"Winning the Race"

You cannot divorce race from discussions about poverty in the United States. In 2003 the black poverty rate was 24.4%, twice the U.S. average. John McWhorter's new book, Winning the Race, addresses the cause of this trend. I've not read the book, but Arch Puddington reveiws the book in last week's Wall Street Journal (rr).

Like others, Mr. McWhorter blames open-ended welfare and the fashions of the white counterculture -- especially its glorification of drug use -- for damaging precisely the generation of blacks that should have reaped the benefits of civil-rights change. But he also blames an academic establishment and intellectual elite that seem unwilling to judge the dynamics of black life by the standards that it applies to other groups.

Puddington goes on:

Clearly Mr. McWhorter is concerned less with public policy than with black America's psychological readiness to join the competitive mainstream. Like welfare, he argues, the outlook of the underclass requires reform. But such reform will not occur as long as a set of corrosive beliefs holds sway advising blacks that the system is rigged against them and encouraging in them "therapeutic alienation" -- an exaggerated sense of victimhood. There is consolation in such beliefs, Mr. McWhorter concedes, but they are no way to win the race.

I don't disagree with any of McWhorter's arguments, especially that "open-ended welfare" has been detrimental to raising blacks from poverty--arguably it's been the greatest obstacle. Charles Murray has contributed much to this argument.

But why have many blacks failed to join this "competitive mainstream" to which Puddington alludes? Why do they hold these "corrosive beliefs"? Is it enough to conclude that blacks living in poverty perceive themselves as victims and therefore we can ignore their plight? There is indeed opportunism driving beliefs of victimhood, but is it a cop out for white America to simply scoff, shrug their shoulders, and walk away muttering that the irrational fears of black Americans are keeping them from prosperity.

Yes, black poverty can be attributed, at least in part, to the failure of some blacks to accept the rules and institutions of our market capitalist and democratic society. Their failure to "act white" (i.e., valuing education, following the customs, traditions, manners and norms of the white middle-class, refraining from naming your kids Jamal and Muhammed, not exhibiting "gangsta" behavior, etc.) has caused many to live in poverty. But is it really irrational for some blacks to have rejected white middle class values, which is essentially what Puddington means when he says that they have failed to "join the competitive mainstream." What may appear irrational to white America may in fact be a rational response of blacks to a history of violence and oppression against them and their relatives.

The market capitalist and democratic institutions of our society have enabled us to greatly improve the human condition. In other words, the rules and institutions that allow for the division of labor and entering into voluntary exchanges have been responsible for improving the human condition for those who have adopted them. Things like property rights, contract enforcement, rule of law, capital markets,  access to political institutions and markets, etc, and of course family, enable most Americans to escape the harsh realities of poverty. Given the history of black America, however, should we really be surprised that at least some blacks remain suspicous of these institutions, maybe as much as their forebears?

The history of black America is rife with property rights violations; of exclusion from the political process that ruled and continues to rule their lives; a system that (at least partially) invalidated their rights to participate in markets and refused to protect their interests therein; and of exclusion from capital markets. Yes, these problems have largely been rectified, albeit not always effectively. But it's not as if, given their history, black Americans' skepticism of market capitalist and democratic institutions will all of a sudden be overcome. Having such expectations of blacks is as unrealistic as the expectations that you could simply import market capitalist reforms into post-socialist economies and prosperity would flourish. Voila! Just put it in place and they will prosper. Such expectations ignore culture as a significant influence on behavior.

No simple cause explains why blacks are disproportionately poor relative to whites. My argument here is not that even a fraction of black poverty can be explained by history, but only to emphasize that expectations that black Americans can and should simply participate in our market capitalist and democratic institutions should they wish to prosper fail to understand the importance of culture. Until more of the black population currently living in poverty does participate there is little to be done to alleviate their plight; direct payments in the form of subsistence or other welfare programs have exacerbated the problem. But it seems unrealistic for whites to attribute the problem to irrational behavior by black Americans and expect an immediate change in their behavior.