<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Thoughtful, persuasive, enjoyable
Review: Glen is an accomplished economist, and you can tell in the style of his writing: He is organized and sets up axioms and bullet points to clarify his arguments. I had the opportunity to hear him speak in 2002, and he is quite persuasive. In this book, Loury makes a case against liberal individualism, the popular assumption that liberalized, free market, "race-blind" policies will naturally dissolve unjust inequalities over time. In this discussion, Loury avoids the topic of overt "racial discrimination", which is easier to spot and has more obvious effects, and focuses instead on the strong, persistent, and self-replicating patterns caused by more subtle forces, which he terms "racial stigma". Stigma refers to bodily markings that are automatically cognitively perceived in all social interaction and which have strong social associations that affect perception and behavior of observers. This stigma, and the associations and stereotypes that are cognitively linked with it, acts to rationalize and sustain systematic racial inequality, perpetuating factors that drive formation of stigma. I believe that these arguments appear more compelling if the reader has previous knowledge of theories in cognitive psychology suggesting that mental associational categorization based on observed statistical tendencies applied to readily observable stimuli may form the basis of all thought and learning Glen's arguments are not airtight, and he relies primarily on philosophical thought experiments for illustration; however, his explorations are useful, and a perspective of racial inequality that did not consider and respond to these perspectives would be naive and incomplete.http://www.blackpeopleloveus.com
Rating: 
Summary: Stigma versus discrimination
Review: I found in this book a refreshingly different take on the current issue of racial inequality in the US. I had heard Loury say on the radio something to the effect of that if you accept the premise that there is no fundamental difference between the races, then how can you not be outraged by the percentage of blacks in jail versus the number of whites (or outraged about many other very telling statistics included in the book). The reason we are not outraged, is that somehow it has become 'reasonable' for this outcome to occur, and we don't see it as out of the ordinary. He describes the mechanism for this as a racial stigma associated with blacks. The book describes how this is different that the more commonly discussed discrimination, and how it is a systematic / cultural mindset bias more than just a behavioral one. He develops this thesis of a racial stigma well, in a readable and convincing fashion.
Rating: 
Summary: Intellectual
Review: I had the chance to take a class called the "Economics and Politics of Race and Inequality" with Professor Loury at Boston University. He had recently released this book, and of course, it was required reading. Loury presents many interesting ideas in this book, including the difference between racial discrimination (treating people differently because of their race) and racial stigma (the image that a person gives off because of their race). Loury argues that racial discrimination, which today is mostly 'discrimination in contact' (between two private people) and not 'discrimination in contract' (in a legal matter), is not what should be viewed as the end game. Of course, he thinks that ending racial discrimination would be great, but the more important thing to do, he says, is to work to end the stigma that black Americans have. Loury, when he used to be a conservative, was considered as a "conservative intellectual", a term that many would find contradictory. Even though his politics may have changed (he now considers himself more liberal, even supporting the 20 point plan in the recent Univ. of Michigan affirmative action case), his status as an intellectual hasn't changed. I had difficulty understanding this book and I had him there to explain it to me! Of course, I got it after a while, but Loury often talks on a level much higher than those not entrenched with the subject will understand. This book, which is a recap of a series of lectures and speeches he gave, is for an intellectual by an intellectual. It's not a casual read on a summer afternoon. But if you're really interested in race relations and racial equality, pick it up. He lays out his arguments well, and even though I don't agree with him on most of his ideas, he's a fascinating guy.
Rating:
Summary: Intellectual
Review: I had the chance to take a class called the "Economics and Politics of Race and Inequality" with Professor Loury at Boston University. He had recently released this book, and of course, it was required reading. Loury presents many interesting ideas in this book, including the difference between racial discrimination (treating people differently because of their race) and racial stigma (the image that a person gives off because of their race). Loury argues that racial discrimination, which today is mostly 'discrimination in contact' (between two private people) and not 'discrimination in contract' (in a legal matter), is not what should be viewed as the end game. Of course, he thinks that ending racial discrimination would be great, but the more important thing to do, he says, is to work to end the stigma that black Americans have. Loury, when he used to be a conservative, was considered as a "conservative intellectual", a term that many would find contradictory. Even though his politics may have changed (he now considers himself more liberal, even supporting the 20 point plan in the recent Univ. of Michigan affirmative action case), his status as an intellectual hasn't changed. I had difficulty understanding this book and I had him there to explain it to me! Of course, I got it after a while, but Loury often talks on a level much higher than those not entrenched with the subject will understand. This book, which is a recap of a series of lectures and speeches he gave, is for an intellectual by an intellectual. It's not a casual read on a summer afternoon. But if you're really interested in race relations and racial equality, pick it up. He lays out his arguments well, and even though I don't agree with him on most of his ideas, he's a fascinating guy.
Rating: 
Summary: Natural Distribution, or Discrimination and Stigma?
Review: More East Asians than Whites qualify for entrance to top universities in the U.S. East Asians also average higher SAT scores and GPAs than do Whites. In turn, White averages are above those of Hispanics, whose average scores are above those of Blacks. In the music, sports, and the entertainment industries, however, Blacks are disproportionately over-represented. Two main theories have been put forth to explain such racial- and ethnic-group differences in average rate of socially-valued outcomes: (1) the distribution model, and (2) the discrimination model. The two models may each be partially correct. The discrimination model focuses on social and institutional practices that discriminate against members of one group (or favor members of another), thus tilting the "playing field." This model assumes that in the absence of discrimination, outcomes should be about equal for all populations; thus evidence of differential performance in itself constitutes proof of discrimination. Factors hypothesized under this model to cause mean racial group differences include relative poverty, anti-Black bias, a lack of access to legitimate channels of upward mobility, and dysfunctional family organization growing out of the legacy of slavery. Loury's "stigma theory" is an extreme special case of the discrimination model. Well articulated, it builds on Erving Goffman's idea that some people carry bodily marks (stigmata) that incline others to judge them negatively. (Goffman's stigmatized classes were the blind, the deaf, the "crippled," the drunk, the ex-mental patient, and the homosexual.) According to Loury's extension, in a white racist society, Blacks have been tagged with a disreputable reputation, a "spoiled identity" that leads others to doubt their worthiness, or if they even share "a common humanity with the observer" (p. 6). Loury believes only more powerful affirmative action programs can rid our society of such "insidious habits of thought, selective patterns of social intercourse...and defective public deliberation..."(p. 168). The alternative distributional model, in contrast, explains both the overlapping of racial groups and the offset in their means in terms of intrinsic group characteristics -- for example, heritable differences in average IQ, proneness to crime, athletic ability, and other biological variables such as body type, hormonal levels, personality and temperament. In contrast to the discrimination model, under the distributional model, population differences are expected to occur, and to do so globally.
While Loury's explication of his position is well argued, his cavalier dismissal of distributional theories makes his book one of advocacy, not science. His stigma theory rests on the week reeds of verbal argument, not the bricks and mortar of statistical analysis and hypothesis testing. Right from the get-go, he high-handedly states it as an "axiom" (p. 5) that racial differences in IQ are not biological and that "this book is not the place to make that case" (p. 6), thus granting himself carte blanche to withhold from his readers one hundred or more years of research about group differences in brain size, sex hormones, as well as trans-racial adoption studies, within-family social mobility, and the worldwide distribution of cognitive ability. To cite one established empirical finding that undercuts his theory, Blacks do not underachieve scholastically only in "white majority countries" like the U.S., Britain, and Canada, where, in principle, "stigma theory" could apply. Africans in Africa (whose average IQ = 70) score even further below the White average IQ of 100 than do African Americans (average IQ = 85), perhaps because African Americans have about 25% White genes. ....
Some have suggested that it is unkind to call attention to such facts because we cannot expect our society to accept the genetic component in the mean-group differences in IQ and other traits and still maintain its ethical commitment to equality before the law. Yet, we do acknowledge that some families within an ethnic group, as well as individuals within a family, do better in school, in sports, in music, or in inspiring or in helping, than do others. We should, therefore, by extension, be able to generalize to our entire human family. If viewed against the backdrop that group differences are simply aggregated individual differences, it should be easier to acknowledge openly the reality of genetic differences, which deep down inside we all recognize.
Rating: 
Summary: The Anatomy of Intellectual Dishonesty
Review: The central theme of this book is the persistence of a debilitating "racial stigma" that had its origins in the institution of slavery and continues to affect the descendants of slaves - particularly the "underclass" - down to the present day. The attributes of inferiority, otherness, and dishonor attributed to black slaves have been imputed to their descendants, stifling their chances for advancement in spite of their present-day equality under the law. Although black Americans are protected by law from overt discrimination, they still lag behind white Americans because of the lingering effects of racial stigma. Programs such as affirmative action are still needed to ameliorate the ongoing effects of this stigma. Instead of thinking of the marginalized underclass in terms of an us/them dichotomy, we ought instead "embrace" them. Sometimes the things an author chooses to leave out of a book give more insight into his motives for writing it that the things he chooses to include. Conspicuously absent from this book is any mention of the well-documented "not wanting to act white" syndrome as a possible contributor to underclass woes. The best schools in the country would fight like dogs over a bone for an inner-city black kid with superlative grades and test scores. Sadly, many of the potential beneficiaries of so great an opportunity choose to pass it up because excelling academically carries with it the racial stigma (sorry, I couldn't resist) of "acting white." While refusing to address this issue, Loury tacitly acknowledges it by carefully tiptoing around it and covering his tracks: "A talented adolescent whose social peer group disdains the activities that must be undertaken for that talent to flourish is at risk of not achieving his or her full potential." (p. 102) White America would love to see this black adolescent succeed. It is the young person's own black underclass peers, however, who would derail those efforts with gibes that such an ambitious and hard working youngster must be trying to "act white." Is white America really trying to keep the underclass at arm's length and maintain an us/them dichotomy as Loury claims, or is it the other way around? The motive for Loury's refusal to forthrightly discuss the "not wanting to act white" syndrome is readily evident: It is much easier to generate sympathy for those perceived to be poor, helpless victims of racial stigma than for those perceived to be militant idiots bent on shooting themselves and others in the foot. After having devoted a substantial portion of his book to generating sympathy for the racially stigmatized underclass, Loury then smoothly segues into an impassioned defense of racial preferences in elite schools, preferences designed to aid those "at the margin" by admitting them in spite of their lower grades and test scores. Now since Loury has referred to the underclass as "marginalized," his reference to the beneficiaries of racial preferences as being "at the margin" (p. 153) might lead the unwary reader to assume that these beneficiaries are themselves for the most part from the underclass. But this simply isn't so - the majority of these beneficiaries of lowered standards don't come from the small minority of the black population comprising the underclass, but rather from the great majority of the black population who aren't a part of the underclass, a majority that includes a growing middle class and ever-increasing number of black professionals. In other words, Loury supports racial preferences that lower academic standards for well-off blacks (who shouldn't have to have standards lowered for them anyway) while making it appear that he's championing the poor, downtrodden, racially stigmatized underclass. The racial preferences advocated by Loury are more likely to benefit his own children than anyone from the underclass.
The entire book is chock-full of this kind of disingenuous sophistry. Most telling, however, is that the author himself felt compelled to bolster flagging reviews of his own book by going online and giving himself five stars. (At this posting, Loury had replied online to the diabolical J. P. Rushton's two star review, giving himself five stars in the process.)
Rating:
Summary: Deeply Distrubing
Review: The classic collision of teleological (emphasizing the result) and deontological (empahsizing the procedure) philosophy applied to race relations in the United States. More than mere economic consquentialism, or sociological stucturalism, Loury rails against racial stigmatism, and posits powerfully in favor of "racial egalitarianism," by use of moral suasion. Any right thinking, moral minded human being will be disturbed by his polemics, and cannot help but be swayed by his appeal. I will, however, leave it to you, the reader, to discover for yourself which side of the philosophical divide, mentioned above, Loury favors. Very highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: A thoughtful review in a top journal
Review: The current issue of the Journal of Economic Literature (December 2002) has a review of Loury's book by Steven Raphael (Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California at Berkely) on pages 1202 - 1214. The JEL is a peer reviewed journal; the article is very thoughtful and well written. Raphael's article ends with the following sentences: "While many may take issue with Loury's analysis of racial inequality in the United States, a careful study of this book is sure to challenge one's assumptions and to force the reader to think more deeply about the stubbornly and profoundly persistent and profound social disadvantage of African-American. On this basis alone, the book is a must-read." (page 1213) The JEL arrived this morning and I ordered a copy today.
<< 1 >>
|
