HomePoverty, Academia and PC Speech
February 19, 2021 matloff
Like many of you, I have been increasingly concerned about the stifling of free speech on US university campuses. Meanwhile, a lifetime concern of mine has been the elimination of poverty, both US and worldwide. These two interests converge in this disturbing article in Inside Higher Ed.
The piece opens with
Lehigh University asked professors in its business school to advise the new Biden administration on their areas of expertise via short "kitchen table talk" videos. But one professor's short talk on poverty, including its relationship to race, proved divisive — and that the topic needed a more thorough analysis, the university said. So after temporarily removing the video for review, Lehigh reposted it alongside additional context from other scholars.
"Relationship to race" here meant that the professor, Frank Gunter, downplayed the Race Card: "Gunter explains that he wants to dispel the following 'widely held' beliefs about poverty: that it is 'mostly a matter of race,' that it's a 'generational curse' and that the poor have 'no agency.'" In particular, Gunter cites a Brookings study that found that three simple actions would in most cases enable the impoverished to join the middle class: "finish high school, work full-time, wait until age 21 to get married and have children after marriage."
Of course, this is similar to the views of sociologist/politician Daniel Moynihan back in the 60s and 70s, which later fell out of favor, and I've generally been critical of Brookings for its "hired gun" nature. Yet the study is bipartisan, and even Gunter's critics don't seem to be vigorously disputing its points, merely calling the Moynihan view as "discredited."
The critics do correctly note a major error of omission in Gunter's video: Though his statement that most of the poor are not black, and most black people are not poor, as is indeed correct, he fails to note that the poor are disproportionately black; the poverty rate is higher among black people than in the general populace. Gunter was remiss in not including this in his original video.
The critics also note that various government programs have been successful in reducing poverty. One may debate as to whether Gunter erred in not mentioning this, but the critics themselves are remiss for not mentioning a government program that research shows has contributed to black poverty — an immigration policy that brings high levels of low-skilled immigration.
In addition, the debate seems to have overlooked the obvious key point: If indeed the three "silver bullets" of the Brookings study are statistically accurate, then why are many young black people not taking advantage of them? And even more importantly, what can be done to change that?
As the Lehigh faculty senate commented, "Too many times statements are made in response to uncomfortable topics that do little to address the issue at hand." Lehigh, by now restoring the video and pairing it with one expounding an opposing view, should be applauded for attempting to start a genuine debate. This would not happen at many other universities these days, and sadly, I don't expect it to occur within the Biden administration.
← On Trump, Biden and America's Disgrace
Anti-Asian Violence and the Model Minority →
12 thoughts on "Poverty, Academia and PC Speech"
FutureUser says:
The answer is a self-fulfilling statistic: many black children are told — by peers, by neighbors, by well-meaning "experts" — that doing the 3 things listed (study hard, work full time, marriage and then children after age 21) means "acting white". So by not "acting white", children do not "succeed white".
The latest thing in education is to abolish grades, advanced courses, and tests, because they are "racist" or even "white supremacist". It's like having a person find a key to a treasure chest, but his/her friends refuse to use it because they consider it tainted since the person who found it first was white.
Imagine what this trend will mean for society, namely, dumbing down all students to the lowest common denominator. No Child Gets Ahead.
Math instructors used to be encouraged to give examples that would make minority kids proud of their ethnicity. A common one was to point out how the ancient Mayans could precisely predict the date and time of eclipses. But now, they say getting the right answer is "white." 2/
— Norm Matloff 全世界加油! (@matloff) February 18, 2021
I agree it's concerning when views get swept under the bed for ideological reasons.
As to Gunter's arguments, though, I think he doesn't understand how disadvantage works. Finishing high school is a fine idea, but students in disadvantaged households often don't have a desk or even somewhere quiet to study. It's therefore very hard for them to keep up with their work.
Similarly with working full time. Fine advice for the children of the upper middle classes, but often not an option for disadvantaged people. For them, the only options are casual jobs that go nowhere.
Economics really needs a makeover, with more diverse sources of expertise.
There are ways around these obstacles, such as usin the public library for a quiet study place. Low-wage jobs at least provide income, and they teach responsibility and so on, in preparation for better jobs.
The problem of black poverty is largely, though certainly not entirely, one of young black men. Young black women tend to do better, in spite of the obstacles you correctly cite.
To me, the key issue is determining the WHY. If it is indeed at least partly a problem of lack of personal responsibility, then WHY does that lack exist? And how can it be fixed? Very few gov. programs, if any, address these issues. The whole topic of personal responsibility is verboten for discussion, let alone addressed with effective action.
Why?!?
a) stop railroading their fathers into prison, for free convict labor, and cheap labor as "ex-con".
b) living wage. no one does well when parents are working 3 jobs.
c) with parents working multiple jobs, running the household falls to their kids, who won't be at the library, they'll be home cooking supper.
d) lots of people, not just black, who're stiffed in the job market, for a cheaper captive foreign worker – and you know that already, Norm. 1 in 3 under 35 live at home with no job – and that's not a reflection of school dropout rates.
Kristian Schmidt says:
we are made personally responsible for transgressions against legislation; we are made personally taxable for success; and we are subsidized for failing. So, there is lot's of personal responsibility; just not where it matters for promoting success.
As Thomas Sowell also pointed out, African boys did fine in Germany in the 1970s, because they were not surrounded by a culture promoting failure.
So, both Government legislators and local communities must consider if their intervention and culture is promoting success of failure.
For individuals aware of these issues, the best option is not debate, but emigration.
Willie Pete says:
U.S. universities are well on their way to meaninglessness, which will be achieved in this decade, as far as doing actual useful research is concerned. Their restrictions on speech will be a major component of this decline.
The other problem is that funding for research is also being directed towards politically motivated topics, and to "hot" topics rather than areas in which real innovation is possible but where the problems are hard. Mediocrity is being normalized, and the politicization of everything at universities is being given top priority.
The end result will be that the majority of people who will "study" at US universities will be foreign students, obviously with the sole intent of converting their F-1 visas into green cards.
It is all a giant scam.
PabloCruise says:
Not a scientific study but in my immediate and extended family and among dozens of friends, the ones who do the following are generally more secure financially that those that don't:
– Finish high school
– Work full-time
– Wait until age 21 to get married and have children after marriage
Now most of them are white but there is some minorities through intermarriage. And the results are the same across races.
Virgil Bierschwale says:
If those 3 things will decrease poverty, why is poverty increasing among those who have played by those rules?
I made $12,665.00 last year and I can do, and have done all, and played by the rules as well.
If we really want an intelligent conversation around poverty, we need to understand that when we send our best paying jobs to other countries and import a tidal wave of non-immigrant guest workers to take our remaining best paying jobs, this forces our citizens into poverty rather than decreasing it.
drgenenelson says:
Virgil: As I have noted previously, as a Caucasian earning a natural science Ph.D. in 1984, my advanced degree guaranteed that I would be underemployed and unemployed for most of my working life. My parents were not economic elites, which reduced my probability of career success. I experienced multiple job cuts because I exercised my First Amendment rights and criticized the H-1B Visa program as a policy that favored certain economic elites.
Furthermore, an article in the May 29, 2021 Wall Street Journal noted that preschool is beneficial for helping children of poor parents to get ahead. The big benefit is improved resilience in the face of the inevitable reverses during the first two decades of a person's life. The improved resilience leads to increased probability of high school graduation etc.
"disproportionately affects", the new buzz words.
Trade guru on twitter mentioned offshoring "disproportionately affects" black workers.
Reading the article,
– they get their numbers from TAA, "trade adjustment assistance", which does not allow white collar workers assistance – so likely the base numbers on race are HIGHLY skewed from this alone.
– the numbers they did have, 9% of workers in the offshored blue collar domain are black but 13% were laid off due to offshoring.
Just what are we after here, precision rationing of the growing damage?
It looks to be more deflection from Living Wage.
Those 3 silver bullets no longer apply no matter the color of your skin as the ladders that allowed upward mobility have been pulled up by those who have gone before us.