
You might raise the issue of Trent Lott, but I ascertain he didn’t lose much. He lost the majority leader position but is now chairman of the Senate Rules Committee. Doesn’t seem like he lost much to me.
You failed to mention that Sowell firmly is on the right. He’s a fellow at the Hoover Institute. In fairness, if you truly want a nuanced view and commentary from across the spectrum to decide for yourself, I would also look at the work of Claude Steele, Michael Eric Dyson, Cornel West, and Peggy Macintosh, to name a few.
A book which blames the problems of poor blacks on poor white Southerners. I wonder why I have a problem with this thesis? :rolleyes:
One, I’d like to see the methodology of those studies quoted. As I’ve stated above, from what I have read most of the “racial discrimination” is more accurately labeled as “class discrimination.”
Two, again, I think individuals experience isolated cases of discrimination. These isolated cases are not responsible for the problems experienced by black America.
I am doing what everyone else does – generalize. Of course there is a great diversity within black America. However, as a whole blacks suffer greater poverty, more illegitimate births, higher crime, etc. That’s what I’m talking about. Those issues cannot be blamed on racism.
True, but they still exist. Thankfully the courts do not fear to tread in this area.
No, I say it’s ridiculous to expect to find a quote like this. I make my claim based o my experience working in politics. I base it on the fact that the race card gets trhown around for obviously non-racist government actions (the response to Hurricane Katrina, for instance). No one is going to come out and say that they are supporting a certain government program because they don’t want to be labeled racist. My contention is that given the weakness of politicians and the tendency to overuse the word “racist,” this is a natural reaction.
Of course we do, but the ridiculous use of the word “racist” has led to the fact that many blacks think GWB is a racist, that crack is a CIA plot, and that The Man is holding them down (hyperbole, I know – but my point is that these calls of racism are given a lot of credence in the black community).
And a shitload of money for the region. I’m of the opinion that the only reason so much emergency aid was appropriated was because Congress was scared of being called racist if they didn’t throw a ton of cash at the region.
Do you know anything about the Senate? The Majority Leder is the most powerful person in the Senate. The Rules Committee is (unlike the House Rules Committee) a minor post that wields little real power. It was an incredible demotion.
I know Sowell is firmly on the right, but his views on race are much more scholarly than someone like Dyson, for instance. I’ve ready my fair share of him and Cornel West and was less than impressed. I respect West’s work while disagreeing with him. Dyson, however, is little more than a rabble-rousing huckster. He’s the Ann Coulter of the black community as far as I’m concerned – he says idiotic things that make those who already believe cheer, but at root he’s simply fooling them with dazzling words and no factual support.
When I was an education major, one of my professors had a saying. Basically, he stated that more money does not necessarily make for a better school. But less money will DEFINITELY guarantee a failing school. Which makes sense-just because the school has money, doesn’t mean they spend it wisely. However, without money, there’s not much you can do.
I think his thesis is a bit more nuanced than this. He is simply examining the culture and pointing out where it came from. He is not “blaming” anyone but trying to illustrate a historic fact.
You talk as though cultural characterists are just arbitrary things. We all know that home environment is one of the most important determinant factors in academic success. There are historical factors that shape the culture of specific communities. It’s not as though poorer people think, “Oh, I don’t care if my children become well-educated.”
Of course. If you read Sowell’s work you would see that he examines the history of cultures and why some cultures work and some don’t.
No one ever said they did. However, a lot of poor people do not plan for the long-term and do not think in terms of delaying gratification. Living in the now and not worrying about how something will affect you in ten or twenty years is a poor cultural trait.
Then you and I have very different opinions about what “not holding people” back means. If they get zero phone calls for an interview, they aren’t going to get a job.
Or there is a fear of being exposed as a racist, which would cause the same behavior.
I don’t believe that at all. I believe there are thousands and thousands of tiny little conspiracies, often in the form of a single individual, who can drastically slow down the progress of black people.
Bolding mine. I’m very aware of who he is (as well as your Freakonomics guy), and strongly believe that he knows less about black culture than your average person. He does know how to sell his view of black culture to fellow neocons and libertarians, but that’s not the same as actually knowing anything about it.
So the unemployment rate for blacks is high because they don’t get any return calls for job interviews?
Of course, if you are going to call one a racist, then you should probably prove it. Just thinking that thousands and thousands of white people are racist and trying to screw over black people does not make it a reality.
Have you actually read any of his books on race, culture, and ethnicity? He may not know how to drop pop culture references like Dyson, but he knows volumes about how race, culture, and ethnicity interact in America and around the world. What is refreshing about him is that he looks at the world instead of America, since so many others seem to think that our problems here are so unique. His data show that, in fact, the patterns we see here can be seen elsewhere, and he examines why this is.
So who, then, is an expert?
Of course. Fewer or no interviews equals fewer or no job opportunities.
No, I have no need to think anyone’s a racist for there to be thousands and thousands of racist white people. Did you want me to provide evidence that there are thousands and thousands of racist white people? I’m pretty sure membership counts for several organizations would more than do the trick, but I’ll be happy to provide the data if you’d like.
I have no desire to spend the amount of time required to read one of his books, but I’ve read plenty of his work. I’ll give you a quick example why I think he’s just a quack of a neocon mouthpiece (although he has occasionally shown flashes of potential brilliance, although rare enough that one can’t know if it was accidental accuracy or some hidden true spirit shining through the mouthpiece facade).
Now, I’ve been relocated a time or three in my life, and it didn’t resemble what I like to call internment. I not only didn’t have anything taken away from me, I was even given big fat checks to cover expenses, as well as a higher paying job in the place I relocated to. It’s hard to believe, but it was voluntary, too. Is that what happened to the Japanese-Americans?
In my opinion, absolutely nobody. I don’t think there is such a thing as “black culture”, any more than there is a “white culture”, or a “gay culture”. Feel free to define them if you wish, and then I’ll happily tell you who might be considered an expert in the arena that is covered by your definition.
I’ll make a deal with you. You fight with your voice, your vote, and your time to eradicate racism, and when that’s done, I’ll happily chastise any blacks who do not rise up to reach their potential.
But that’s a study compariing the overall life experiences of two people of the same race.
All Levitt is saying there is that over the course of 25 or 30 years your life will probably be very similar to the life of somebody of the same race as you who had very similar birth circumstances to yours, even if you have a “black-sounding name” and they have a “white-sounding name” or vice versa.
The only thing that Levitt’s study implies is that even if a black-sounding name is a slight disadvantage for a white person, it is negligible compared to the overall advantage of actually being white. Conversely, even if a white-sounding name is a slight advantage for a black person, it doesn’t compensate for the long-term disadvantageous effects of actually being black. In other words, even if a person who doesn’t know you’re white might initially be prejudiced against you because of your black-sounding name, they forget about it once they see you’re white, so in the long run your life opportunities don’t suffer significantly.
Nothing about that disproves or debunks the “name study” finding that when the average white employer gets essentially identical resumes with one white-sounding name and one black-sounding name, they’re more likely to reject the one with the black-sounding name.
You, or Levitt, is dishonestly tapdancing away from valid evidence that people do discriminate against black-sounding names. He does that by changing the subject, talking instead about evidence that in the long run, having a black-sounding name isn’t a significant disadvantage for a white person compared to other white people, while having a white-sounding name isn’t a significant advantage for a black person compared to other black people.
Big whoop. That does nothing to disprove the claim that black people get discriminated against when compared to white people, and that employers do in fact use the racial overtones of names to facilitate such discrimination.
I guess I’ll take them one at a time.
The Blacks forced the government to take action at a time when the President (LBJ) was willing to support them. However, if there had been no boycotts or students willing to break down segregation barriers in the universities, very little would have happened.
I believe I distinguished between celebrating your culture and identifying yourself by a lable. The scenerio I was thinking about was the recent protests over illegal immigration. These were not people celebrating Mexican-American culture, but rather people identifying themselves as Mexicans living in America. Witness the plethora of Mexican flags and nary an American flag in sight those first days. That’s the separatism I was referring to.
I have worked in Los Angeles Unified for 9 years. I know that there is a dichotomy in funding of white school districts and black school districts in many states. However, in many urban school districts where there is de facto segregation (such as LAUSD), the black schools often get equal funding or more funding to pay for security and vadalism repair. At the same time, LAUSD lost a case (actually settled) because a student was not provided with a textbook in his classes. Why? All of the $ spent on security and vadalism repair.
I never asked “what you wanted from us?” I was mearly asking what people think would make up for past injustices. Bear in mind my original premise was that since white people are to blame for past injustices, then they are responsible for setting it right. I then give 6 points that IMHO invalidate that premise. If you disagree with that original premise (i.e. us Anglo-Americans are responsible for making things better) the you and I agree.
Actually I agree with you on many points, but not because it’s owed to you but because equality of opportunity is the right thing to have.
In the first place, aren’t illegal immigrants (ones from Mexico, that is) in fact “Mexicans living in America”?
In the second place, if what you were thinking of was the immigration protests of a few weeks ago, why did you originally mention African-Americans in your complaint about “separatism”? Namely:
But you are still benefiting from the residual effects of widespread cultural racism simply by not being a member of a minority group. Every time your white parents or grandparents competed with a black person for some benefit and won out partly due to racism, or received some benefit that blacks weren’t allowed to compete for because of racism, that was an unfair advantage for them that allowed them to pass on more advantages to you. Even today, every time you compete with a black person, if the decision is partly influenced by lingering racism, you are benefiting from an unfair advantage.
You may not be personally responsible for any racist discrimination, but you still receive unfair benefits from it. Just as it might not be your fault if your uncle went out and robbed a bank, but if he came home and gave you some of the money without telling you where he got it, you would still be receiving an unfair advantage from other people’s losses. You can’t just say “I’m not personally at fault for it and therefore I’m entitled to keep everything I get out of it.”
To take your points in reverse order: the Sowell book will provide a counterpoint to the reading I have done on the subject over the last 30 years, almost all of it from the liberal standpoint. (One of the first texts I read on the subject was called “Encounters between Blacks and White Liberals: the Collision of Stereotypes”, which was recommended to me in my final year at school as I prepared to go on to university. If anyone is interested in reading what now, no doubt, would feel very dated, but at the time was quite an eye-opener, I looked it up the other day in the library, and it’s published in Social Forces, Volume 55/3 (1977). I originally got it as a “purple peril”, which some of you will remember - the smell, if nothing else!)
My response to Renob anyway focused on his experience working in the political field: hence my reflections on the situation at State level in KY. I hardly endorsed his position, if you care to read what I wrote.
Regarding the typo in “Boner” (have you not noticed that “b” and “n” are next to each other on the keyboard?), I find it a little concerning that someone who advocates tolerance for groups in the abstract so much should be so intolerant of individuals in the concrete.
Beautifully ironic, really.
Yes, but many people born in America with relatives in Mexico were protesting too.
Because many of the leaders or the reparations movement laud their African background while simultaneously belittling their American heritage. I think there are also quite a few black public figures that use the term “African-American” to separate theselves from what they perceive as the majority culture.
What benefits have I ever received from racism? Be specific because that is one of the biggest canards around - that somehow all of us Anglo-Americans have some sort of benefit from institutional racism. Gee, my ancestors had advantages because of their race? I’m going to have to dig up some graves and beat the crap out of some corpses because I never got anything out of it.
As for the idea that if I received benefits from my ancestors because of race I can’t keep it. I’ll tell you what, why don’t you tell the Kennedys that they need to pay back all their fortune because Joe Kennedy made his money bootlegging?
In fact, why don’t we ALL give our money to third-world countries because being an American in general gives us an unfair advantage over most of the world.
And don’t get me started about the unfair advantage humans have over other animals. Two words: opposable thumbs.
Beg pardon? It’s not clear to me what connection you can possibly imagine between those two things. You’ve mentioned your academic credentials numerous times; I hope you did that work with more care than you’ve brought to the two discussions you’ve started about this subject. This is rather a strained attempt to find some means to insult me, roger. I’m not sure how many more such disappointments I can take from you. I would think a man like you could come up with much more cutting insults than that.
Anyway, I just pointed it out because it was, well, such an inapropos time to make a typo. Let me assure you that I didn’t mean any ill intent by it.