I am often criticized for sounding (not even acting, which might be better) as though racial preferences were the greatest evil of contemporary society. I don’t believe that, although I do believe that our abandoning the “without regard” principle in favor of an outright justification of racial and ethnic discrimination does far greater and longer lasting damage to our society than the disappointment it causes to the specific individuals harmed by those policies.
Still, I think it is sobering to step aside from that debate for a moment and consider the truly disturbing statistics contained in an article sent me by “Paul,” a reader:
- In 2000, 65 percent of black male high school dropouts in their 20s were jobless. By 2004 the share had grown to 72 percent, compared with 34 percent of white dropouts and 19 percent of Hispanic dropouts.
- In 1995, 16 percent of black men in their 20s who did not attend college were in jail or prison; by 2004, 21 percent were incarcerated. By their mid-30s, six in 10 black men who were dropouts have been in prison.
- In the inner cities, more than half of black men do not finish high school.
- Similar trends are apparent across Michigan. In 2000 there were about 100,000 black men in their 20s in the state, and almost half of them didn’t have jobs, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures. Almost a quarter of black males in their 20s had not finished high school, and for them, two of every three were not employed.
Both critics and supporters of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative should recognize that the problem revealed by the above statitstics will be unaffected by either allowing or barring Michigan universities from continuing to judge blacks by different, and lower, standards.
What the passage of MCRI would do is bar remedial or other programs limited to black high school dropouts. That seems to me a good thing. Colorblind, non-discriminatory programs would no doubt help more black high school dropouts, since there are more of them, but limiting programs to them could only be based on rejecting the principle that bars racial discrimination, and there is no good reason to do that.
I cannot imagine that anyone denies the social devastation caused by black teenagers failing to graduate high school. The disagreement occurs once people claim that racially discriminatory policies in employment and college contexts constitute an appropriate remedy. There are very many ways of approaching the underlying lack of skills that block many people from getting jobs and into colleges that they might like to attend. But ignoring those proper remedies and simply hiring on the basis of race only makes the problem worse: It compounds the foundational problem of lack of skills with attendant problems of race resentment and disrepect.
Well… to what degree should we assign the blame for these negative statistics about black men to… the behavior and attitudes of black men?
Every university in the country wants to offer black men a free ride. Every corporation in the country wants to hire a black man for an executive position.
Maybe black men should take a look at themselves.
As I’ve said before: given the appalling graduation/employment/living situations of many minorities in this country, we must have programs to help improve these conditions. One type of program seeks to include under-represented groups in education and employment. Should this be the only remedy? No.
But why try to dismantle programs that seek to ameliorate the deplorable conditions that many minorities live with? Should these programs be reformed? Yes. Dismantled? No.
And as I’ve said before (and will no doubt say again), I think there is no good reason — and all sorts of reasons why not — to make responses to this problem (or any problem) race based. If society has a problem with unemployable high school dropouts, programs should be developed to prevent people from dropping out and to rescue them and make them employable after they have. Programs should not be limited to black dropouts. As usual, focusing on race and ethnicity, i.e., being concerned only with “under-represented groups,” is just another problem, not a cure. Even if you don’t agree, why repel all the people who might support an inclusive, non-discriminatory program but will never support programs whose benefits are limited by race?
But John, if the problem is that a beneficial program only focuses on Blacks, then the answer should be to make the program more inclusive or begin a parallel program that offers the same service to non-Blacks. The answer should not be to get rid of the program all together. Most of the efforts I see from anti-preference people are to get rid of programs, but they almost never offer an alternative.
And yes, ST, Black men should certainly work harder in education and work harder at building up the Black community (although I’m sure some double talking conservative would claim that Black people were being “racist” by working to improve the outlook of their group). So let’s say that 80% of the blame should go toward Black people for not working hard enough and not holding “traditional values” of marriage, education, etiquette, or whatever.
Now, let’s say 20%(or 10% or whatever small percent helps you sleep better at night) of the blame should go to historical disadvantages and present day racism. Should we all just ignore that 20% of the blame? Should we all just act like Black people came here of their own volition and have been given the same opportunity everyone else has been given? Is that 20% insignificant?
And again, if most of the problem is minorities’ “attitudes” then you should be pushing for institutions that help teach the “proper attitude” for success in this country. Instead all I hear from conservatives is “We need to get rid of racial preference”; “we need to stop giving minorities handouts”; “we have too many programs to help people”; “we need to do less!”; None of these “solutions” addresses the issue of poverty. None of these “solutions” addresses poor elementary education and lack of health care.
Yes, ST, Black people in this country have been given so very much. EVERYONE in this country wants to see Black people do well. People in South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, all those people want to see Blacks do well. EVERY corporation in the country wants to hire a black man for an executive position. That is a very accurate and fair description of the situation Blacks and other disadvanteged minorities face today. Why with all this outpuring of support it MUST be some inherent failure in Black people that is holding them back en masse.
(“Black employees have been poked with sticks, taunted with racial slurs, have had pictures of burning crosses, and white sheets, placed near their lockers, and have discovered the initials KKK carved on tables and benches in the workplace.
In an 18-month period in 2001, the EEOC handled 25 hanging noose cases. Since then other black employees have reported hanging nooses at other worksites. In the past couple of years, Toyota Motors and Northwest Airlines settled hanging noose cases, and black employees at Lockheed Martin Corp. in Marietta, Ga. complained of finding them near their desks.
http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/21919/
In 1993, OFCCP (Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs) initiated a new round of glass ceiling reviews. Besides being part of its overall enforcement strategy, the reviews were conducted to evaluate progress regarding the removal of glass ceiling barriers since the pilot study and, perhaps more importantly, to gather examples of positive actions taken by companies to remove those barriers. Fifty-three reviews were conducted in fiscal years 1993 and 1994, and this report, Are There Cracks In the Ceiling?, focuses on the results and findings of those additional investigations.
The existence of attitudinal and organizational barriers that prevent or inhibit equal progress for minority men, and women of all races should now be beyond debate.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/media/reports/ofccp/newgc.htm)
Maybe “religious” “conservatives” should take a look at themselves.
But John, if the problem is that a beneficial program only focuses on Blacks, then the answer should be to make the program more inclusive or begin a parallel program that offers the same service to non-Blacks. The answer should not be to get rid of the program all together. Most of the efforts I see from anti-preference people are to get rid of programs, but they almost never offer an alternative.
I’m not sure what efforts you’re talking about, but I didn’t say anything about getting rid of any programs. I have no idea what programs actually exist, or even should exist. The only thing I’m sure of is that they shouldn’t be restricted by race, which would seem to be what you have in mind by recommending programs that concentrate on “under-represented groups.”
Hull,
The last round of liberal programs designed to “help” blacks caused an increase in the illegitimacy rate from 10% in the 1940s to the current 70%. That would be the previous great liberal panacea, welfare.
There are, virtually, no people living in deplorable conditions in the U.S. Even the poorest among us has a house, a car, air conditioning and a diet sufficient to cause obesity.
You are really making these things up, Hull. You’re making them up because you love the sound of your own sainted statements. The poor in the U.S. live at the level of the wealthy of the 17th and 18th century.
No, we don’t need to create more programs so that you can feel superior to religious conservatives, or so that you can have a sainted cause. You’re bored, and you want drama.
To say that you are stuck in the past would be a vast understatement. The 60s, to which you constantly harken in romantic raptures, have been over for a long time. We can’t re-run them so that you can play civil rights martyr.
Well, we could, I guess… but that would be delusional.
Hull: “And again, if most of the problem is minorities’ ‘attitudes’ then you should be pushing for institutions that help teach the ‘proper attitude’ for success in this country. Instead all I hear from conservatives is ‘We need to get rid of racial preference’; ‘we need to stop giving minorities handouts’; ‘we have too many programs to help people’; ‘we need to do less!’; None of these ‘solutions’ addresses the issue of poverty. None of these ‘solutions’ addresses poor elementary education and lack of health care.”
Hull, if you have a problem, and you have a program aimed at stopping that problem, but as your program gathers steam the problem gets worse and worse, it may be time to take a step back and ask whether your program isn’t actually making things worse. All the good intentions in the world won’t guarantee that a program will have good results. The things you list conservatives saying, if internalized by low-SES people, could help them turn their lives around. Not sitting around waiting for preferences or waiting for handouts, getting off your butt and going after what you want, is the proper attitude for success. Do you want results, or do you want your vision of how to get to utopia to win out regardless of whether it gets anybody where they ought to go?
John writes:
>>>”Both critics and supporters of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative should recognize that the problem revealed by the above statitstics will be unaffected by either allowing or barring Michigan universities from continuing to judge blacks by different, and lower, standards.
What the passage of MCRI would do is bar remedial or other programs limited to black high school dropouts. That seems to me a good thing. Colorblind, non-discriminatory programs would no doubt help more black high school dropouts, since there are more of them, but limiting programs to them could only be based on rejecting the principle that bars racial discrimination, and there is no good reason to do that.”
Of course there’s a good reason to do that. You see, the big picture, IMHO, John is that when statistics and research brings to light these stark, alarming situations that are “race-based”, exactly why wouldn’t a “race-based” examination of the problem, along with “race-based” strategies be included in the solution?
One cannot be intellectually honest when discussing “race-based” crime statistics and incarceration rates without discussing “race-based” police profiling, and “race-based” mandatory minimum drug laws–both issues I’ve raised here.
One can’t have an intellectually honest discussion about “race-based” unemployment without discussing research about “race-based” job discrimination–another issue I’ve raised here through the works of Devah Pager and EEOC reports.
One cannot be intellectually honest when discussing “race-based” high school drop out rates and not discuss what I believe to be a “race-based” abandonment of the public school system in “certain neighborhoods.”
I was born in Jersey City. I moved to Middlesex County, NJ. Even Stephen can vouch for me that there’s a SERIOUS difference in those public education systems.
THAT being said, I’m not going to “white-wash”, or totally make excuses for the many self-inflicted wounds that are afflicting African-America. Blacks aren’t perfect. No race is. But in my request for intellectually honesty, I can’t sit here and type some polyanna notion that there is a magic formula to solve these problems, or even present a goal-standard to aspire to.
What percentage of black graduation would be realistic in a nation where there are significant numbers of white drop-outs? There are Asian-Americans in prison, and Hispanic Americans on the unemployment line, so do the pesky horns of that satanic concept of “proportionate representation” rear up in this case?
Hull hits a mark here:
>>>”Instead all I hear from conservatives is “We need to get rid of racial preference”; “we need to stop giving minorities handouts”; “we have too many programs to help people”; “we need to do less!”; None of these “solutions” addresses the issue of poverty. None of these “solutions” addresses poor elementary education and lack of health care.”
You see, you’re giving some on the right too much credit, here. (not all, but some.) You see, I don’t forget the statistics on hiring, law enforcement, sentencing and housing discrimination. This nation isn’t still largely segregated by accident. There has been and continues to be institutional racism in this nation, and not surprisingly, those who don’t see “real problems” NEVER seek “real solutions.”
One exciting movement, however is being led by author and media professional Tavis Smiley, and the “Covenant with Black America”–
>>>”As we witnessed in the 2004 presidential election, Americans are deeply divided between race, class, gender, political ideology and moral values. A divide so extreme, that in order to bridge it, we must speak openly, freely, without judgment and work together. It is imperative that we take this opportunity to consider the issues of particular interest to African Americans and to establish a national plan of action to address them. No longer can we sit back and expect one political party, one segment of the population or one religious denomination to speak for us or to act on our behalf. It is our responsibility as an entire community to no longer be left behind politically, socially, or economically and to bridge the economic and social divides ourselves, by encouraging a conversation and a commitment that will inevitably benefit all Americans.”
Why the Covenant
Why does this movement excite me? Well, much like the Powernomics initiatives by Claud Anderson, this movement recognizes something that in unity there is strength, and there are forces in this country that are poised to make pursuit of happiness even more arduous and difficult for African-Americans than it already is, whatever their particular motivation.
–Cobra
cobra, you assume that every problem that disproportionately affects blacks is “race-based,” even though many non-blacks suffer from the same problem. I don’t.
You argue that every problem that disproportionately affects blacks should be addressed by race-exclusive programs, even though many non-blacks suffer from the same problem. I don’t.
You assume that there is no conflict between laws preventing discrimination on the basis of race and programs that discriminate on the basis of race. I don’t.
And yet you impugn the “intellectual honesty” of people who believe that civil right laws should and do bar racial discrimination. Go figure.
Cobra, I’m black and I don’t believe that institutions can do anything for us, except for those we create ourselves, churches, community organizations, etc. The government or white people cannot teach us fundamental life lessons about work or discipline or anything like that. black conservatives have often pointed out how when the modern form of welfare was introduced in the early sixties, black employment was at an all time high, black illegitimacy was low, and black neighborhoods were generally safe. All the past years of discrimination did not do to us what has happened to us today. I think we can improve out situation without a complete revolution or overhaul in America. That does not mean that racism is good or acceptable. I believe this is your fear. You feel that if we stop presenting ourselves as the walking wounded, white people will say, racism is no longer a problem so let’s get rid of civil rights laws, or some such thing, that we should not have to do anything until white people make everything perfect. What we have to face is what our forefathers faced: life is unfair and hard, but you have to work and you have to be respectable and you have values. Tens of millions of blacks have found opportunity in this country, including every african and west indian immigrant that gets off the boat. We can do better by ourselves.
ST, just to clarify a couple of misconceptions on your part. You said:
“There are, virtually, no people living in deplorable conditions in the U.S. Even the poorest among us has a house, a car, air conditioning and a diet sufficient to cause obesity.
You are really making these things up, Hull.”
O.k., according to the U.S. Census Bureau the official poverty rate in 2004 was 12.7 percent, up from 12.5 percent in 2003.
By comparison, Blacks make up about 12.7% of the population. So, just pretend that every Black person in the US is poor (shouldn’t be hard for you). Think about a city like Atlanta being populated primarily by poor people.
In 2004, the poverty threshold (dollar amounts the Census Bureau uses to determine poverty status) for a single person under 65 with no children was about $9,827/year. The poverty threshold for a couple with one child was $13,020/year.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/threshld/thresh04.html
Now, if you think you can buy a house and a car on a salary of 10k/year, you are either a financial wizard or a candidate for some beach front property I’m trying to get rid of in Wyoming.
I’m not bored and I don’t want more drama. I also do not live in a tower separated from the rest of the people living in this country. I really wish I could live in your world where there is no racism and no poverty. Must be a nice place.
Cobra, I’ve ordered a copy of the Covenant and I’m looking forward to getting into the nitty gritty of it.
Similar to the Republican Contract with America, I think the Covenant will be a good tool to get Black people speaking with a unified voice.
Hull,
OK, here are the programs to fix the problems you address: church and marriage.
That was simple, wasn’t it?
Now, you need to find something worthwhile to occupy your time,e
Hull writes:
>>>”Cobra, I’ve ordered a copy of the Covenant and I’m looking forward to getting into the nitty gritty of it.
Similar to the Republican Contract with America, I think the Covenant will be a good tool to get Black people speaking with a unified voice.”
You’ll find some interesting passages in there. I was turned on to it from a rousing C-SPAN panel discussion ran by Smiley.
If I can score a DVD, can I put it on your Christmas list, Stephen?
–Cobra
ST,
Let’s apply your reasoning to the war on terror. Terrorism is a big social problem that effects many of us. Are you satisfied with “church” as a solution to that problem. Should we rely on “church and marriage” to defeat Al Qaeda? No?
How about illegal immigration? Are church and marriage a reasonable answer to solving that issue?
Drug war? Are church and marriage a sufficent soultion for that problem? Should we stop taking government action in the war on drugs because church and marriage are a better solution?
What other pressing social problems do we rely solely on church and marriage to answer?
Hull, alot of things can’t be solved. most things can’t be solved. they can be made better or worse. church and marriage makes people behave better. to say first give people money and then they will behave is wrong. the values have to come before the money. it’s the values that lead to the money. also one of the most pernicious liberal notions is that poor people have to be criminals. if people really acted like that we’d all be living caves to this day. if you want more social programs, people behaving better is actually the way to get it. the other way amounts to paying people for behaving badly and just makes everything worse.