21 ms·
Ideally, the confrontation of economic realities that America is long overdue for. I did not like reading this and won’t defend it on a general basis. It suffe
by gt_ 9y ago
Ideally, the confrontation of economic realities that America is long overdue for.
I did not like reading this and won’t defend it on a general basis. It suffers from the same problem that undermines all identity related political efforts: a failure to acknowledge the integral role of capital disparities in every area of our lives.
It’s tough, and somewhat pointless, to debate the effects of affirmative action unless it can be isolated from the circumstances it seeks to defeat. We have by and large failed to accomplish that.
Isolating the maps of our societal relations (culture, tradition, economy, geography) is incredibly difficult, until we can offer equal opportunities in life, we will be fools to expect equal outcomes in particular segments.
Let us be humble and consider that Democrats are equally challenged in these considerations.
- nothrabannosir 9y ago> I did not like reading this and won’t defend it on a general basis. It suffers from the same problem that undermines all identity related political efforts: a failure to acknowledge the integral role of capital disparities in every area of our lives. I thought the author did their very best to steer clear of actually going into the affirmative action issue itself, instead focusing purely on Penn’s reaction to the debacle. He even says as much, at one point: > I will not state here whether I agree or disagree with Amy Wax's controversial opinions about affirmative action, about bourgeois culture, or about what are the appropriate remedies for past racial wrongs. Seems to me like there is little room in this article to (fail to) acknowledge anything about the merits of affirmative action. In fact, reading between the lines of that one paragraph, i would wager he does agree with you. But he doesn’t want to give anyone the satisfaction of getting him to say it. Edit: rest of that paragraph, for context: > I won't say, because it's completely irrelevant to the points I'm making here; and, because to state that "I certainly don't agree with Wax on A, B, or C, but ..." would be to concede far too much to the thought police. It would be a transparent attempt to gain credibility with them before criticizing their reactions to Wax, and I refuse to acknowledge their authority over me in that way. […] Hear, hear.
- gt_ 9y agoAll good points. I just wanted to be cautious but it’s probably not fair for me to imply his stance was stronger than you describe.