"Equity" Is Illiberal, Bullshit Equality -- And It's What's For Dinner In The Biden Admin
Biden has bought into -- or more likely, has been sold into -- trendy illiberalism, and he's bringing it to the country...to his eventual detriment and to ours. Andrew Sullivan writes:
Biden has also signaled (and by executive order, has already launched) a very sharp departure from liberalism in his approach to civil rights. The vast majority of Americans support laws that protect minorities from discrimination, so that every American can have equality of opportunity, without their own talents being held back by prejudice. But Biden's speech and executive orders come from a very different place. They explicitly replace the idea of equality in favor of what anti-liberal critical theorists call "equity." They junk equality of opportunity in favor of equality of outcomes. Most people won't notice that this new concept has been introduced -- equity, equality, it all sounds the same -- but they'll soon find out the difference.In critical theory, as James Lindsay explains, "'equality' means that citizen A and citizen B are treated equally, while 'equity' means adjusting shares in order to make citizen A and B equal." Here's how Biden defines "equity": "the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality."
In less tortured English, equity means giving the the named identity groups a specific advantage in treatment by the federal government over other groups -- in order to make up for historic injustice and "systemic" oppression. Without "equity", the argument runs, there can be no real "equality of opportunity." Equity therefore comes first. Until equity is reached, equality is postponed -- perhaps for ever.
Helping level up regions and populations that have experienced greater neglect or discrimination in the past is a good thing. But you could achieve this if you simply focused on relieving poverty in the relevant communities. You could invest in schools, reform policing, target environmental clean-ups, grow the economy, increase federal attention to the neglected, and thereby help the needy in precisely these groups. But that would not reflect critical theory's insistence that race and identity trump class, and that America itself is inherently, from top to bottom, a "white supremacist" country. Biden just endorsed that with gusto.
The paradox, of course, is that to achieve "equity" you have to first take away equality for individuals who were born in the wrong identity group. Equity means treating individuals unequally so that groups are equal.
How do we know when "equity" has been achieved? That's a very good question. It seems to me that the only definition of "equity" that works is that all groups are represented in federal policies in proportion to their share of the population, or more so -- since equity can also require over-representation of these groups to make up for the past. The fact that an individual born, say, in the early 21st Century, has no personal or moral connection to slavery or segregation (au contraire), is irrelevant. She must pay for the past sins of her race.
This is as illiberal as it gets. Sullivan concurs:
Those policies are obviously unconstitutional. The federal government cannot actively discriminate on the basis of race, sex or group identity under the Constitution. It cannot strip women of their rights as a distinct biological class. It cannot void religious freedom for individuals. Biden's woke rampage in the federal government won't last, because it cannot last if our constitution means anything. So let the lawsuits commence as Biden alienates and inflames his moderate supporters and snubs practices that most Americans take as common sense.I want Biden to succeed. I want Republicans to moderate. I want to lower the temperature. I want to emphasize those policies that really do bring us closer together, even though many may still freely dissent. Biden says he wants to as well. But none of that can or will happen if the president fuels the culture war this aggressively, this crudely, and this soon. You don't get to unite the country by dividing it along these deep and inflammatory issues of identity. And you don't achieve equality of opportunity by enforcing its antithesis.
America has lost the plot. Listen to the second half of the Srinivasan podcast. Or the whole thing.
Republicans are Trumpbots, Dems are on a spending rampage and eager for race wars, and nobody wants to hear that they'll have to make any sacrifices at all to lead satisfactory lives.
Crid at January 22, 2021 11:38 PM
This seems wildly overblown at this stage.
Of the 30 executive orders signed at this point the vast majority have nothing really to do with "equity".
We have 14 orders specifically designed to deal with the corona virus pandemic for example. These have to do with things like accelerating the manufacturing of supplies for vaccination and PPE production, expansion of pandemic testing capabilities, developing guidance recommendations for safely reopening school systems, etc...
Then we have some economic orders that aim to assist with people struggling to afford food as a result of pandemic driven issues, and to extend the existing moratorium on evictions and foreclosures also associated with pandemic struggles.
So most of the orders are pandemic related in one form or another.
Then we have things like rejoining the Paris climate accord... which was a campaign promise. Conservatives can disagree if they like, but this is something he was elected to get done.
Then there are a bunch of immigration related executive orders, which have nothing to do with "equity".
In terms of "equity" related executive orders we really just have the following two:
1 - Rescinds the Trump administration's 1776 Commission... so it is basically just a reversal of a Trump administration policy.
2 - An order that aims to prevent workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
So what is the big issue this article is specifically concerned about?... is it the order not to discriminate against homosexuals in the work place?
Right now it just seems like a concern about something that hasn't actually materialized yet.
We don't need to pull the fire alarm because someone smells burnt toast.
Artemis at January 23, 2021 12:13 AM
That's what the CCP would say.
Crid at January 23, 2021 5:38 AM
Aw, Crid, what a cute story! Just read it. I love Wodehouse.
NicoleK at January 23, 2021 10:41 AM
Thank God the Democrats don't have 2/3 of the Senate to be able to remove Trump-appointed judges by impeachment. All those judges just need to do their jobs, and this will all get sorted out.
jdgalt at January 23, 2021 10:42 AM
@Artemis: The problem with harmless-sounding laws against discrimination is that it's easy for the favored group to successfully use them to demand preferential treatment from people who never really did discriminate against them. That's what Critical Race (and gender) Theory is all about.
jdgalt at January 23, 2021 10:45 AM
Tried to read Wodehouse… Didn't take. Wrong end of the century and the wrong side of the pond.
Crid at January 23, 2021 11:12 AM
Doesn't Sullivan watch the news? Doesn't he remember when Trump paid a hooker to pee on him, and then he had anal sex with the hooker, and she pooped out a poop-baby, and Trump peed on the poop-baby? And then he ate it! He cannibalized it, because Trump is also made of poop! Doesn't anyone remember?!
Well I DO pay attention and I will NEVER forget this. NEVER.
Now excuse me, I have to go back to helping Biden get the Nobel Peace Prize before February.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at January 23, 2021 11:15 AM
"Tried to read Wodehouse"
For all the Netizens out there, "PG Wodehouse" is an abbreviation for "Pelham Grenville Wodehouse", not "Pretty Good Wodehouse".
You're welcome.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at January 23, 2021 11:20 AM
The "Jeeves and Wooster" stories did it for me. I thought Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry embodied them perfectly in the television series. A marathon of Fry and Laurie doing Wodehouse is what sent me to the books.
==========
Not "Parental Guidance" Wodehouse? And here I thought his more risqué stories would be by PG-13 Wodehouse.
Conan the Grammarian at January 23, 2021 11:59 AM
Language is powerful, and so can history. Be careful when so much of it is changed.
Saw several people send out their MLK day speeches. according to one he was a champion of equality. According to the other two, he was a champion of Equity and social justice.
Well I know which of those three jobs will be on the chopping block soon.
Joe J at January 23, 2021 12:05 PM
Sullivan: “I want Biden to succeed.”
There are, of course, different opinions about what constitutes success. For liberals, it would be implementation of most things Biden would like to do.
For conservatives and libertarians, if would be prevention of those same things.
Sullivan: “I want Republicans to moderate.”
Yes, Andrew. And I would like a villa in the hills overlooking Nice, shared with Kate Beckinsale, Charlize Theron and Sarah Shahi. My wish is probably more likely to come true than yours.
JD at January 23, 2021 2:19 PM
jdgalt Says:
"The problem with harmless-sounding laws against discrimination is that it's easy for the favored group to successfully use them to demand preferential treatment from people who never really did discriminate against them."
Okay... so then let's just cut out the bullshit then and get to the real meat of the argument you are trying to put forth.
The article Amy linked to specifically said the following:
"The vast majority of Americans support laws that protect minorities from discrimination, so that every American can have equality of opportunity, without their own talents being held back by prejudice."
So first the article insists that the "vast majority" of Americans support laws that protect minorities from discrimination.
I point out that the executive orders in question just protect minorities from discrimination.
You then jump in and object to the existence of laws that protect minorities from discrimination on the basis of some poorly defined slippery slope argument.
Now I am not saying you and the author have to see eye to eye on this... but it is either true that the "vast majority" of Americans are in favor of laws that protect minorities or it is not true.
It it is true then what Biden is doing is consistent with what the vast majority of Americans want... so there is no reason to compose entire articles about it.
This is just a bunch of chicken little stuff.
Artemis at January 23, 2021 4:14 PM
Leave a comment