I read Ben Peterson’s lengthy essay at JBT website. I like the reference to “social, moral, spiritual” components of the individual and group. And I love hierarchical concepts. One must be social in order to become moral. One must be moral in order to become spiritual. I am optimistic.
I read this essay unsure of its purpose. Is it to celebrate Loury, as he certainly deserves, or is it to co-opt the meanings it has taken him decades to refine? I raise the issue with the understanding that Loury has tacitly endorsed the essay’s words. In multiple instances, Peterson lifts less signifying quotes from Loury’s writing that ultimately figure in rather more sweeping conclusions. Here is a quote from the essay that makes me wonder who is making the assertion, Loury or Peterson?
“To provide a vision for a healthy and vibrant democratic polity, our political theory must shed its “liberal-individualist morality of race-blindness” and its attendant faith in a pure equal opportunity doctrine.”
—And here again is confusion between the Loury of 2002 and the present:
“Despite his current, relished persona as a “woke buster,” Loury’s 2002 book presents what amounts to a sophisticated theory of systemic racism.”
Fans of Glen Loury understand that his vision is evolving, and one snapshot of the past is not determinative, so what does this statement signify in 2023? On a personal level I have to say I identify with the fearful cab driver of this essay. The unintended consequence of abandoning color-blindness, and enforcing identity-based politics is to make us all much more aware of the tribes we never chose to be a part of. Walking the street of America, more than any time in the past, I am aware of myself as a white man, and as such, my sympathy goes to others superficially like me. Is that a good thing?
You will get much more sympathy to your point of view if you could get the black kill ratio down. Even if it was twice that of Hispanics it would half your current numbers. That in itself would save 5,000 people.
If America truly wants better race relations they are going to have to address the black crime issue, and unqualified blacks put into positions of power through affirmative action and DEI initiatives.
This doesn't fit the narrative, so we will continue with excuses, midnight basketball, and the never ending search for white supremacy.
After 60 years, this is as good as it gets. Get used to it.
Hate to be so picky but on should be one in the quote by Confucius. Kind of hurts the excellence of the article.
I read Ben Peterson’s lengthy essay at JBT website. I like the reference to “social, moral, spiritual” components of the individual and group. And I love hierarchical concepts. One must be social in order to become moral. One must be moral in order to become spiritual. I am optimistic.
I read this essay unsure of its purpose. Is it to celebrate Loury, as he certainly deserves, or is it to co-opt the meanings it has taken him decades to refine? I raise the issue with the understanding that Loury has tacitly endorsed the essay’s words. In multiple instances, Peterson lifts less signifying quotes from Loury’s writing that ultimately figure in rather more sweeping conclusions. Here is a quote from the essay that makes me wonder who is making the assertion, Loury or Peterson?
“To provide a vision for a healthy and vibrant democratic polity, our political theory must shed its “liberal-individualist morality of race-blindness” and its attendant faith in a pure equal opportunity doctrine.”
—And here again is confusion between the Loury of 2002 and the present:
“Despite his current, relished persona as a “woke buster,” Loury’s 2002 book presents what amounts to a sophisticated theory of systemic racism.”
Fans of Glen Loury understand that his vision is evolving, and one snapshot of the past is not determinative, so what does this statement signify in 2023? On a personal level I have to say I identify with the fearful cab driver of this essay. The unintended consequence of abandoning color-blindness, and enforcing identity-based politics is to make us all much more aware of the tribes we never chose to be a part of. Walking the street of America, more than any time in the past, I am aware of myself as a white man, and as such, my sympathy goes to others superficially like me. Is that a good thing?
This was rich, Glenn. Thank you!
You will get much more sympathy to your point of view if you could get the black kill ratio down. Even if it was twice that of Hispanics it would half your current numbers. That in itself would save 5,000 people.
If America truly wants better race relations they are going to have to address the black crime issue, and unqualified blacks put into positions of power through affirmative action and DEI initiatives.
This doesn't fit the narrative, so we will continue with excuses, midnight basketball, and the never ending search for white supremacy.
After 60 years, this is as good as it gets. Get used to it.