Showing posts with label welfare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label welfare. Show all posts

Friday, January 14, 2011

The GOP's Ambassador

When he isn't advising folks to quit speaking the language of living in the "ghetto" (he says -- I'm not kidding -- he meant the Jewish ghetto, so presumably, his objection is to Hebrew), Newt Gingrich likes to think of himself as a "go-between" for the GOP and minority communities. No, I don't get where he got that idea either.

And now, Gingrich has started talking about what the GOP needs to do to build upon their 2010 victories in 2012. In order to rack up a suitable governing majority to begin 2013:
Republicans need to spend at least 30 percent of their time campaigning to black, Hispanic and other minority communities ....

Interesting! And what should they say in those meetings?
....and emphasize lowering taxes instead of social programs such as welfare.

Great plan, Newt! Finger on the pulse.

Via Chait.

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Class Doesn't Stay That Way

In an editorial for the Washington Post, Peter Beinart thinks that Barack Obama could put the issue of race away for good if he came out for replacing race-based affirmative action with class-based programs.

I have no problem with class-based affirmative action, though I think it should supplement, not replace, its racial peer, as both are independent sources of disadvantage and both are independent sources of diversity. But even the premise is wrong here. The reason affirmative action inspires disdain isn't because it leaves "deserving" Whites out. The reason is simply that it is a program whose primary beneficiaries are seen to be Black people.

It is well established that even class-based programs which are tagged as predominantly helping Blacks have significant struggles maintaining their popularity. Welfare is a great example of this -- it is, of course, the paradigmatic class-based assistance program, and yet it is just as controversial and (more importantly) just as racialized as affirmative action is (Welfare Queens, anyone?). Affirmative action is particularly vulnerable to this, because many of the arguments deployed against it now work just as well against the class-based variety (that we should "just judge everyone based on merit" applies as much to the poor as it does to Blacks).

Advocates for class-based AA say that it would still help many Blacks, because Blacks are disproportionately concentrated amongst the extreme poor. But if that's the case, then I doubt you'll see any serious dissipation in the antipathy many Whites feel for affirmative action. The causal force is White jealousy of Black attainment. At the end of the day, the procedures don't matter all that much.

See also, Ta-Nehisi Coates: "There's always a good reason to be a racist."

***
"Sometimes I have feared that, in some wild paroxysm of rage, the white race, forgetful of the claims of humanity and the precepts of the Christian religion, will proceed to slaughter the Negro in wholesale, as some of that race have attempted to slaughter Chinamen, and as it has been done in detail in some districts of the Southern States. The grounds of this fear, however, have in some measure decreased since the Negro has largely disappeared from the arena of Southern politics, and has betaken himself to industrial pursuits and the acquisition of wealth and education, though even here, if over-prosperous, he is likely to excite a dangerous antagonism; for the white people do not easily tolerate the presence among them of a race more prosperous than themselves. The Negro as a poor ignorant creature does not contradict the race pride of the white race. He is more a source of amusement to that race than an object of resentment. Malignant resistance is augmented as he approaches the plane occupied by the white race, and yet I think that the resistance will gradually yield to the pressure of wealth, education, and high character.

My strongest conviction as to the future of the Negro therefore is, that he will not be expatriated nor annihilated, nor will he forever remain a separate and distinct race from the people around him, but that he will be absorbed assimilated, and will only appear finally, as the Phoenicians now appear on the shores of the Shannon, in the features of a blended race.

Frederick Douglass, "The Future of the Colored Race", in Negro Social and Political Thought: 1850-1920, Howard Brotz, ed. (New York: Basic Books 1966), pp. 308-310 (originally published May 1886), 309.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

The Lash, Part II

In discussing whether Barack Obama should come out in support of class-based affirmative action (an idea forwarded by Jon Chait), Ta-Nehisi Coates makes a point I hadn't thought of before:
I have a radical theory: If you never address white paranoia, class-based Affirmative Action is doomed. What Chait isn't seeing (and I submit this with much respect, because I am a fan) is that racism poisons everything. The War on Poverty programs were also class-based, but that didn't stop white racists from demonizing these programs a handouts to Negroes. Welfare supported more white people than black, but that didn't stop people from turning poor black women into welfare queens. The theory of class-based Affirmative Action as "great politics" rest on a foundation which black folks have always found wanting--the ability of crucial swaths of white people to not cut off their nose to spite their face. But, in regards to race, this country entire history is based on white people cutting off their nose to spite their face.

In my previous "lash" post, I noted that the term "backlash" is somewhat of a misnomer -- it acts as if the racist White response was a reaction to a particularly policy, differentiable from previous White behavior that was...well, every bit as hostile and racist. The default setting in America -- regardless of what policies we choose or how much or little the White power structure agrees to bend to Black demands -- is for racism to be produced, albeit at varying levels. The trick is figuring out how to produce anti-racism -- and that's something that we've yet to bottle.

I support class-based affirmative action, but only in tandem with race-based AA, because I think they are separate sources of disadvantage that need to be remedied separately. Nonetheless, I have to admit I figured that replacing racial affirmative action with a class-based system would have at least diffused White anger on the issue, and would still accomplish some good given the disproportionate placement of people of color in the ranks of the economic underclass. Hell, that was even an argument the replacement advocates made themselves: class-based affirmative action would still primarily help people of color, so what's the fuss?

But as Coates reminds us, even programs which primarily help Whites (such as welfare) will engender White opposition and "backlash" if they are perceived to be aiding Black people. And perhaps no program has more indelibly been associated with "aiding undeserving Blacks while stomping on the dreams of hardworking Whites" than affirmative action.

I've noted before how racist ideology in America has proven itself to be incredibly mutable -- it can adapt itself to nearly any change in environment, changing its justifications and rationalizations without a hitch. If affirmative action switches from a race to class basis, and it still results in any meaningful assistance being given to Black students, expect the educational equivalent of "welfare queens" to pop up. It's a prediction that's never failed in the past.