Working my way through Dr. King's 1967 book "Where do we go trom here: Chaos or Community?" and I was struck by his comment that for every step forward of Black American progress, there was a step backwards by a white backlash. This is a major point of Ibram X. Kendi's thinking, too. Dr. King also favored massive government spending to mitigate the centuries of Jim Crow, pointing out that costs for such a program would be miniscule compared to what is spent for world military hegemony.
This seems like an insult to King by Kendi. It implies the work King did 60 years ago accomplished very little. The world King saw accurately in the 1960s has changed - a lot - in large part due to him and his fellow activists and thinkers. Kendi is not a thinker. Kendi closes his eyes to this immense progress, so this "major point" of his thinking is an embarrassment.
King and Kendi, from different eras, came to a similar conclusion independently. Kendi would be the first to praise King and his cohort of non-violent warriors, but in the last generation so much of what was achieved by that generation in terms of law has dissipated under a vicious counterattack by racist whites and apathetic liberals. King foresaw this in 1967, pp. 80-83, where he sketches the developing white backlash, and says "... the white backlash is not new." (Affirmative Action opened up the pathway for an entire generation of Blacks to move up, but it remains to be seen if that will be enough to achieve societal lift-off. )
I assume from previous visits to this site that the readers want facts and go into things with open eyes and an open mind. I gave you the cite from Dr. King in 1967 and Prof. Kendi's view on the same subject is well known. The question, Where do we go from here?, is more relevant than ever. (I would characterize your point of view as ahistorical, that is, you conceive that things have gotten better and will continue to get better.)
The comment about moving from academic to non-academic (informed? popular?) writing reminded me of when I was involved in contract research funded ultimately by San Diego Gas & Electric. We worked through a middleman. The company was having difficult in getting public opinion through traditional telephone research (this was in the early 1980s). It was not only about access (to low-income ethnic minorities) but also how to make the questions understandable (rhetoric). So, the question "what do you do for energy conservation?" was translated into "what do you do to save on your gas and electric?" That did get us some more telling responses. For example, a grandmother said, "I put scotch tape on the light switches when my grandkids come over." So, the rhetoric of the street made more sense, in this case, than the rhetoric of the "learned."
DEI will continue to linger in feminized spaces and bureaucratic structures (anywhere the rigorous limitations of profit and outcome aren't constraining, basically). But it is certainly fading from the market and it has been discredited among people who seek individual excellence and institutional effectiveness as primary goals.
Unfortunately we have millions of people (disproportionately progressive women) who take an emotional approach to society and reality, for whom the greatest aim is ALWAYS to 'uplift' the 'marginalized.' It's purely a coincidence in their minds that the uplifting always involves vast administrative structures and provides their class with billions of dollars of employment and extra status.
Many black Americans are not fully aware of the troubling statistics surrounding black family instability, academic underperformance, and crime rates, and in some cases, there is resistance to confronting them. I believe that if these realities were discussed more openly and consistently within the community, we could better recognize that many of our challenges come from behavioral and cultural issues within our control, rather than racism.
Great Interview. Nice mix of the personal and professional. Re academic writing: When I edited a journal on international housing policy at HUD, Brookings' urbanist Anthony Downs was a huge relief from the academic style of all the other submissions. He was a PhD economist. But he wrote in plain English, and he got so much more attention than anybody else. It was then I realized that even academics don't much like reading academic writing!
Some of the institutions are quietly trying to walk back their efforts... without being honest about what went on, or the eventual effects. It's a neat attempt at memory-holing. I get a kick out of all the managerial types who seem surprised that equity-centered selection policies were in place, when these same people could've strenuously argued for them 4-5 years ago. There's little honesty in this discourse, unfortunately - just institutional incentives and unchallenged social desirability bias.
Working my way through Dr. King's 1967 book "Where do we go trom here: Chaos or Community?" and I was struck by his comment that for every step forward of Black American progress, there was a step backwards by a white backlash. This is a major point of Ibram X. Kendi's thinking, too. Dr. King also favored massive government spending to mitigate the centuries of Jim Crow, pointing out that costs for such a program would be miniscule compared to what is spent for world military hegemony.
This seems like an insult to King by Kendi. It implies the work King did 60 years ago accomplished very little. The world King saw accurately in the 1960s has changed - a lot - in large part due to him and his fellow activists and thinkers. Kendi is not a thinker. Kendi closes his eyes to this immense progress, so this "major point" of his thinking is an embarrassment.
King and Kendi, from different eras, came to a similar conclusion independently. Kendi would be the first to praise King and his cohort of non-violent warriors, but in the last generation so much of what was achieved by that generation in terms of law has dissipated under a vicious counterattack by racist whites and apathetic liberals. King foresaw this in 1967, pp. 80-83, where he sketches the developing white backlash, and says "... the white backlash is not new." (Affirmative Action opened up the pathway for an entire generation of Blacks to move up, but it remains to be seen if that will be enough to achieve societal lift-off. )
We can't agree on the facts. You might be able to sell your spin on some woke site, but I would guess FBT readers don't share your attitude.
I assume from previous visits to this site that the readers want facts and go into things with open eyes and an open mind. I gave you the cite from Dr. King in 1967 and Prof. Kendi's view on the same subject is well known. The question, Where do we go from here?, is more relevant than ever. (I would characterize your point of view as ahistorical, that is, you conceive that things have gotten better and will continue to get better.)
The comment about moving from academic to non-academic (informed? popular?) writing reminded me of when I was involved in contract research funded ultimately by San Diego Gas & Electric. We worked through a middleman. The company was having difficult in getting public opinion through traditional telephone research (this was in the early 1980s). It was not only about access (to low-income ethnic minorities) but also how to make the questions understandable (rhetoric). So, the question "what do you do for energy conservation?" was translated into "what do you do to save on your gas and electric?" That did get us some more telling responses. For example, a grandmother said, "I put scotch tape on the light switches when my grandkids come over." So, the rhetoric of the street made more sense, in this case, than the rhetoric of the "learned."
DEI will continue to linger in feminized spaces and bureaucratic structures (anywhere the rigorous limitations of profit and outcome aren't constraining, basically). But it is certainly fading from the market and it has been discredited among people who seek individual excellence and institutional effectiveness as primary goals.
Unfortunately we have millions of people (disproportionately progressive women) who take an emotional approach to society and reality, for whom the greatest aim is ALWAYS to 'uplift' the 'marginalized.' It's purely a coincidence in their minds that the uplifting always involves vast administrative structures and provides their class with billions of dollars of employment and extra status.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/dei-dies-a-little-more
It's no fading as it has gone into hiding. https://www.thecollegefix.com/undercover-video-at-nc-state-catches-staffer-admitting-covert-dei-programs-amid-ban/
Many black Americans are not fully aware of the troubling statistics surrounding black family instability, academic underperformance, and crime rates, and in some cases, there is resistance to confronting them. I believe that if these realities were discussed more openly and consistently within the community, we could better recognize that many of our challenges come from behavioral and cultural issues within our control, rather than racism.
Not so fast .... https://www.thecollegefix.com/undercover-video-at-nc-state-catches-staffer-admitting-covert-dei-programs-amid-ban/
Great Interview. Nice mix of the personal and professional. Re academic writing: When I edited a journal on international housing policy at HUD, Brookings' urbanist Anthony Downs was a huge relief from the academic style of all the other submissions. He was a PhD economist. But he wrote in plain English, and he got so much more attention than anybody else. It was then I realized that even academics don't much like reading academic writing!
Some of the institutions are quietly trying to walk back their efforts... without being honest about what went on, or the eventual effects. It's a neat attempt at memory-holing. I get a kick out of all the managerial types who seem surprised that equity-centered selection policies were in place, when these same people could've strenuously argued for them 4-5 years ago. There's little honesty in this discourse, unfortunately - just institutional incentives and unchallenged social desirability bias.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/equity-as-outgroup-contempt