OneSTDV has a great post on the new Liberal integration policy.
There’s a popular meme amongst liberal race commentators that I’ll deem “white people osmosis”:
The seemingly intractable racial achievement gaps would disappear if blacks could be surrounded by white people in every aspect of life.
…This person actually believes that absent some external influence, racial integration would flourish. Has she ever been to a public school cafeteria? But the problem isn’t merely the apparent sin of racial segregation, though Mr. Louis never actually explains why we MUST integrate. The author blames all sorts of social pathologies on segregation:
Segregation haunts questions of public safety, education, housing and fairness in the workplace.
Perhaps I’d interpret this differently than Mr. Louis intended. And the poison spreads from there. Racially segregated zones make it “natural” for cops and prosecutors to make decisions about law enforcement (including stop-and-frisk procedures and low level drug busts of sellers rather than buyers) that inevitably track with race. I wonder if actual crimes “inevitably tracks with race” too? He ends with a nebulous plea common amongst liberals – never actually define the problem and the incessant grousing will thus never end:
Welcome to the fight, kids, and good luck making New York what it will someday become: a city for everyone.
Through all of Mr. Louis’ indignant rhetoric, I just barely can parse out an actual point. He basically condemns Bloomberg’s New York for permitting racial segregation then assumes this causes all the evident disparities.
As stated above, he promotes the idea of “white people osmosis”. Many liberal creationists believe that merely living amongst whites will change everything. They blame black dysfunction on the assumed disparity in public funding and focus, a laughable assertion if one actually considers the numbers…
…So if not money and government focus, then what’s the casual link between segregation and social pathology? Willfully obtuse individuals like Mr. Louis refuse to consider what a “bad neighborhood” almost always entails and why upwardly mobile blacks seek to escape them. Throughout Mr. Louis’ piece, he consistently implies that white neighborhoods offer higher living quality than black neighborhoods, a rather controversial statement if he ever expressed it in more direct terms. A liberal creationist of course could never even admit to this obvious truth; yet, no other conclusion seems reasonable given Mr. Louis’ insistence that these exclusive white enclaves admit scores of black residents.
And surely we can’t expect Mr. Louis to ponder the most contentious of suppositions: that blacks neighborhoods are bad primarily because of who lives there. To Mr. Louis the disparities between white and black neighborhoods, euphemistically referred to as “bad neighborhoods” in polite society, arise from either serendipity or the efforts of racist politicians. One could then ask why black neighborhoods don’t create their own insulated utopia if excluded from the trappings of white privilege.
This is a complex topic and I don’t have the time to comment on it currently. My general impression is that integration is being sold as the new form of reparation. And I consider that to be perverse. (If you are interested in my view of reparations refer here.) I will have to spell out why, latter.