Tag: Heather MacDonald

By on 1 Comment

Heather MacDonald writes that Donald Trump took “the most important step it can to restore meritocracy. to American society” by eliminating disparate-impact. When exactly was there a meritocracy in the United States? Certainly no time before 1964 when discrimination against people of color and women was legal. Not directly after the passage of Civil Rights laws in 1964 when White resistance to the new laws was so fierce it required the implementation of Affirmative Action in order to ensure that Whites complied with the new law. Since MacDonald finds any tool that aids people of color a boost is an affront to meritocracy, it certainly isn’t the recent past So MacDonald needs to identify the golden age of meritocracy in USA because from the evidence I can see, there never has been a meritocracy.

MacDonald glosses over 200 years of American History. She assumes that the 1964 Civil Rights ended discrimination and nothing more needed to be done. For her racial prejudice is obvious, racists are obnoxious assholes in a Ku Klux Klan robe screaming the N word. It certainly couldn’t be nice middle class whites who hire employees or admit students to Ivy League colleges. They wouldn’t be caught dead in a Ku Klux Klan robe, so how could they be prejudiced.

The advantage of the public bigots is that they are easy to identify. The problem is the more prevalent form of racism that Blacks encounter is from polite and powerful White who, just the same, might be disinclined to hire someone different from them. They don’t say we are picking a White over a Black. They know the game. They say that the White guy is just more qualified for the job than the Black guy. For this reason, discrimination is difficult to prove. This is the barrier that Blacks face. MacDonald doesn’t appear to be bothered much by this more subtle form of racism or even acknowledge that it might exist.

Disparate-impact was one of the tools that the government used to show discrimination. If an employer has never hired Blacks, year after year, in a community where the population is 25% Black, then the government can see that there might be a problem with discrimination in hiring. Without disparate impact, how does MacDonald propose to identify non-compliant businesses and schools?

She doesn’t. She views discrimination as a phantom problem that doesn’t occur any more so there is no reason to investigate. People are only looking for the best – Black, White, Man, Woman. Race and Gender don’t matter only quality. Well, maybe, but how do we know this is happening unless we evaluate?

Finally, for the record, there will never be a meritocracy as long as rich families hand over their businesses to their children. It is never going to happen as long as some people have connections and others don’t. It never is going to happen as long as people with money can buy their children’s ways into universities. It never is going to happen when White middle class people can avoid “bad” school districts. It never is going to happen as long as poor Black children are given a second rate educations while White middle class children are given a first rate one.

How does MacDonald feel about those problems? Until she addresses them, I don’t believe that she gives a damn about meritocracy.

By on

I am sure the cops will come up with an explanation that gets them off the hook but the death of Roger Fortson is a perfect case to show the problems of the police, Black men and the 2nd Amendment. Forston was an Air Force man in his home when the police came knocking but, according to witnesses, not identifying themselves as police. Forston, who did not know they were cops, greeted them with a gun which is his right. The cops shoot him dead.

First, cops should always identify themselves as cops — every single time. This may have stopped the tragedy from going any further. I don’t care what the situation is because the cops, as in this case, might be at the wrong house. Given the high percentage of gun owners in the USA, if the cops break down someone’s front door without identifying themselves, they really should expect to be greeted with a person holding a gun. Isn’t this what the whole 2nd Amendment argument is all about — home owners protecting their homes. Identifying themselves as cops is for the safety of the cops as well as any potential suspects.

Then there is the fact that the cops had the wrong address. Yes, the cops can make mistakes but how rotten is it for the cops to break down a person’s door, find a man with a gun waiting for them and, because he is pointing a gun at them, the cops then shoot the person dead. All taking place within seconds of the police breaking down the person’s door. How do you balance a person’s right to protect themselves with the cops justified fear that the person holding a gun might kill them? Right now, it seems that cops have a little trouble with the constitutional right for Black men to bear arms (see Tamir Rice, John Crawford and Philando Castile).

It is completely irrelevant to argue, like Heather MacDonald frequently does, that black criminals are much more dangerous to the black population than cops. I suspect that this is also true that white criminals are more dangerous to white people than the cops. This should go without saying, right? Criminals are criminals. There should be an expectation that they are more dangerous than cops. Cops, on the other hand, aren’t supposed to be killing innocent people. Criminals are under no such compunction.

The fact that the mortality of Blacks at the hands of cops is small compared to Black criminals is changing the argument about a real problem. MacDonald says the problem is crime and if only Blacks understood that the police, in order to deal with crime, will have to take on Black criminals. Up to a point, she is correct. Criminals need to be dealt with but if you are afraid that your call to the police might get you or a neighbor killed, you might think differently. She conveniently ignores the historical experience that Blacks have had with the cops. If she considered it, it might help her understand why Blacks focus on cops killing innocent Blacks. They shouldn’t have to worry about cops killing innocent people.

If Blacks are afraid to ask the cops for help, they may depend more upon their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms which conflicts with MacDonald’s assertion that innocent Black people will have to endure even more contact with the police in order to stop Black crime. The cops then will face even more Black men with guns which then will lead to even more innocent black men getting shot. MacDonald assumes a level of trust that Black people just don’t have with the cops. She can complain all she wants about Black criminals being more dangerous than cops but in order for her plan to work Blacks have to see cops as allies and not enemies. They don’t and it is up to the cops to change this perception.

Until then, Black men will have to exercise their 2nd Amendment right with extreme caution.

By on

Heather MacDonald worries that Black on Black crime is the real problem plaguing the Black community and not a racist cop problem. That Black on Black crime problem is rooted in the racist cop problem eludes her. She thinks it is simply a matter of the Black community behaving better and all will be taken care of. She offers nothing in the way of tangible ways to make this happen and, because she ignores the racists cop part of the problem, her idea is doomed to failure even if she could trouble herself to make a tangible recommendation to address Black on Black crime.

MacDonald sees the problem quite narrowly — Blacks are committing too many crimes against other Blacks. Blacks need to stop worrying about bad cops and do something about their criminal youth then there would be no problem at all. But crime has been with us since humans began living together. It isn’t going to stop. Say a stranger attacks me on the street. I will certainly be pissed off about it and want something done. Now, if that person is a cop, I am going to be pretty damn upset about it. I just don’t expect much from my neighbors. They are strangers and I they can be half crazy for all I know. I do, however, expect cops to be helpful. I don’t expect them to attack me. They are public servants paid, in part, with my taxes. The worst I, as a white person, expect from a cop is that the crime will remain unsolved and I will never hear from them again. Some Blacks fear a different reaction from the police and that is a problem. A problem that impacts all crime in a Black neighborhood.

This doesn’t mean Blacks like their neighbors committing crimes against them or that they don’t see this as a problem. They may, however, have different concerns about the police. They may worry that the police will somehow entangle them in a bigger problem, or that the cops might overreact to what happened and, instead of solving the problem, they may kill someone or send someone to the hospital. They might weigh their decision about whether to involve the cops. Is this going to be worth any trouble I get from the police. This is an impediment to crime control. It also makes the police peculiarly ineffective in handling crime in Black neighborhoods. How can police solve crimes when the people they are serving mistrust them so much that they are circumspect in their interactions with the police? MacDonald never addresses this.

But she does point out that Black criminals are more dangerous to Blacks than the police. I don’t think anybody would argue with that. Criminals are more dangerous than the police. The problem here is that the police aren’t supposed to be dangerous. Fear of the cops is not an issue for MacDonald. For MacDonald, the data should convince Blacks about that, why should any other effort be made when the numbers prove her point. But, even if you assume the numbers are right and MacDonald is correct about Black on Black crime, it doesn’t really matter. Perception is everything. If the Black community believes Racism is still a problem then it is still a problem and the police need to change that perception. The burden for change rests firmly with the cops. Present day cops are paying the price for the racist behavior of their predecessors. It’s not fair to them but it is up to the present day cops to change this perception.

I also would argue that MacDonald is wrong about police racism being inconsequential and all in the Black community’s mind. Here is a sample of police racism which might explain this fear: the Central Park rape trial of innocent blacks, the drug arrests of innocent Blacks in Tulia Texas, George Floyd who died in police custody over a bad check, Tamir Rice, a twelve year old boy with a toy gun, who was shot and killed seconds after the police arrived — a grand jury decided not to take case to trial, John Crawford III who was shot holding a BB gun in a Walmart — a grand jury decided not to prosecute, an all white jury finding a white policeman not guilty of shooting of an unarmed black man, a white Louisiana judge using the N word, an Illinois cop fired for his racist posts, six Georgia policeman caught using the N word, a Mississippi police chief caught bragging about killing a black person, and just recently an Oklahoma sheriff was caught on tape talking about lynching black people. Why would Black people think they could be treated fairly when their daily personal experiences tell them differently? Why would Black people work with the police to stop crime in their neighborhoods when they are suspicious that these efforts might be used against them or their kids?

Black on Black crime is a problem but it isn’t “the” problem. Blacks have plenty of reasons to mistrust the police. MacDonald telling them this no longer is a problem in 21st Century America isn’t going to change many minds because Black people have a history with hundreds of years of police racism. Those feelings don’t just disappear overnight. In order to fight crime, Black people need to have confidence in the police. A lot of them don’t. Until then, MacDonalds complaint about Black on Black crime is an impotent response to a difficult and complicated problem and therefore meaningless.