Thomas Sowell writes about INEQUITIES HERE....please take a look. He's such a good thinker and I URGE you to send this to friends, it's important that more and more Americans see and understand his point.
Thanks to Namaste for her excellent blog piece and the article.
Z
16 comments:
When some bobo decides that sports analogies are satisfactory for discussing complex topics ... he should be asked to leave the grownups table.
This guy is a damn circus clown
Ducky, you can't not see his whole point..the whole metaphor of it is absolutely PERFECT and you don't GET IT?
Why insult him? Try to see what he's saying because every American would benefit by it.
What the heck's the matter with you?
If you don't like the message, attack that, not the messenger.
Why insult him? Because he's writing for Rollo, that's why.
"The problem with trying to equalize is that you can usually only equalize downward."
Now if you think he demonstrated that point with his little Michael Jordan riff then you simply aren't being critical and he preys on people that want easy confirmation of complex issues.
Basketball skills or any other sports skills are in an environment where very small differences in ability can make the difference between winning and loosing but he can't demonstrate that in situations where there isn't opportunity that providing that opportunity doesn't provide an overall societal benefit.
His argument is simplex and the man is a lightweight who specializes in preaching to the choir.
Ducky, he's making an excellent point. No writer can extrapolate every single incidence where his point DOESN'T apply or even DOES apply...this doesn't take from the metaphor at all.
It is NEVER a great accomplishment of a great country to put everyone in the hole because a few can't make it. SHIT HAPPENS, Ducky. Pardon me for the crudeness but it's the expression that best fits....not ALL people will ever be rich or fulfilled or anything else.
To bring those down who have worked hard and accomplished something is dangerous and stupid and goes against the best in human nature, of course.
We should be encouraging the less-gifted and less-successful to do more with their lives, not discouraging those of us who have, I'll grant you that.
It's my impression that if those less-gifted and less-successful would be told that they CAN succeed and the opportunities are there IF they work hard,(and they are), they'd do better; America would do better.
Excellent post Z!
Sowell's metaphor is, as usual, spot on. Elucidating, but not simplistic. Not from the mind that gave us the painstakingly well researched and broad reaching trilogy on Conquests and Culture, Migrations and Culture, and Race and Culture.
Ducky, I'm not so sure the simplicity of the metaphor is for the "choir" as much as for those with blinders on who think and see in one, narrow track. More like throwing a line to those drowning in racial obsession.
As for not addressing "providing opportunity ... provides a societal benefit" - that's a topic for another editorial, but, I agree, one even better suited to lengthy discourse. And Dr. Sowell has done that, too. His excellent book, Black Rednecks and White Liberals, sheds much needed light and shades of understanding on the subject.
Ducky: You are getting really nasty in your old age. Too bad. There was a time when I thought you were at least sincere.
"...he should be asked to leave the grownups table." is a very condescending, arrogant and elitist remark and not worthy of rational discussion.
Some people have the intellectual ability to take a simple illustration and extrapolate to a larger issue.
Some people don't.
Which school are you in?
Actually it's a perfect analogy. Maybe we should allow everyone in America exactly one minute on the professional sport of their choice.
Perfect equality.
Hey Z! Stopped by to say hello. I see things are lively today.
Here's a different one for Ducky.
The healthcare bill has a regulation in it for affirmative action for acceptance to medical schools.
Now, for the rest of us that should be enough said.
However for Ducky, I'd ask which doctor would you choose, if you had a choice, the medical student who became a doctor based on his excellence at his studies, and his excellence as an intern, or the doctor who was accepted and promoted by virtue of his so-called minority status?
What's truly criminal, is that standards will be lowered in order for the government's idea of diversity to succeed. It's all about the numbers.
And those who are of minority status who are truly gifted in this area, will be thought to be inferior as a result of the implementation of affirmative action.
Fewer will be as good at their profession as they were when standards were high. Fewer highly qualified will even seek medicine as their profession. This will be the sole result of government meddling with freedom to compete based on merit.
No, this isn't basketball, but, it is equality based on racial quotas and lower standards and ultimately, lower quality of care.
If Thomas Sowell misses a basket no harm no foul, but if a doctor is mediocre, the care will be too. It could cost you your life.
Pris
Pris, GOod comment, thanks!>>AND, this morning, I heard they're going to REWARD excellent doctors!
WHAT? What will they do with NOT excellent doctors!? I can't BELIEVE THIS!
Z, the best thing we can do is to disbelieve the folks pushing this crap. That includes the President, and all his sycophants.
They might as well be selling snake oil!
Pris
He gets it, and ultimately the proponents of affirmative action aren't really looking for equality. That's just a smokescreen, what they really want is to keep dividing and keep giving people reason to hate or dislike each other and also to hobble the truly talented.
mk, you said: "He gets it, and ultimately the proponents of affirmative action aren't really looking for equality. That's just a smokescreen, what they really want is to keep dividing and keep giving people reason to hate or dislike each other and also to hobble the truly talented."
i have to disagree with you. i think that the aim of MOST advocates of this thought is to make non-performing people (whatever the cause) feel good about themselves. i'll give another example from the world of basketball to help me illustrate.
when my son was 8 years old, he was already taller than all but those who were in at least 3 or 4 years older than he. at this point in time my kids were homeschooled, but we had them involved at several activities at the y for social interaction.
at that point he was a member of a group that played intermural (sp?) sports three days a week based on the season. that winter, as one would expect, the sport was basketball. one of my son's very favorite activities at that point in his life was basketball. please note that everyone in this group was 7-9 years old, so jesse fell right smackdab in the middle of the group in terms of age.
through the first week of the sport all seemed to be ok. jesse was so excited each time at the end of the session. after the third session mr. j was called into the "coaches" office when he arrived to get jesse. in this office he was told by the session leader AND the director of that ymca that jesse would have to sit out for basketball.
mr. j immediately inquired if jesse had done something improper or if he was being un-sportsmanlike or what. their answer? "no, jesse's behavior is fine. however, it's unfair to the rest of the kids because he's so much taller he gets the ball more and gets to shoot more than everyone else." WTF???
now, mk, these people weren't trying to foment hate or dislike. no, they were simply trying to make everything "fair" and make ALL the kids feel good about themselves. this could have been an opportunity for the leaders to teach the kids how to use a kid such as jesse to increase the winning and to learn from him. and that is EXACTLY what would have taken place had he been playing in street games rather than in "organize" sports.
jesse refused to go back to the y when he couldn't play b-ball - mr. j tried to get them to let him play with the bigger boys, but the age thing made that impossible. only good thing was that this y's team lost every game that year. so how good do you think the kids felt about themselves after that?
had jesse been allowed to play, there was a good chance the team would have won a few games, at least. don't you think winning, even if you weren't the star player, gives you a better sense of worth than losing, but getting equal time handling the ball??
ts is right on with his analogy.
i think that the aim of MOST advocates of this thought is to make non-performing people (whatever the cause) feel good about themselves.
This is definitely the politics of resentment.
It's time people began to realize that inequality is not "an inequity". Its not a moral issue at all. It's simply a fact of life.
This was a great article. Level the playing field and everyone suffers.
If Sowell were a liberal, he'd screech 'RACISM' over those statements about being asked to leave the grownups table, circus clown, simplistic comments, etc.
But he's not.
That's what makes Sowell so good.
Thanks for sharing this, Z.
Post a Comment