From the Pen of David Horowitz: December 16, 2009
A new scholarly study by two civil rights veterans has now been introduced into this debate. Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom’s America In Black and White reconstructs the history of racial progress and conflict in the postwar era, and examines the impact of affirmative action solutions. The authors cite a statement made in 1996 by Atlanta’s black mayor articulating the view implicit in the position of Clinton and Jackson that every black person in America “has benefited from affirmative action. There’s not been anybody who’s gotten a job on their own, no one who’s prospered as a businessman or businesswoman on their own …”
Yet consider these unruly facts presented in the Thernstroms’ book:
In 1940, 87% of American blacks lived in poverty. By 1960 — five years before the Civil Rights Acts and ten years before the first affirmative action policies — the figure was down to 47%. This twenty year drop was an even greater and more rapid decline in black poverty than the one that took place over the next thirty-five years, a period which saw the black poverty rate come down to 26% as of 1995.
In 1940, only 5% of black men and 6.4% of black women had middle class occupations. By 1970, the figures were 22% for black men (a nearly four-fold increase) and 36% for black women (a more than five-fold increase) — larger again than the increase that took place in the twenty years after affirmative action was put in place (roughly 1970) when the figures reached 32% and 59%.
The cause of black poverty, as the Thernstrom’s show (and the dramatic expansion of the black middle class should make self-evident) has little to do with race. Consequently, its solution will not be affected by affirmative action set-asides. Currently, eighty-five percent of all poor black children live in fatherless families. In other words, the poverty rate for black children without fathers is nearly six times that for black children with two parents. A far more effective anti-poverty program would be to promote black marriages.
Even in higher education, affirmative action has not been the indispensable agency its advocates imply. The rate of gain for blacks in college enrolments was greater between 1960 and 1970 before affirmative action policies were instituted (enrolments for blacks increased from 4% to 7% of the total college population), than it was in the decades after, between 1970 and 1980, when black enrolment went from 7% to 9.9% and between 1980 and 1994, when it went from 9.9% to 10.7%.
I don’t normally comment on the quotes selected for “From the Pen of David Horowitz” but I do feel compelled to note the importance of the information and arguments presented here.
The key facts are these: in 1940 87% of African-Americans lived in poverty. In 1960 it was 47%. In 1995 it was 26%. Horowitz uses these figures to destroy the concept of affirmative action. They struck me in a very different way. You know what these numbers do? They quantify the American Idea. They prove that social mobility in America is an indisputable fact. In just over 50 years the poverty rate among blacks dropped over 60%. (And most of that was done before the Civil Rights victories of the ’60s and the institution of the Great Society — so it’s not like the Left can claim that the government did it.)
How did this happen? The Left has no answer for this. (I don’t think many leftists are even aware of these facts.) The Right’s Answer: African-Americans lifted themselves and their families out of poverty by working hard and bettering themselves.
As an added benefit these numbers also smash the idea of “institutional racism” — the leftist lie that America is fundamentally, irredeemably racist.
Keep these facts and these arguments in mind the next time the Left lectures about how the government needs to spend tax dollars to lift people out of poverty.
–
If you have a favorite Horowitz quote you want to highlight for others then please email it to DavidSwindle {@} Gmail.com. Please include:
- “Horowitz Quote of the Day” in subject line.
- A link to where the quote is from. (No need to include this if it’s from a book.)
- Any remarks you’d like published explaining what value you take from it.
- Your preferred name and a link to your blog or homepage (if you have one.)
Roger Ailes Warns Fox News Staffers Not To Attack Glenn Beck
Poll: Boxer Suddenly In Trouble
Dear Media Matters: Catholics call them ’sins of omission’
Stewart’s Glenn Beck Impression: The Best Ever?
From Article: The authors cite a statement made in 1996 by Atlanta’s black mayor articulating the view implicit in the position of Clinton and Jackson that every black person in America “has benefited from affirmative action. There’s not been anybody who’s gotten a job on their own, no one who’s prospered as a businessman or businesswoman on their own …”
———————–
Michael Jordan, Reggie Jackson, Shirley Chisolm, Oprah, MLK Jr, to name a few would have all failed without someone else’s help? Really? That’s very interesting!
“The authors cite a statement made in 1996 by Atlanta’s black mayor articulating the view implicit in the position of Clinton and Jackson that every black person in America “has benefited from affirmative action. There’s not been anybody who’s gotten a job on their own, no one who’s prospered as a businessman or businesswoman on their own …”
You should ask the people quoted about that.
You mean the people I named in my comment? Is something troubling you about that, Walter?
The reality is that in a democracy the government can do nothing unless the people first decide what is to be done. What that means is that the society is always well on the road to change before some jerk politician decides to run out in front of the parade and pretend to lead.
“The key facts are these” – LOL
Why would the Left let the facts get in the way of a good social program that lines their pockets while claiming to help the “poor”
The main argument is that affirmative action policies have not helped Blacks, and that Blacks’ advancements since affirmative action has been due to their working hard. However, I do not see any direct evidence that supports this position given the data presented. Indeed, I do not see support for either side of the argument.
This article reports that there was a decrease in Blacks living in poverty from 1940 to 1960 by about 40% (which is congruent with the Great Migration of Blacks to urban centers during Hoover’s and Roosevelt’s administrations and the dramatic increases in the standard of living for all working adults because of the War and the New Deal), then another drop in the % of Blacks in poverty, albeit smaller, from 1960 to 1995 of 19%. We see similar trends for Blacks obtaining middle class positions and enrollment in college.
Yet just because there are ostensibly smaller gains for Blacks after affirmative action policies were implemented does not mean affirmative action did not work or that it did work. Moreover, the authors did not set any criteria for which they consider affirmative action to have succeeded or not.
Further, these are only percentages, for Blacks, without other considerations. We have no other data presented, for example, about the relative number of Blacks in the population during these years and the number of jobs open during these times. Take, for example, if we have steady number of Blacks in the population, but a lower number of jobs open, %s are of course going to decrease. We also have no comparison numbers for Whites to see, for example, whether Blacks’ advances parallel Whites’ advances. I would also like to see data regarding income as well as employment. There is also the issue of how affirmative action is being implemented; there may be work policies, but not all people adhere to them.
Indeed, only in an experimental context in which affirmative action policies are manipulated (i.e., compare hiring rates of minorities at institutions/businesses that do and do not enforce affirmative action policies) and other relevant factors are statistically controlled for can we have a more complete picture about whether affirmative action is beneficial for Blacks. We also first have to have agreement about the criteria for which we judge whether affirmative action has succeeded or not.
I have to say that is a well thought out analysis.
I guesss Horowitz has never heard of Clarence Thomas. Why not tell the truth?