4 ms·

> .... inner city blacks are incompatible with an advanced free market economy. We must have read different articles because that's not what I saw - I think yo

> .... inner city blacks are incompatible with an advanced free market economy. We must have read different articles because that's not what I saw - I think you're so focused on detecting a dog whistle that you're missing the key point being raised. Values are race, gender, and class neutral. A value or system of values can be adopted by a person regardless of their race, gender, class, sexual orientation, etc. Values are the only way we can find common ground with others, they are the only way we can be unified as a society. Imagine a white supremacist. Certainly if his skin color was magically changed to black overnight he would no longer be a white supremacist. But that's not a possibility - a white supremacist cannot change his skin color. But he can change his values. We all agree that a stable family life is very advantageous for children. Most often this stability is achieved via marriage. Examining it along this axis we can then say that bourgeois, pro-family, pro-marriage values are measurably better than others. We can also imagine an inner city black who has a choice between two value systems - a bourgeois value system or a hedonistic "gangster" value system. Which value system should he adopt? The bourgeois one, as this one will have better outcomes for him, for his family, and for his community. Now there's a possible danger here: that we assume that all inner-city blacks have a gangster value system. That by dint of skin color and geographic location a person must necessarily have a certain value system. So let's not make that error. Additionally, I would be very surprised if a majority of inner-city blacks held to some sort of gangster value system. While I don't have the data or surveys on hand, I would assume that most of this population already agrees with and holds most of the pro-family bourgeois values. If these bourgeois values are already widespread yet poor outcomes remain then we can't pin these outcomes on a person lacking correct values. There's another factor in play. It may be that bourgeois values are hostage to other social, economic, and cultural factors. That they might yet bloom into something positive but are missing other essential ingredients. Wax fails insofar as she assigns too great a weight to the impact of bourgeois values.

angersock 9y ago
Building on this point, values for a single person/group can be ranked in terms of importance: I value easily drinkable water much more than I value easy access to cat pictures, and I value easy access to cat pictures more than I value Irish independence (for example). This being the case, two groups that might differ on some values can oftentimes work together if they have similar regard for highly-prioritized shared values--for example, I would have no problem protesting with somebody from the IRA were our common supply of water or internet threatened. The cancerous line of thinking adopted by extremist conservatives and progressives, though, requires that all values must be ranked according to some ill-defined group gestalt, and moreover, that any difference in value systems--no matter how low-priority!--is sufficient for name-calling and failing to cooperate. That desire to gridlock over petty things is what rots a society.
- taylodl 9y ago
  In my argumentation and debate class I took at the University many years ago the professor made the somewhat provocative statement that there is a set of universal values which everyone holds dear. The problem is they rank them differently in terms of importance and that's where all the arguments stem from. The key to effective debate is to identify those values you share and show you have the same mutual concerns.
  - angersock 9y ago
    Yep. When arguing properly (as opposed to here, for example), I usually try to start with a common set of values or facts with my opponent--oftentimes just using theirs for convenience's sake--and try to reason back to my own position. Rarely does this fail. When it does fail, it usually means that we both have an incomplete view of the world, or that there is some incorrectness in the chain of reasoning that becomes evident pretty quickly. Unfortunately, people usually prefer to take the (quicker, sloppier, more quarrelsome) route of "I have my facts, you have your facts, you are evil for believing <X,Y,Z>".
wsxcde 9y ago
"I think you're so focused on detecting a dog whistle that you're missing the key point being raised." There is no need to detect a dogwhistle. We have an explicit statement from Wax (http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/08/amy-wax-penn-law-cultural-values http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/08/amy-wax-penn-law-cultur...) where she says Anglo-Protestant cultural norms are superior. "I don't shrink from the word, 'superior,'" she said, adding, "Everyone wants to come to the countries that exemplify" these values. "Everyone wants to go to countries ruled by white Europeans."
- Veelox 9y ago
  An aside, I grew up in a small Midwest town. There was one black family in town. One of the sons was in the grade above me in school and people would joke that he wasn't really "black". This was because he had been raise in a small Midwest town and had small-town values and habits. He and his family were an accepted part of the community because they had the same values. If a member of the Bloods had moved in town, they would very much have been rejected because they would have been acting with very different values. Further more, they probably would have starting acting in ways that were contrary to cultural norms. Is it racist to say that I think small-town Midwest values are superior to inner-city black values? Is it racist to say that I think that the lives of inner-city blacks would be improved if they adopted small-town Midwest values? What if I switch the statement and say that I think small-town Midwest values could improve the lives of all poor people in the inner city. Is that "dog whistling"?
  - kelnos 9y ago
    You're assuming that "inner-city black values" is a thing, and that black people living in inner cities all have the same values. That's the part that's racist.
    - Veelox 9y ago
      My sister taught in Memphis for 3 years. The kids she taught were of raise significantly differently than we were raised. I will grant you that not all black people living in the inner city have the same values but I think it is factually incorrect to say that low income African Americans living in the inner-city do not have a common culture and common values. My phrasing might be racist, if that is the case, can you point out how to express the same idea in a more neutral way so that I don't make the same mistake in the future?
pdkl95 9y ago
> We can also imagine an inner city black who has a choice between two value systems Far too many black families do no have the luxury to choose a new value system. Extreme generational poverty is bad enough, but many are not allowed to even start on a path towards self improvement because 7.7% of adult black men are currently in prison. How, exactly, does "pro-family culture" improve social mobility for the 1-in-9 black children with a parent in prison. > It may be that bourgeois values are hostage to other social, economic, and cultural factors. Exactly - it wouldn't surprise me at all if the "benefits" attributed to marriage are actually a proxy for race. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/26/america-has-locked-up-so-many-black-people-it-has-warped-our-sense-of-reality/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/26/ameri...
- leepowers 9y ago
  This underscores an error that many conservative thinkers make - that "values are everything." I think values are an important part of achieving good outcomes, but values don't exist in isolation. The war on drugs criminalizes behavior that could be better treated through rehabilitation. Then it compounds this error by imposing large externalities, like felony records that make it impossible to find a job, excessive mandatory minimum sentences, etc. Values multiply positively with other factors. So it's not "bourgeois values" + "economic opportunity" == "success". It's more like "bourgeois values" * "economic opportunity" == success (multiplication instead of addition). When "economic opportunity" = 0 values will have no impact. This is an idea that a lot of us in the U.S. grapple with, that you can be virtuous but still end up with a bad outcome.
TheCoelacanth 9y ago
Inner-city blacks don't have a lack of stable family life because of "culture". It's because we lock up vast numbers of young black men for minor crimes right when they would otherwise be forming families.

angersock 9y ago

Building on this point, values for a single person/group can be ranked in terms of importance: I value easily drinkable water much more than I value easy access to cat pictures, and I value easy access to cat pictures more than I value Irish independence (for example). This being the case, two groups that might differ on some values can oftentimes work together if they have similar regard for highly-prioritized shared values--for example, I would have no problem protesting with somebody from the IRA were our common supply of water or internet threatened. The cancerous line of thinking adopted by extremist conservatives and progressives, though, requires that all values must be ranked according to some ill-defined group gestalt, and moreover, that any difference in value systems--no matter how low-priority!--is sufficient for name-calling and failing to cooperate. That desire to gridlock over petty things is what rots a society.

taylodl 9y ago
In my argumentation and debate class I took at the University many years ago the professor made the somewhat provocative statement that there is a set of universal values which everyone holds dear. The problem is they rank them differently in terms of importance and that's where all the arguments stem from. The key to effective debate is to identify those values you share and show you have the same mutual concerns.
- angersock 9y ago
  Yep. When arguing properly (as opposed to here, for example), I usually try to start with a common set of values or facts with my opponent--oftentimes just using theirs for convenience's sake--and try to reason back to my own position. Rarely does this fail. When it does fail, it usually means that we both have an incomplete view of the world, or that there is some incorrectness in the chain of reasoning that becomes evident pretty quickly. Unfortunately, people usually prefer to take the (quicker, sloppier, more quarrelsome) route of "I have my facts, you have your facts, you are evil for believing <X,Y,Z>".

wsxcde 9y ago

"I think you're so focused on detecting a dog whistle that you're missing the key point being raised." There is no need to detect a dogwhistle. We have an explicit statement from Wax (http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/08/amy-wax-penn-law-cultural-values http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/08/amy-wax-penn-law-cultur...) where she says Anglo-Protestant cultural norms are superior. "I don't shrink from the word, 'superior,'" she said, adding, "Everyone wants to come to the countries that exemplify" these values. "Everyone wants to go to countries ruled by white Europeans."

Veelox 9y ago
An aside, I grew up in a small Midwest town. There was one black family in town. One of the sons was in the grade above me in school and people would joke that he wasn't really "black". This was because he had been raise in a small Midwest town and had small-town values and habits. He and his family were an accepted part of the community because they had the same values. If a member of the Bloods had moved in town, they would very much have been rejected because they would have been acting with very different values. Further more, they probably would have starting acting in ways that were contrary to cultural norms. Is it racist to say that I think small-town Midwest values are superior to inner-city black values? Is it racist to say that I think that the lives of inner-city blacks would be improved if they adopted small-town Midwest values? What if I switch the statement and say that I think small-town Midwest values could improve the lives of all poor people in the inner city. Is that "dog whistling"?
- kelnos 9y ago
  You're assuming that "inner-city black values" is a thing, and that black people living in inner cities all have the same values. That's the part that's racist.
  - Veelox 9y ago
    My sister taught in Memphis for 3 years. The kids she taught were of raise significantly differently than we were raised. I will grant you that not all black people living in the inner city have the same values but I think it is factually incorrect to say that low income African Americans living in the inner-city do not have a common culture and common values. My phrasing might be racist, if that is the case, can you point out how to express the same idea in a more neutral way so that I don't make the same mistake in the future?

pdkl95 9y ago

> We can also imagine an inner city black who has a choice between two value systems Far too many black families do no have the luxury to choose a new value system. Extreme generational poverty is bad enough, but many are not allowed to even start on a path towards self improvement because 7.7% of adult black men are currently in prison. How, exactly, does "pro-family culture" improve social mobility for the 1-in-9 black children with a parent in prison. > It may be that bourgeois values are hostage to other social, economic, and cultural factors. Exactly - it wouldn't surprise me at all if the "benefits" attributed to marriage are actually a proxy for race. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/26/america-has-locked-up-so-many-black-people-it-has-warped-our-sense-of-reality/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/26/ameri...

leepowers 9y ago
This underscores an error that many conservative thinkers make - that "values are everything." I think values are an important part of achieving good outcomes, but values don't exist in isolation. The war on drugs criminalizes behavior that could be better treated through rehabilitation. Then it compounds this error by imposing large externalities, like felony records that make it impossible to find a job, excessive mandatory minimum sentences, etc. Values multiply positively with other factors. So it's not "bourgeois values" + "economic opportunity" == "success". It's more like "bourgeois values" * "economic opportunity" == success (multiplication instead of addition). When "economic opportunity" = 0 values will have no impact. This is an idea that a lot of us in the U.S. grapple with, that you can be virtuous but still end up with a bad outcome.

TheCoelacanth 9y ago

Inner-city blacks don't have a lack of stable family life because of "culture". It's because we lock up vast numbers of young black men for minor crimes right when they would otherwise be forming families.