The Economist - USA (2020-08-01)

12 The EconomistAugust 1st 2020

Lettersarewelcomeandshouldbe

addressedtotheEditorat

TheEconomist,TheAdelphiBuilding,

1-11 JohnAdamStreet,LondonWC 2 N 6 HT

Email:[email protected]

Morelettersareavailableat:

Economist.com/letters

Letters

Liberalism and race

The Economistmissed the point

about the Black Lives Matter

movement (“The new ideology

of race,” July 11th). You praised

Martin Luther King’s “vigorous

protest and relentless argu-

ment”, but criticised the meth-

ods of today’s activists as “dan-

gerous”, contending that they

seek to impose their ideology

“through intimidation and

power”. King may have taken

issue with your position. In his

“Letter from Birmingham Jail”,

written in 1963, King wrote:

I must confess that over the

past few years I have been

gravely disappointed with the

white moderate...who is more

devoted to “order” than to

justice; who prefers a negative

peace which is the absence of

tension to a positive peace

which is the presence of

justice; who constantly says “I

agree with you in the goal you

seek, but I can’t agree with

your methods of direct action”;

who paternalistically feels he

can set the timetable for anoth-

er man’s freedom; who lives by

the myth of time and who

constantly advises the Negro to

wait until a “more convenient

season”.

While today’s activists should

be open to constructive

criticism, this is not the most

important issue at hand. The

Economist’s line makes clear

that it is more interested in

maintaining comfort and

economic stability rather than

achieving change. Its words

perpetuate white complacency.

griffin congdon

New Haven, Connecticut

Your leader dripped with estab-

lishment anxiety over the

growing influence of Black

Lives Matter and the broader

progressive movement. It

reeked of the classic “you-

can’t-say-anything-these-

days” terror that radiates off

those whose intellectual

authority is being challenged.

Rashad Robinson, president of

Colour of Change, perfectly

summarises this type of mis-

calculation: “Far too often we

mistake presence, visibility

and awareness for power.”

Disappointingly, The Economist

fell into this trap, equating the

visibility of anti-racist voices

in the virtual public sphere

with the economic, political

and judicial heft of the systems

they seek to reform, dismantle

and democratise. This false

equivalence would be laugh-

able if it wasn’t so insulting.

a. mensah

London

Although liberalism has given

the world theoretically

unassailable values such as

free speech, it has not been as

successful dealing with perva-

sive social problems. The

liberal “state of nature” and

“veil of ignorance” imagine a

society untarnished by

politics. Thomas Hobbes, John

Locke, and even John Rawls

claimed to have established

that the equality of mankind

was determined by our fear of

slaughtering each other, God,

or rationality.

No one who studies politi-

cal philosophy takes this exer-

cise in apolitical history at face

value. Their conclusions about

government are based on a

flawed assumption that

humans once lived without

politics. Social order has

always existed, and therefore,

so has politics. The assertion

that “all men are created equal”

is based on Enlightenment

principles that were primarily

created to check the power of

government and protect prop-

erty rights. The pursuit of these

goals made it possible to ig-

nore social inequality in gen-

eral and allowed for the hypoc-

risy of most of the Founding

Fathers owning slaves.

As you pointed out, liberal

thinkers have always struggled

with conceptualising unequal

power relationships among

groups. Critical theorists, their

roots based in Marxism, inev-

itably face similar challenges

when arguments are premised

on simplified assumptions. If

racism and discrimination are

systemic, where do they

originate from? Why do they

persist, even if no one at an

institution holds racist beliefs?

And, hardest of all, what about

individual rights?

However, it is liberalism

that has had centuries to deal

with prejudice and the social

ills it produces. Thus far, the

solutions it has offered are

inadequate.

heather katz

Assistant professor of political

science

Southwestern Oklahoma State

University

Weatherford, Oklahoma

In “Who We Are and How We

Got Here”, David Reich, a

population geneticist, related

the story of how a piece of his

research that identified genetic

variants associated with an

elevated risk of prostate cancer

among men of west African

descent led to accusations

from some of his colleagues

that he was “flirting with

racism”. Critical race theory

does not allow for the pos-

sibility that racial disparities in

health could be caused by

something other than systemic

racism. If accepted, its as-

sumptions make it nearly

impossible to eliminate any

racial disparities that have

other causes, because the type

of intervention required to

address a disparity depends on

what the disparity is caused by.

jonathan kane

Flat Rock, North Carolina

You made a good case for a

genuinely liberal approach to

race, at a time when the mod-

ern left has forgotten what a

truly liberal society is. You see

what we all see: intellectual

rigidity and intolerance of

dissent, the fomenting of

division, racial obsession

replacing colour-blind equali-

ty of opportunity, identity

politics taking priority over the

rights of the individual, all the

marks of an authoritarian

society, not a liberal one.

Donald Trump’s speech at

Mount Rushmore was an

attempt to address this issue.

You say his speech strived “to

inflame a culture war centred

on race”, when in fact he was

expressing the very concerns

you share.

steven van dyck

Toronto

Congratulations on having the

courage to challenge the

intellectual hogwash that is the

new race and identity politics.

Prejudice based on skin colour

is among the idiotic of all

prejudices and it must be

challenged. But to go from

there to the construction of a

Marxist-derived analysis, this

time with “white people” as the

new group to hate instead of

the “bourgeoisie”, is nonsense

on stilts. Its intellectual

dishonesty is imbued with a

Manichean worldview and

totalitarian instincts. George

Orwell would recognise all the

newly woke, self-haters of the

academic and cultural elite,

who have meekly caved-in to

show trial by Twitter.

simon diggins

Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire

The hard part of resolving

America’s racial economic gap

starts with facing the actual

history of our country. When I

attended high school in Cali-

fornia in the 1980s, I learned

nothing of the lynchings in the

post-Reconstruction era, nor

of the Tulsa massacre or other

white riots, nor the redlining

that prevented black Ameri-

cans from building home

equity. White Americans need

to fully reckon with this betray-

al of their fellow citizens.

mark seaman

New York

One cannot easily shake off

unwanted associations with

partners picked up during a

prolonged binge. As you made

quite clear, liberalism awoke to

find itself in bed with

slave-traders and unbridled

imperialists. Singing its

prelapsarian virtues now,

however sweet the tune, will

not readily assuage the critics.

matthew kapstein

Director of studies, emeritus

Practical School of Advanced

Studies

Paris

Editor’s note:More letters on

this topic can be found on our

website and on our app.