One Nation, Divided?

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said Thursday that America remains a nation divided along racial and economic lines, and pledged to ``lift up those who are left out.''

Fine sentiment, to lift up those who are struggling, but incorrect assertion: that this nation is divided along racial and economic lines. Or more precisely, it's false to claim that this country is divided without using a thousand provisos. It would have been much more accurate to state that some areas of racial and economic progress are models of positive change, while other areas need attention. But nope. Just straight line division of the old style (or for the Left, W's Us versus Them, Bad versus Good dichotomy, here replayed by their man.)

Maybe belief, more than data, define the mutual suspicions with which Right and Left interpret the same data about this country's future. But I see more integration, not less, along racial lines, and I don't understand what an economic line looks like.

If the economic line that Kerry mentions is manifested in something like the rich and poor living in different neighborhoods, then I would ask when this was not true? How would he possibly fix this...problem? Is it really a problem? Would a poor person like to live in Kerry's neighborhood? Would Kerry like to have a ghetto next to his house?

It is a shame that real problems of opportunity are buried under the weight of so much class rhetoric.

How will he (Kerry) lift these people out of poverty? How can he assume that the government can lift them out of poverty -- or that they are in fact "left out?" More than $1 trillion dollars have been spent on anti-poverty programs in the US since the 60s and the poor are still with us. What magic does Kerry know that no one else does?

I'm not trying to be silly. His point of argumentation is counterproductive to real debate about how to fix problems in that it assumes that Republicans don't want to see change here (or, worse, created and maintained the poor).

Use data about possible solutions to interest me. Stop this "we love the poor" bullshit. Everybody loves the poor during elections.

I guess that moments like this are indicative of my skepticism about Democrats' motives. For all of the consoling words, this speech is pure class envy/warfare/call-it-what-you-will.

If I were to use a favorite tool of the lefty postmodernist, I would bring out my handy institutional analysis stick and note that Democrats have virtually defined themselves as the party of the poor. To reduce their numbers would be to reduce their voting power. This is enough evidence to make a Michael Moore film.

In Paul Fussel's book, Class, he assumes that the concern for the poor in the Democratic party platform comes from nobless oblige. He might be right -- but that would hardly help a party trying to define itself as a blue collar redoubt. (Maybe that should read, blue-blooded redoubt.)

America is still a house divided, in health status, living standards, access to capital, schools, all the things that make a difference,'' he said.

Divide, divide, divide. Sheesh. What happened to the One America that featured so prominently at the DNC Convention?

Well, in health status, how will the government assist people? Most of the poor already depend on the government for their health needs via free clinics and government hospitals. If Kerry believes that giving them more of what they already have (which presumably is not good, since he has just insisted that it isn't), then ok. But how are they better off than before?

BTW: I'm concerned about the current lack of medical insurance for many poor people, and the rising costs of employer-provided coverage, but how will Kerry fix that? The most detailed article I have found about reforming the current medical insurance system recommended limiting malpractice suits as they were the largest driver of cost increases doctors face -- but I am skeptical that Edwards would bite the hand that fed him so well.

Kerry mentions access to capital? Does he mean bank loans? I would bet credit scores play a bigger role in limiting access to capital than evil bankers intentionally denying otherwise qualified applicants. It's a sad but true statement that many minorities have bad credit. How would the government fix that problem? Guarantee their loans?

Regarding education, rich kids go to private schools. Poor kids don't. Does Kerry want to send the rich kids to public schools, or the poor to private schools? If the latter, doesn't that signal a problem with government-funded education?

Kerry cited statistics that 50 percent of black men in New York City are without work, while in some cities 40 percent of Hispanic children are school dropouts.

50%? I doubt that number very much.

How is the government going to help these people? First, let's establish the basis of Kerry's claim. Is he upset because he believes that racists are keeping blacks out of industry or because they don't have the skills and education necessary to secure employment?

Though few on the Left want to say anything, Bill Cosby is closer to the truth about black unemployment than is John Kerry. Many black men I know openly ridicule the gansta-rap lifestyle that is the most culturally dominant in poor black communities - -but few whites of any stripe will. Is that lifestyle enhancing their job prospects? Or does Kerry believe that the 50% [really?] of unemployed black men in NYC are that way because of organized, but still secretive, cabals preventing them from working?

If you argue that it's their lack of schooling that prevents them from finding employment, then how would the government change that? Dropping out of school in a free country is an individual's choice. Since that choice is influenced by the cultural milieu in which the individual lives, can we still maintain that culture has no legitimate presence in the debate? Does it (gangsta-cultcha) see education as a road to success?

If you think it's all a racist conspiracy against black culture, talk to black immigrants from Africa or the Carribean. Their stories tend towards how little racism they've encountered -- except from American blacks urging them to "be more black."

Until someone talks about this openly, I don't need John Kerry telling me how concerned he is with black/hispanic/anybody-not-white unemployment.

There could be much more to minority unemployment that simple racism or culture, but how will we find it when people are accused of racism for even examining the issue? First we need to get over the idea that examining racial issues are expressions of racism. Otherwise we'll just hurl invective back and forth, until we really are One Nation, Divided.

At Conference, Kerry Asserts Race and Economics Divide U.S.