Is "Reverse Discrimination" a Real Thing?

 We hear charges of "reverse discrimination" in cases of college and law school admissions, in affirmative action hiring and promotion (eg. Colin Powell), in the appointment of women to corporate boards (as in Germany last week). These charges usually focus on an individual case, which makes it difficult to discern the truth. Let's try to find a way to view these situations with more perspective.

Of course, we will need an exaggerated, simplified metaphor with some hypothetical numbers. Here's a little town from nowhere special where the situation may give us a chance to see clearly. We can call it "Starkville" and we will look at the town in 1950. The East half of Starkville and the West half of Starkville are separated by "Division" Street. To the east of Division St., the homes are upper-middle-class or moderately wealthy. The streets and sidewalks are paved and in very good repair. The city budget for streets on the east side is $100,000, which is adequate to maintain them as the residents prefer. 

To the west of Division St., the houses are working-class or poorer. The streets are graded dirt and gravel with only one badly paved, seriously potholed through street. The city budget for the "streets" on the west side is $20,000.

When the national "enlightenment" of the 1960s passes over, Starkville realizes the error of its ways and resolves to bring about justice and equity in its civic infrastructure (the streets). Several serious issues arise, some immediate and some long-term.

First, simply dividing the $120,000 total city street budget in half will result in degrading the maintenance on the east, which will leave those taxpayers very unsatisfied. $60,000 is not enough to keep the streets in a manner they are accustomed to. Are the east-siders going to complain of "reverse discrimination" 

Second, raising the street budget for the west side to $100,000 will strain all the taxpayers of the city, but the tax increases will fall more heavily on the wealthier (east) side. Again, is this "reverse discrimination"?

And still one more question: the condition of the west side streets is the result of 100 years of (east-siders) willful neglect of their west-side neighbors. Simple "equality from now on" will never bring the actual infrastructure up to the level of the east side. The real need is for a full-scale repair to bring about true equality (also known as "justice"). Equal budgets AFTER the repair is completed will maintain that justice into the future.

The discrimination against the west side by the east side would always exist until the historical distortion that harmed the west side has been repaired. Any illusion of (reverse) discrimination harming the east side would always be a falsehood until then.

The View from the Back Pew

 

The View from the Back Pew

At first glance, it seems that “politics” for many laypeople is only a question of which party they prefer. In many ways, the idea of “religion” is similar - a preference for a denomination. If these are the limits on the view from the back pew (laypeople in general), then there is nothing to discuss. The blunt instruments of “separation of church and state” and the IRS rules in 501(c)3 tell us to change the subject.

 

As soon as we scratch a little below the surface of either politics or religion, looking for more meaning in either, things become more complex - more interesting.

 

In all of the Church parishes where I have been a member, and in all of the social gatherings I find myself in (work, family, or neighborhood), there seems to be a common question underneath any discussion: “What is the right thing for us to do?” When we whittle it down to the most basic level, both religion and politics are seeking the same answers. What is right? What is wrong? What will it cost to do the right thing? What will it cost to ignore the right thing?

 

In America, both religion and politics have extensive documents of principles for making those “right vs wrong” decisions. Those principles overlap a lot and rarely conflict. “Love your neighbor as yourself” and “All [people] are created equal” say basically the same thing. Both faith and patriotism wrap our freedoms in a protective layer of responsibility. Cooperation and compassion are central virtues of both Church and State, not the exclusive province of one or the other.

 

The institution of the Church and our partisan power of the government need to be kept at arms-length or further apart. The actions of citizens in a Republic, however, need to be guided by a strong sense of right and wrong, wherever that sense comes from.