so true. and there are so many different divisions we humans draw, you are right. i've often wondered why this nature is in us with such persistence.
the media beast has grown too large. people have grown too damn reliant. it's scary.
Another excellent piece, man. The unspoken aspect of equal oportunity, is that, like the lottery, there are many more losers than winners. Unlike the lottery's random chance, we're taught that life's winners earned it through hard work, ability, sacrifice, etc. Upwardly mobile poc aren't immune to this narrative even when fully aware of society's structural, institionalized forms of racism that play such a great part in maintaining today's class structures. Peer level cross-racial interactions (the most common non-commercial form) tend to reinforce both this, & also at least for many whites, the color-blind society story. Always left unspoken is the simple fact that the prosperity of the few is dependent on the hard work & impoverishment of many. How convenient is it when they are then blamed for their poverty because of whatever set of stereoytpes are then brought into play?
Until we start defining equality in terms of opportunity rather than in terms of moral responsibility, capitalist America will continue to provide the working class with the illusion of equality while it proceeds to exploit them.
I don't understand this. Isn't the concept of equality we currently grapple with defined precisely upon the fulcrum of opportunity? Not that it's been achieved, but what would this supposedly ideal state look like? An equivalent percentage of identifiable groups (based on race, sex, religion,or whatever other categories of division are imagined) in the 1% billionaires club, the whatever % millionaires club, & so on thru the various class strata whose haves are utterly dependent on the existence & labor of a vast number of have-nots. That is the model of liberal copporate capitalism, the best it has to to offer. Our focus on equal opportunity can only re-distribute in more equitable fashion the percentages of groupings in each class strata which, while a laudable goal, fails to challenge a system that cannot exist without a vast, global impoverished class.
Arcturus - the model of liberal copporate capitalism is what is called equality of outcome or commonly known here in the US - egalitarianism. You are very correct about its shortcomings.
Equality of opportunity is another matter. Equality of opportunity is a political ideal that is opposed to caste hierarchy but not to hierarchy per se. It is how Affirmative Action started off and the bases of the Bakke arguement before things changed.
*nod*
I trust my views are familiar enough to you that you understand I'm not constructing an argument against AA, and that I believe Bakke was a horrible set-back. Guess what I'm pointing at is that lack of opportunity is a symptom & effect of racism (as well as a structural aspect of capitalism, which needs an underclass), and that a quantitative focus, one which defines "equality in terms of opportunity," ultimately misses the mark. For it is entirely possible (& I think one can see this in both public & private sectors today) that good-looking numbers/percentages can be achieved in terms of participation in education & employment, without making any serious dent in the underlying racism that infects our society. To my mind, equality would entail something more like mutual respect, something "opportunity" alone will never guarantee.
I think a lot of the back-patting on 'how far we've come' - mostly from whites, but as noted, sometimes from upwardly mobile poc as well - is enabled & lent credibility by equating equality w/ quantifiable opportunity.
Hope that makes some sense - I need more coffee.
I see what your saying. I think we are saying the same thing, but in different ways. I agree that that use of quotas and set asides are horrible.
The problem with the numbers game nobody is ever happy. White people will complain of reverse discrimination and it divides poc, which, in my mind, is the reason we have the who is "more opressed" game. We will always argue that the numbers are low. In that sense, it continues to benefit the rich. They in turn, use it to their advantage to continue the divide.
Racism has been embedded in peoples minds for centuries because it passed down from generation to generation, a few break out of it, but not enough to make a serious dent. Equality should entail mutual respect, but I don't think that in our life time we will see this, not when people are unwilling to break the chains that bind them the current view.
use of quotas and set asides are horrible - actually, I'd argue that they are often (still? ha!) necessary. & you're right, we're just coming at basically the same thng from different angles - I just quibbled w/ that one phrase
White people will complain of reverse discrimination and it divides poc, which, in my mind, is the reason we have the who is "more opressed" game
'zactly! divert & divide - who benefits when whites see themselves threatened by AA? when workers are encouraged to believe it's immigrants who are 'taking their jobs'? when Native American tribes are set against the Black Chamber of Comemrce or whatever it's called for homeland security minority contracts?)
& certainly won't argue with:
eternal hopes, too
long deferred
That was a very well constructed piece.
Rachel - Thanks!
Commenting by HaloScan
