Loading...
Title : Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's?
link : Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's?
Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's?
From "The Weekend Interview with Glenn Loury: A Challenger of the Woke 'Company Policy'" (Wall Street Journal):Mr. Loury says he "politely declined" an invitation to sign "A Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published by Harper's on Tuesday. Endorsed by some 150 liberal academics and writers, it denounces President Trump as "a real threat to democracy" before criticizing leftist repression.
"I declined for two reasons," Mr. Loury says. "First, I'm not 'on the left' and felt no need to signal solidarity with the left before criticizing cancel culture. And second, I don't view Trump as the greatest threat to democracy in this country." The truth, he adds, is "quite the opposite. It has been the refusal of the left to accept the democratic outcome of 2016 which precipitated the intolerance about which [the signatories] were complaining. So I did not sign."
Mr. Loury is a hard man to pigeonhole. He belongs to no party and says he isn't "partisan in the electoral process," so "'on the right' doesn't quite suit me." Yet on the issues that he cares about most -- race, inequality and social justice in America -- he is, he says, "right of center for sure, and considerably right of the center of opinion amongst African-Americans."
Parsing the politics of black America, he says that the prevailing orthodoxy requires him to support the payment of reparations to descendants of slaves, to assert that "voter suppression" today is comparable to Jim Crow, that the overrepresentation of blacks in prisons is "ipso facto an expression of white supremacy and structural racism," and that preferential treatment is "entirely appropriate, and indeed imperative, as a matter of racial justice."
A black person who takes issue with these premises is largely ostracized. Here, an impassioned Mr. Loury delivers a small speech without pausing for breath: "If you don't think that systemic racism accounts for the high rate of outside-marriage births amongst African-American women, if you don't think the school-to-prison pipeline cultivates the incarceration of black youngsters, if you have doubts about affirmative action, if you think self-reliance is important, if you think the coherence of the family is an elemental aspect of any social group's being able to function adequately in the world, if you're religious, and if you think that blacks' obeisance to the Democratic Party is unhealthy for their long-term political interests -- you'll be dismissed as being on the right. And that's where I find myself."...
"I became disillusioned," he says, "with a lot of the rhetoric. I came to think that the incarceration issue is vastly more complicated than I'd come to regard it." Black people in cities needed protection from the criminals in their midst. Individuals had to be held accountable for their lawbreaking. "The left's deterministic argument -- 'Well, there's poverty, so of course there's going to be crime' -- left out human agency, and it left out morality."...
There is certainly some discrimination in policing and the courts, he says. "But it can explain maybe 15% or 20% of the gap between black and white incarceration rates, not the whole thing." Most of the difference, he insists, turns on the behavior of people. "If you want to call that racism, then you're calling everything racism."
Loading...
From "The Weekend Interview with Glenn Loury: A Challenger of the Woke 'Company Policy'" (Wall Street Journal):
Mr. Loury says he "politely declined" an invitation to sign "A Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published by Harper's on Tuesday. Endorsed by some 150 liberal academics and writers, it denounces President Trump as "a real threat to democracy" before criticizing leftist repression.
"I declined for two reasons," Mr. Loury says. "First, I'm not 'on the left' and felt no need to signal solidarity with the left before criticizing cancel culture. And second, I don't view Trump as the greatest threat to democracy in this country." The truth, he adds, is "quite the opposite. It has been the refusal of the left to accept the democratic outcome of 2016 which precipitated the intolerance about which [the signatories] were complaining. So I did not sign."
Mr. Loury is a hard man to pigeonhole. He belongs to no party and says he isn't "partisan in the electoral process," so "'on the right' doesn't quite suit me." Yet on the issues that he cares about most -- race, inequality and social justice in America -- he is, he says, "right of center for sure, and considerably right of the center of opinion amongst African-Americans."
Parsing the politics of black America, he says that the prevailing orthodoxy requires him to support the payment of reparations to descendants of slaves, to assert that "voter suppression" today is comparable to Jim Crow, that the overrepresentation of blacks in prisons is "ipso facto an expression of white supremacy and structural racism," and that preferential treatment is "entirely appropriate, and indeed imperative, as a matter of racial justice."
A black person who takes issue with these premises is largely ostracized. Here, an impassioned Mr. Loury delivers a small speech without pausing for breath: "If you don't think that systemic racism accounts for the high rate of outside-marriage births amongst African-American women, if you don't think the school-to-prison pipeline cultivates the incarceration of black youngsters, if you have doubts about affirmative action, if you think self-reliance is important, if you think the coherence of the family is an elemental aspect of any social group's being able to function adequately in the world, if you're religious, and if you think that blacks' obeisance to the Democratic Party is unhealthy for their long-term political interests -- you'll be dismissed as being on the right. And that's where I find myself."...
"I became disillusioned," he says, "with a lot of the rhetoric. I came to think that the incarceration issue is vastly more complicated than I'd come to regard it." Black people in cities needed protection from the criminals in their midst. Individuals had to be held accountable for their lawbreaking. "The left's deterministic argument -- 'Well, there's poverty, so of course there's going to be crime' -- left out human agency, and it left out morality."...
There is certainly some discrimination in policing and the courts, he says. "But it can explain maybe 15% or 20% of the gap between black and white incarceration rates, not the whole thing." Most of the difference, he insists, turns on the behavior of people. "If you want to call that racism, then you're calling everything racism."
Thus articles Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's?
that is all articles Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's? This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's? with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2020/07/why-did-glenn-loury-refuse-to-sign-that.html
0 Response to "Why did Glenn Loury refuse to sign that "Letter on Justice and Open Debate" published last week in Harper's?"
Post a Comment