With the start of Black History month, famous antiracism author Ibram Kendi thinks big, saying, “Why can’t we be calling for immediate equality? Why can’t we be thinking that big?”. Well, why not?
A major source of inequality between groups is income. The following illustration shows a simply way to get instant income equality - just have Asian and White people donate their surplus income each year to a pool to be distributed to Hispanic and Black people to make up for the gaps in income.
If it is true that income inequality is due to systemic racism, then what is an easier way to eradicate it than to simply eradicate the income inequality? White people, for example, would only need to give up 13.9% of their income. Could this be considered a small price to pay for 400 years of injustice? Should Asians, once arguably an oppressed group, also participate? What's your thoughts?
I'm white...and my annual income falls right in between the mean household income for Blacks and Hispanics. So, do Hispanics give me some money, and then I split the difference and give it to Blacks ? Or do I just dip in to the slush fund provided by the wealthier Whites and Asians. How much does Oprah have to cough up...or Lebron James...or do they get a piece of the White/Asian pie too ? Where do American Indians fall ? I'm one quarter Blackfoot, do I only have to give up 10.425%, that's 75% of 13.9%.
Or maybe we might consider the Civil Rights Act and the financial and human cost of the Civil War as a down payment for reparations? Knock a little off the top.
The founding principles of this country, although they weren’t always in practice in the past, are equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. With the passing of countless laws over the decades offering preferences to preferred “victim” groups the scales have tipped in the other direction giving a lopsided advantage to those groups now. Imposing laws forcing equal outcomes for everyone despite ability or effort is nothing short of government tyranny and stinks of communism.
FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY,
TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS NEEDS
Yeah, that’s always worked.
As Jordan Peterson put it: “We’ve run that experiment. The data is in. It doesn’t work. Move on.”
Oh... right. This time you’ll make sure you’re properly funded.
What, 100,000,000 corpses isn’t enough to make the point?
I’m sorry, it’s just that I’d considered this a forum for intelligent discussion.
You have to define equality first.
You mean to say a white doctor should earn the same as a black janitor?
Considering the drive to train more black doctors through preferential recruitment and lower entry requirements the past two decades, is it white doctors fault that they racially dominate the profession?
Or Asian IT specialists?
Or Black basketball players?
You can replace doctor with engineer, lawyer, accountant... etc.
You can also replace white and black above with men and women.
Should black sports stars earn the same as their less gifted white counterparts?
When you start thinking and digging into the problem, you find it has very little to do with race, but the general issue that some earn large incomes and some don’t.
And how this is becoming socially unpalatable, unless you are a politician or a billionaire.
Stupid ideas such as this one have practically destroyed the Black race in the USA.
It doesn’t help them, it simply forces them to become more and more dependent while making them less and less productive.
Give tge People a Fish and tomorrow they’ll be back for another fish.
After awhile, you’ll have them eating from your hand.
You will strip from them the concept of purpose ... of pride ... of self worth.
But that’s been a deliberate DemLeft Program for decades.
I am reminded of a story from Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago.
Secret police came and evicted a family of kulacks (rich peasants) from their prosperous farm. They took them by train to a river in Siberia, then they took them down the river to a howling wilderness. They threw them off the boat with a handful of tools.
The family worked hard and gradually prospered. Years later the secret police came down the river again. They shouted at the farmers, "We exiled you here years ago with nothing because you were kulacks. And here you are kulacks again!"
Enforced equality doesn't work because it contradicts human nature.
What I have to repeatedly point out is that many people are more than willing to give up their agency in exchange for security.
The history of failure of the climate scientists to make predictions sufficiently accurate to formulate reasonable policy. The inability of the medical community to make predictions accurate enough to formulate policy concerning the pandemic in a timely manner. The number of drugs that have to be recalled after FDA approval. Are just a few examples of how science struggles to deal with complex chaotic systems. The problem can be summed up by a biblical quote " pride goeth before a fall".
Empiricism and determinism are not the same thing. As it relates to this issue it can be stated more exactly as the question of the validity of incompatiblism. What incompatiblism reality means is we have little or no control over our destiny. It has become the dominant intellectual position and is at the heart of our social malaise and political discord.
Because freewill is historically tied to religious ideology killing God killed freewill. All freewill really means is individual agency and dignity. Along with God "science" killed freewill. What most scientists do not grasp is the relationship between culture and physical evolution. The former preceded and defined the latter. The argument that culture is as random as evolution is valid but freewill is one of the environmental factors that define cultural natural selection. Remove it and the cultural environment is so radically alter that existing institutions cannot survive. The irony is that if you accept the incompatibilists argument then the proper environment cannot be created it is simply a matter of random changes. The proof of the truth of this concept is the failure of almost every progressive intervention.
The answer is humility. You will never get that from the likes of Sam Harris or any of our other public intellectuals. They are exactly what they purport to oppose, silly apes driven by instinct. Balls of suppressed emotions.
Freewill is real it just isn't what you think it is. It is a social construct that is as real as money and just as useful an abstraction. We all know that money isn't "real". It is however a cultural adaptation to a real problem. Similarly we know that agency is abstract but it has real consequences. Without agency punishment is useless and society chaotic.
Unearned privilege and unearned income are two sides of the same coin. Both are destructive to civilization which requires hierarchies of competence. Unfortunately the concept of competency has been destroyed by the same forces that destroyed freewill. The proof is in crony capitalism and the welfare state, Corporatism and Globalism. Another biblical quote comes to mind "to those that have much will be given". Take away agency and society becomes a pyramid scheme where everyone eventually becomes a loser.
I keep this short with the limits of attention span in mind. I may flesh it out in the philosophy group someday.
This is called the bigotry of LOW expectations.
The majority of income inequality happened, because most of the wealth was earned by hard working parents, and grandparents. It took them generations to rise out of poverty. In doing so, they learned how to be productive and organized.
I know that it's very unfashionable and very un-PC to use nature as a baseline but in nature "income" is directly related to output. There are examples of charitable care for the incapable in some species but as a general rule those who do the work eat. Those who don't starve. Income inequality is an idea that is based in political ideology, not sound economics nor sound philanthropic judgment. So very unreasonable.
Are you (the OP) talking about equality or equity?
Black people don't get paid less than white people in the same role.
This whole post reeks of a racial version of 'the gender pay gap' nonsense that's been debunked thoroughly. It seems like the exact same arguments are being applied in this post, substituting women with black/hispanic people instead.
Why not? Because the races are not equally productive, as individuals are not equally productive. Kendi's whole premise is that all the races perform the same on average in every field of endeavor, so they all deserve the same average rewards, but that is a false premise.
"If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are wormeaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! I am not for tying or fastening them on the tree in any way, except by nature’s plan, and if they will not stay there, let them fall. And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone!" - Frederick Douglass, former slave, orator and Great American Treasure
If you want them to fail, tell them they’re a victim. The best prison is our own mind. If you love them, tell them they’re responsible for themselves.
I would never tell anyone that I could be bought even if I could. Although it would be nice to buy their equality for them there are no free lunches in nature. Why would or should anyone that considers themselves underprivileged want to be even more beholden to the very Government that is supposedly keeping a foot on their throat?
It’s completely naive to think that simply giving people money will have any impact on equality.
Leftists think everything is about handing out money, and are blissfully ignorant of other variables like money management, prudence, impulse control, saving and investing, delayed gratification, want vs need, and basic household budgeting to name a few.
You could give many people a fortune and they would be broke in five years, or raise the minimum wage to $50/hour and achieve nothing but more poverty.
Three and a half million uneducated white men and five hundred thousand free black men were displaced by slaves. I don't think they were pro-slavery. Whose idea was it anyway? The same group that is doing it today? Who are we displacing now? I wonder what reparations they will require in the future?