Discussion about this post

User's avatar
John K. Wilson's avatar

I think to understand today's political polarization, and the emphasis on equity and disparities rather than intent and equality, you have to go back further--to Brown v. Board of Education. That's when Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP amassed data to show that segregated schools hurt black children, and argued that the doctrine of separate but equal was wrong without needing to show any intent to harm black people--the harmful effects were sufficient. In any legal system, the first step toward justice is equality by prohibiting de jure discrimination. The second step toward justice is equity by prohibiting de facto discrimination--that's what the Griggs ruling did, and Griggs was right. But it's very hard to argue that political polarization was invented in 1971 when we had many worse forms of political polarization during the 1960s. It's also questionable that political polarization is such a terrible thing if we had far less polarization during the repressive eras of Jim Crow and McCarthyism.

Expand full comment
Steve's avatar

As I understand it, the key flaw in the decision is that the mere existence of disparity is prima facie evidence of discrimination. In other words, given a disparity, the default assumption is "discrimination". (And now, to defend yourself, you have to prove you weren't discriminating -- you have to prove a negative. Guilty until proven innocent.)

Why is this troubling? As Thomas Sowell covers at length, disparate outcomes are the norm, not the exception. There are *many* reasons for disparate outcomes; this decision *always* puts discrimination at the top of the list.

Disparity in Nobel Prizes massively favors Jews. Jewish conspiracy, or some other reason? Disparity in the NBA massively favors blacks. Discrimination against whites, or some other reason? Go read "The Triple Package"; it's filled with examples of how cultural differences often lead to disparate outcomes.

And yes, people who even try to have good-faith discussions which question this assumption are often demonized with the "r" word.

Expand full comment
13 more comments...

No posts