The brilliant Coleman Hughes is an American writer, podcaster and musician. He burst onto the intellectual scene at a young age with his ruthlessly well-articulated opinions on race and public policy issues. He joins me this week with his giga-brained thoughts on race, equity and inclusion.
When people talk as though race (and gender, and sexuality) as though it is everything, I feel as though too much is missed. A great example is the idea that legislating to achieve equity among highly paid executives somehow constitutes ‘progress’. Bringing legislative powers to bear to assist those nearly at the top to get just that bit closer to pinnacle is really just grotesque, as pointed out by CH. what of class? How has such a big chunk of the left apparently come to the view that it explains nothing?
Put it this way: which individual is likely to have the better life outcomes: a female with dark skin born and raised in Wahroonga/ Caulfield/ Burnside, or an Anglo male born in Minto/ Doveton/ Davoren Park?
Which of those individuals would you rather be born as? Which faces the greater quantum of ‘barriers’ as they progress through life?
Should the state direct resources to the former individual on the basis that she suffers discrimination?
And is it right to characterise the latter individual as ‘powerful’ in any way?
Not really sure what Josh was getting at with the notion that Australia doesn't have an equivalent of the Italian American community in perpetuity.
For example, where I lived in Brisbane it was a noted enclave of Greek immigrants. They had a Greek church, a Greek festival, a certain cultural cohesion despite quite possibly never having been to Greece. And my goodness, the combination Greek/Australian accent is hard to understand.
The whole dynamic between what one considers to be home and this establishment of ethnic subcultures is interesting, and it is very American, but I don't think it's completely unique to America.
When people talk as though race (and gender, and sexuality) as though it is everything, I feel as though too much is missed. A great example is the idea that legislating to achieve equity among highly paid executives somehow constitutes ‘progress’. Bringing legislative powers to bear to assist those nearly at the top to get just that bit closer to pinnacle is really just grotesque, as pointed out by CH. what of class? How has such a big chunk of the left apparently come to the view that it explains nothing?
Put it this way: which individual is likely to have the better life outcomes: a female with dark skin born and raised in Wahroonga/ Caulfield/ Burnside, or an Anglo male born in Minto/ Doveton/ Davoren Park?
Which of those individuals would you rather be born as? Which faces the greater quantum of ‘barriers’ as they progress through life?
Should the state direct resources to the former individual on the basis that she suffers discrimination?
And is it right to characterise the latter individual as ‘powerful’ in any way?
Not really sure what Josh was getting at with the notion that Australia doesn't have an equivalent of the Italian American community in perpetuity.
For example, where I lived in Brisbane it was a noted enclave of Greek immigrants. They had a Greek church, a Greek festival, a certain cultural cohesion despite quite possibly never having been to Greece. And my goodness, the combination Greek/Australian accent is hard to understand.
The whole dynamic between what one considers to be home and this establishment of ethnic subcultures is interesting, and it is very American, but I don't think it's completely unique to America.