In a short book of only 127 pages the celebrated economist Thomas Sowell explodes this assumption and exposes it as an ideologically-driven myth.
His book is titled Discriminations and Disparities and early on Sowell outlines three different meanings of the word discrimination:
- Discrimination Ia: Basing decisions on evidence about individuals
- Discrimination Ib: Basing decisions on evidence about groups
- Discrimination II: Basing decisions on unsubstantiated notions or animosities
Consider this example from a study cited in the book:
...despite the reluctance of many employers to hire young black males, because a significant proportion of them have criminal records (D-Ib), those employers who did criminal background checks on all their employees (D-Ia) tended to hire more young black males than did other employers.This is because employers knew from the background check that particular young black male applicants had no criminal background and were thus more employable. Had the background check not been given the suitability of these young men would not have been known and employers would've shied away from taking a chance on them.
Nevertheless, there are those who advocate doing away with background checks altogether because they prevent many young blacks with criminal records from being hired. The EEOC has sued employers who use background checks on the grounds that it constitutes racial discrimination even when the background check was given to all applicants regardless of race.
This governmental pressure has the counterproductive effect of actually reducing the number of young black males employers are willing to risk investing in.
Sowell talks about the phenomenon of taxi drivers making a decision not to take customers into or out of certain high-crime neighborhoods at night (D-1b) and the decision of supermarket executives not to open stores in those neighborhoods (D-1b). These decisions are based on risks and costs, yet they're often attributed to racism (D-II) on the part of those who make them, even when the cab drivers are themselves black.
The people hurt by these decisions, of course, are law-abiding residents of these neighborhoods, but the blame should not fall on the decision-makers, it should fall on the criminals who make the risks and costs too high to be acceptable.
Another, related, point he makes on this is that stores and other businesses in these neighborhoods often charge more for their products than do similar stores in more affluent neighborhoods. This, too, is often interpreted as D-II, but stores in high-crime neighborhoods suffer more from vandalism and theft than do stores in other areas. If they don't raise their prices to cover the costs of these liabilities they'll go out of business. If they do raise their prices they're threatened with lawsuits by agencies on the lookout for "racially disparate impacts".
What are these stores and shopkeepers, many of whom are minorities and many of whom operate on tight margins as it is, to do?
Sowell goes on to discuss racial segregation, redlining, the effects of mandated minimum wage, gaps in educational achievement, income inequality and much more that can't be outlined here. Most of the positions, policies and practices he addresses, although the media often sniffs the odor of racism about them, are actually the result of causes that are not at all sinister.
Sowell doesn't deny that there's discrimination (D-II), but in his telling it's largely historical, and so much of what remains today has almost no causal connection to the racial disparities we find in our society.
Discrimination and Disparities is a well-documented, easy book to read and should be de rigueur for everyone who wishes to understand the sociological situation we find ourselves in today and who yearns for greater racial comity in our society.