3 ms·

Equity should operate just as much, if not more so, by boosting people up than by cutting people down. It should also favor the individual and small business ov

by LocalH 6y ago

Equity should operate just as much, if not more so, by boosting people up than by cutting people down. It should also favor the individual and small business over large megacorporations. I fear that the concept of equity presents a real possibility of a race to the bottom if we're not careful to prevent a Harrison Bergeron situation. That doesn't mean I think we should avoid equity, just that we should be cognizant of the potential pitfalls along the way to determining the exact implementation.

nostromo 6y ago
Your fear is well-founded, that's already what is happening. Boston Public Schools, for example, just suspended placements in AP courses for all students out of equity concerns. It turns out it's much easier to achieve equity by pushing people down (no more AP courses for anyone) than by lifting people up (getting more black and latino students into AP courses).
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >just suspended placements in AP courses for all students out of equity concerns. The "ruling" class were angry that the plumbers' kids weren't paying a full 4yr of dues to the state colleges so now they're making it so you need to go to private school if you want to get a head start at college gen-eds. And they sold the idea to the masses in the name of making all the animals equal. I'm being cynical. More likely the people responsible just don't know or care and pushing everybody down is just the easiest way to appease the pro-equity crowd.
bzbarsky 6y ago
This is a very reasonable thing to fear. The concept of "уравниловка" in Russian exists precisely because the government tried to do just that in many cases. Making everyone the same (in terms of equality of outcomes) is a lot easier to do by making all the outcomes bad. I should note that "equity" need not mean "equality of outcomes", but when pressed for how one evaluates "equity" far too many proponents fall back to "equality (and proportionality) of outcomes" in practice....
eplanit 6y ago
"Equity should operate just as much, if not more so, by boosting people up than by cutting people down." This is central to the whole problem with this concept of "equity". If the implementation, as you say, _at all_ involves cutting someone down, then it's morally bankrupt. Who decides who gets cut down? Does the person being cut down have a voice? Are they told how they're supposed to feel about it? Is that not creating a newly marginalized group? This will lead to lots of division, and understandably so. There's a lot of truth to the adage "two wrongs don't make a right". Equity seems to be about saying that everyone should have the same outcome, by force if necessary.

by LocalH 6y ago

nostromo 6y ago

Your fear is well-founded, that's already what is happening. Boston Public Schools, for example, just suspended placements in AP courses for all students out of equity concerns. It turns out it's much easier to achieve equity by pushing people down (no more AP courses for anyone) than by lifting people up (getting more black and latino students into AP courses).

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>just suspended placements in AP courses for all students out of equity concerns. The "ruling" class were angry that the plumbers' kids weren't paying a full 4yr of dues to the state colleges so now they're making it so you need to go to private school if you want to get a head start at college gen-eds. And they sold the idea to the masses in the name of making all the animals equal. I'm being cynical. More likely the people responsible just don't know or care and pushing everybody down is just the easiest way to appease the pro-equity crowd.

bzbarsky 6y ago

This is a very reasonable thing to fear. The concept of "уравниловка" in Russian exists precisely because the government tried to do just that in many cases. Making everyone the same (in terms of equality of outcomes) is a lot easier to do by making all the outcomes bad. I should note that "equity" need not mean "equality of outcomes", but when pressed for how one evaluates "equity" far too many proponents fall back to "equality (and proportionality) of outcomes" in practice....

eplanit 6y ago

"Equity should operate just as much, if not more so, by boosting people up than by cutting people down." This is central to the whole problem with this concept of "equity". If the implementation, as you say, _at all_ involves cutting someone down, then it's morally bankrupt. Who decides who gets cut down? Does the person being cut down have a voice? Are they told how they're supposed to feel about it? Is that not creating a newly marginalized group? This will lead to lots of division, and understandably so. There's a lot of truth to the adage "two wrongs don't make a right". Equity seems to be about saying that everyone should have the same outcome, by force if necessary.