|Английски оригинал||Перевод на български|
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:34
Abstract People in an Abstract World
Абстрактни хора в абстрактен свят
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:34
One of the bases for many of the intellectuals’ sweeping pronouncements about whole societies is conceiving of people in the abstract, without the innumerable specific, systematic and consequential differences in characteristics found among flesh-and-blood human beings as they exist in the real world. For example, the intellectuals’ consuming preoccupation with various inequalities in outcomes is understandable if the individuals or groups that differ in their outcomes do not differ in the many things which produce those outcomes—as they would not with abstract people.
Една от основите на многобройните изказвания на интелектуалците за цялото общество е възприемането на хората в абстракта, изключвайки безбройните специфични, систематични и значими разлики в характеристиките, открити сред хората от плът и кръв, каквито съществуват в реалния свят. Например, загрижеността на интелектуалците за различни неравенства в резултатите е разбираема, ако индивидите или групите, които се различават по своите резултати, не се различават в много неща, които водят до тези резултати - както не биха били с абстрактни хора.
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:37
Abstract people are very convenient for intellectuals’ discussions or research. Abstract people can be aggregated into statistical categories such as households, families, and income brackets, without the slightest concern for whether those statistical categories contain similar people, or even the same numbers of people, or people who differ substantially in age, much less in such finer distinctions as whether or not they are working or whether they are the same people in the same categories over time. The gross contrast between the impression created by income data from the Census Bureau and income data from the Internal Revenue Service, as noted in Chapter 3, is due essentially to the Census’ data being about unspecified people in abstract brackets over time, and the IRS data being compiled from identifiable flesh-and-blood individuals as they move massively from one bracket to another over time.
Абстрактните хора са много удобна тема за дискусии или изследвания за интелектуалците. Абстрактните хора могат да бъдат обобщени в статистически категории, като домакинства, семейства и групирани по доходи, без ни най-малко притеснение дали тези статистически категории съдържат подобни хора или дори същия брой хора или хора, които се различават съществено по възраст, още по-малко в такива по-фини разграничения, като това дали работят или не, или дали са едни и същи хора в различни категории във различни прериоди от живота им. Голямият контраст между впечатленията създадени от данните за доходите от Националния статистически институт (НСИ), спрямо данните за доходите от данъчната Национална агенция приходи (НАП), както бе отбелязано в глава 3, се дължи основно на това, че нанните на НСИ са за неуточнени хора в абстрактни групи във времето, а данните от НАП се събират от идентифицирани хора от плът и кръв, докато те с течение на времето се движат от една доходна гупа в друга.
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:47
Thinking of people in the abstract, and dismissing observed differences between them as mere “perceptions,” or “stereotypes” provides the intelligentsia with innumerable occasions for waxing morally indignant at the concrete differences in economic and other outcomes among different individuals and groups as they exist in the real world.
Мислейки за хората абстрактно и отхвърляйки явните им различия като просто "възприятия" или "стереотипи" дава безброй поводи на интелигенцията да изразява моралното възмущение спрямо конкретните разлики в икономически и други планове сред различните реално съществуващи групи и индивиди.
dimitrovw 15.03.20 в 16:29
Reluctance to associate with any group, whether at work or in neighborhood or other settings, is almost automatically attributed by the intelligentsia to ignorance, prejudice or malice—in utter disregard of not only the first-hand experience of those who are reluctant, but also of objective data on vast differences in rates of crime, alcoholism, and substandard school performances between groups, even though such differences have been common in countries around the world for centuries.
Според интелигенцията, нежелание за асоциация с каквато и да е група, било то в работата, в квартала или в друга среда, се дължи почти автоматично на невежество, предразсъдъци или злоба - напълно пренебрегвайки не само опитът от първа ръка на нежелаещите, но също и обективната база данни върху огромните разлики в процентите на престъпност, алкохолизъм и слабо представяне в училище между групите, въпреки че подобни разлики от векове са често срещани в страните по света.
dimitrovw 15.03.20 в 16:39
Cholera, or example, was unknown in America until large numbers of Irish immigrants arrived in the nineteenth century, and cholera outbreaks in New York and Philadelphia went largely through Irish neighborhoods.1 People who did not want to live near Irish immigrants, as a result of diseases, violence and other social pathology rampant in the Irish communities of that era, cannot be automatically dismissed as blinded by prejudice or deceived by stereotypes.o Strenuous efforts, especially by the Catholic Church, to change the behavior patterns within Irish American communities,2 suggest that it was not all a matter of other people’s “perceptions” or “stereotypes.” Moreover, these efforts within Irish American communities ultimately paid off, as barriers against the Irish, epitomized by employers’ signs that said “No Irish Need Apply,” faded away over the generations.
Холерата, например, била непозната в Америка, докато през 19-ти век не пристигат голям брой ирландски имигранти. Огнищата на холера в Ню Йорк и Филаделфия минавали предимно през ирлански квартали. Хората, които не желаели да живеят близо до ирландски имигранти, заради болести, насилие и други социални склонности преобладаващи в ирландските общности от този период, не могат автоматично да бъдат отхвърлени като заслепени от предразсъдъци или подведени от стереотипи. Упоритите усилия, предимно от Католическата Църква, за промяна в поведенческите модели сред ирландско-американските общности, предполагат, че не всички те се дължали на чуждите "възприятия" или "стереотипи". Още повече, че в края на краищата тези усилия се отплатили, тъй като ограниченията спрямо Ирландците, изразявани чрез работодателски знаци от рода на "Ирландци да не кандидатстват", изчезнали за няколко поколения.
dimitrovw 15.03.20 в 16:57
Such barriers were not simply a matter of mistaken or malign ideas in other people’s heads, nor were the Irish simply abstract people in an abstract world, however much that vision may flatter intellectuals’ desires to be on the side of the angels against the forces of evil. There is no need to go to the opposite extreme and claim that all negative views of all groups are based on valid reasons. The point here is that this is an empirical question to be investigated in terms of the particular facts of the particular group at a particular time and place—a process circumvented by reasoning as if discussing abstract people in an abstract world.
Подобни ограничения не били просто въпрос на грешки или злонамереност в съзнанието на другите. Ирландците, също така, не били просто абстрактни хора в абстрактен свят. Въпреки това, подобни виждания пораждат в интелектуалците желанието да заемат страната на ангелите срещу силите на злото. Няма нужда да отиваме в обратната крайност и да твърдим, че всички негативни виждания за всички групи се базират на основателни причини. Идеята тук, е че това е емпиричен въпрос, който трябва да се изследва вземайки предвид определени факти за определена група в определено време и на определено място - един процес, който се заобикаля, когато се разсъждавя сякаш става въпрос за абстрактни хора в абстрактен свят.
dimitrovw 15.03.20 в 17:15
In the real world, people do not behave randomly. Studies have shown the correlation between the IQs of husbands and their wives to be similar to—and sometimes greater than—the correlation between the IQs of brothers and sisters,3 even though there is no genetic or biological reason for spouses to be similar in IQ. Only the fact that people behave differently toward people whom they perceive as similar to themselves seems likely to explain IQ correlations between people who get married, even though they do not give IQ tests to one another before deciding to wed.
В действителността поведението на хората не е случайно. Проучвания показват, че съотношението между IQ-то на съпрузи и техните съпруги е близко до - а понякога и по-силно от - това между братя и сестри, въпреки че няма генетична или биологична причина за това съпрузи да имат близко IQ. Единствено фактът, че хората се държат различно спрямо хора, които възприемат като равни изглежда обяснява съотношението между женени двойки, въпреки че последните не си правят IQ тест, преди да решат да се оженят.
dimitrovw 15.03.20 в 17:27
Considering an opposite approach may make the difference between reasoning in the abstract and reasoning in the concrete stand out more sharply. When a scholarly study of economic development in Latin America concluded, “Costa Rica is different from Nicaragua because Costa Ricans are different from Nicaraguans,”4 its conclusion—whatever its merits or demerits—was one almost unthinkable within the confines of the vision of the anointed, even as a hypothesis to be tested. The opposite approach—treating Costa Ricans and Nicaraguans as if they were abstract people in an abstract world, whose differences in outcomes could only be a result of external circumstances, has been far more common among the intelligentsia.
Разглеждането на обратен подход може да направи разликата между разсъжденията в абстрактното и разсъжденията в конкретното да изпъкнат по-рязко. Когато едно научно изследване на икономическото развитие в Латинска Америка стигна до заключението, че „Коста Рика е различна от Никарагуа, тъй като жителите на Коста Рика са различни от жителите на Никарагуа“ 4, заключениетп - независимо от неговите достойнства или недостатъци - беше почти немислимо в рамките на визията на помазаните, дори само като хипотеза, която трябва да бъде тествана. Обратният подход да се третират костариканците и никарагуанците, като абстрактни хора в абстрактен свят и на различията в резултатите им да се гледат като причинени само от външни обстоятелства, е много по-често срещан сред интелигенцията.
thegreenmarker 25.03.20 в 17:11
DISPARITIES AND THEIR CAUSES
The grand social dogma of our time, that statistical disparities in outcomes between groups are presumptive evidence of differential treatment by others—a presumption that employers, lenders and others accused of discriminatory behavior must rebut to the satisfaction of commissions or courts, or else face penalties that can amount to millions of dollars—is sheer presumption. No evidence whatsoever is required to be presented to commissions or courts to substantiate that presumption. Moreover, such evidence as history offers goes completely counter to that presumption.
In the nineteenth century, Scottish highlanders were not as prosperous as Scottish lowlanders, whether in Scotland itself or as immigrants living in Australia or the United States.5 In the twentieth century, Gaelic-speaking children in the Hebrides Islands off Scotland did not score as high on IQ tests as the English-speaking children there.6 Rates of alcoholism among Irish-Americans have at one time been some multiple of the rates of alcoholism among Italian Americans or Jewish Americans.7 In the days of the Soviet Union, the consumption of cognac in Estonia was more than seven times what it was in Uzbekistan.8 In Malaysia during the 1960s, students from the Chinese minority earned more than 400 degrees in engineering, while students from the Malay majority earned just four engineering degrees during that same decade.9
To those who think in terms of abstract people in an abstract world, it may be surprising, or even shocking, to discover large intergroup disparities in incomes, I.Q.s and numerous other social variables. Although such disparities are common in many very different societies around the world, intellectuals in each society tend to regard these disparities in their own country as strange, if not sinister. In some countries, particular minorities have been accused of “taking over” whole industries, when in fact those industries did not exist until those minorities created them.10
Sometimes minorities are on the short end of disparities (as in the United States, Britain and France), and sometimes it is a majority that lags behind (as in Malaysia, Indonesia or the Ottoman Empire). Sometimes the disparities are blamed on discrimination, sometimes on genes, but in any event the disparities are treated as oddities that need explaining, no matter how common such supposed oddities are in countries around the world or in how many centuries they have been common. Because intellectuals’ assumptions about these disparities are so deeply ingrained, so widely disseminated, and have such powerful ramifications on so many issues, it is worth taking a closer and longer look beyond abstract people in an abstract world to the hard facts about real people in the real world, now and in the past.
Where minorities have outperformed politically dominant majorities, it is especially difficult to make the case that discrimination is the cause.
A study of the Ottoman Empire, for example, found that “of the 40 private bankers listed in Istanbul in 1912 not one bore a Muslim name.” Nor was even one of the 34 stockbrokers in Istanbul a Turk. Of the capital assets of 284 industrial firms employing five or more workers, 50 percent were owned by Greeks and another 20 percent by Armenians.11 In the seventeenth century Ottoman Empire, the palace medical staff consisted of 41 Jews and 21 Muslims.12
The racial or ethnic minorities who have owned or directed more than half of whole industries in particular nations have included the Chinese in Malaysia,13 the Lebanese in West Africa,14 Greeks in the Ottoman Empire,15 Britons in Argentina,16 Belgians in Russia,17 Jews in Poland,18 and Spaniards in Chile19—among many others. As of 1921, members of the Tamil minority in Ceylon outnumbered members of the Sinhalese majority in that country’s medical profession.20
Groups have differed greatly in innumerable endeavors in countries around the world. In 1908, Germans were the sole producers of the following products in Brazil’s state of São Paulo: metal furniture, trunks, stoves, paper, hats, neckties, leather, soap, glass, matches, beer, confections, and carriages.21 People of Japanese ancestry who settled in that same state produced more than two-thirds of the potatoes and more than 90 percent of the tomatoes.22 Exporters from the Lebanese minority in the African nation of Sierra Leone accounted for 85 percent of the exports of ginger in 1954 and 93 percent in 1955.23 In 1949, Lebanese truckers in Sierra Leone outnumbered African truckers and European truckers combined.24 In 1921, more than three-fifths of all the commerce in Poland was conducted by Jews, who were only 11 percent of the population.25 In 1948, members of the Indian minority owned roughly nine-tenths of all the cotton gins in Uganda.26 In colonial Ceylon, the textile, retailing, wholesaling, and import businesses were all largely in the hands of people of Indian ancestry, rather than in the hands of the Sinhalese majority.27
As early as 1887, more than twice as many Italians as Argentines had bank accounts in the Banco de la Provincia de Buenos Aires,28 even though most nineteenth-century Italian immigrants arrived in Argentina destitute and began working in the lowest, hardest, and most “menial” jobs. In the United States, knowledge of the frugality of Italian immigrants, and their reliability in repaying debts, even when they had low incomes, caused a bank to be set up to attract this clientele in San Francisco, under the name “Bank of Italy.” It became so successful that it spread out to the larger society, and eventually became the largest bank in the world under its new name, “Bank of America.”29 The frugality of Italians was not simply a “perception” or a “stereotype,” as A.P. Giannini well knew when he set up this bank.
At one period of history or another, when it was not one specific racial or ethnic minority dominating an industry or occupation, it has often been foreigners in general, leaving the majority population of a country outnumbered, or even non-existent, in whole sectors of their own economy. Even after the middle of the twentieth century, most of the industrial enterprises in Chile were controlled by either immigrants or the children of immigrants.30 At various times and places, foreign minorities have predominated in particular industries or occupations over the majority populations of Peru,31 Switzerland,32 Malaysia,33 Argentina,34 Russia,35 much of the Balkans,36 the Middle East,37 and Southeast Asia.38 Indeed, it has been a worldwide phenomenon, found even in some economically advanced countries, as well as being common in less advanced countries.
Such examples could be extended almost indefinitely,p and so could the reasons for the disparities. But a more fundamental question must be faced: Was there ever any realistic chance that the various races would have had the same skills, experience and general capabilities, even if they had the same genetic potential and faced no discrimination?
Different races, after all, developed in different parts of the world, in very different geographic settings, which presented very different opportunities and restrictions on their economic and cultural evolution over a period of centuries.
There is no way, for example, that the patterns of economic and social life which originated and evolved in Europe could have originated among the indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere, where the horses that were central to everything from farming to transportation to warfare in Europe simply did not exist anywhere in the Western Hemisphere when the European invaders arrived and began transplanting horses across the Atlantic to the New World. Take horses out of the history of Europe and a very different kind of economy and society would have had to evolve, in order to be viable. Not only horses were lacking in the Western Hemisphere, neither were there oxen, which were common in both Europe and Asia. There were, in short, no such heavy-duty beasts of burden in the Western Hemisphere as existed on the vast Eurasian land mass, where most of the human race has lived throughout recorded history. The way of life in these different regions of the world had no basis on which to be the same—which is to say, there was no way for the skills and experiences of the races in these regions to be the same.
The wheel has often been regarded as fundamental to economic and social advances but, for most of the history of the human race, the value of wheeled vehicles depended to a great extent on the presence of draft animals to pull those vehicles—and there were no wheeled vehicles in any of the economies of the Western Hemisphere when the Europeans arrived. The Mayans had invented wheels, but they were used on children’s toys,39 so the issue was not the intellectual capacity to invent the wheel but the circumstances that make wheels more valuable or less valuable. Clearly, the way of life among the indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere could not have been the same as that on the Eurasian land mass, when there were neither wheeled vehicles nor draft animals in the Western Hemisphere when the Europeans and their animals arrived.
Geographic differences between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa are even more numerous and more drastic than those between Europe and the Western Hemisphere.40 In addition to severe geographic limitations on the production of wealth, due to deficiencies of soil and unreliable rainfall patterns,41 sub-Saharan Africa has had severe geographic restrictions on communications among its fragmented peoples, and of these peoples with the peoples of the outside world, due to a dearth of navigable waterways within sub-Saharan Africa, as well as a dearth of natural harbors, the difficulties of maintaining draft animals because of the disease-carrying tsetse fly, and the vast barrier of the Sahara desert, which is several times the size of any other desert in the world, and as large as the 48 contiguous states of the United States. With an expanse of sand that size standing between them and the outside world to the north, and with three oceans on the other sides of them, the peoples of sub-Saharan Africa have long been among the most insulated from the rest of the human race.
Isolated peoples have for centuries lagged behind others, whether the isolation has been caused by mountains, deserts, or islands far from the nearest mainland. Eminent French historian Fernand Braudel pointed out, “mountain life persistently lagged behind the plain.”42 The inhabitants of the Canary Islands were people of a Caucasian race who were living at a stone-age level when they were discovered by the Spaniards in the fifteenth century.43 On the other side of the world, the similarly isolated Australian aborigines similarly lagged far behind the progress of the outside world.44 Sub-Saharan Africans have been part of a worldwide pattern of isolated peoples lagging behind others in technology, organization and in other ways.
In addition to having many geographic barriers limiting their access to the peoples and cultures of other lands, sub-Saharan Africans also faced internal geographic barriers limiting their access to each other. The resulting internal cultural fragmentation is indicated by the fact that, while Africans are only about ten percent of the world’s population, they have one-third of the world’s languages.45
Eventually, the severe isolation of many sub-Saharan Africans was ended in the modern era, as that of other severely isolated peoples was ended, but that was after millennia in which these isolated peoples had developed whole ways of life very different from the ways of life that developed among those peoples of Europe and Asia who had far greater access to a far wider cultural universe. Moreover, cultures—whole ways of life—do not simply evaporate when conditions change, whether among Africans or others. Long-standing and deep-seated cultural differences can become cultural barriers, even after the geographical barriers that created cultural isolation have been overcome with the growth of modern transportation and communication. As distinguished cultural historian Oscar Handlin put it: “men are not blank tablets upon which the environment inscribes a culture which can readily be erased to make way for a new inscription.”46 As another noted historian put it: “We do not live in the past, but the past in us.”47
Even the geographic differences between Eastern Europe and Western Europe48 have left the peoples of Eastern Europe with a lower standard of living than that of Western Europeans for centuries, including in our own times a larger economic disparity between the people in these two regions of Europe than the per capita income disparity between blacks and whites in the United States.49 As Professor Angelo Codevilla of Boston University put it, “a European child will have a very different life depending on whether that baby was born east or west of a line that starts at the Baltics and stretches southward along Poland’s eastern border, down Slovakia’s western border and along the eastern border of Hungary, then continues down through the middle of Bosnia to the Adriatic Sea.”50 Both geography and history have for centuries presented very different opportunities to people born east and west of that line.51
In addition to the inherent geographic advantages that Western Europe has had over Eastern Europe—for example, more navigable waterways leading to the open seas, with Western European rivers and harbors not being frozen over as often or as long in winter as rivers and harbors in Eastern Europe, due to the warming effect of the Gulf Stream on Western Europe—another major historic advantage growing out of geography is that Western Europe was more readily accessible to invasion by Roman conquerors. Despite the ruthless slaughters in those conquests and the subsequent brutal oppressions by the Roman overlords, among the lasting advantages which the Roman conquests brought to Western Europe were Roman letters, so that Western European languages had written versions, centuries before the languages of Eastern Europe did. To the enormous advantages of literacy, as such, Western Europeans had the further advantage of a far greater accumulation of written knowledge in their languages, even after the languages of Eastern Europe began to develop written versions, but still had not yet caught up with the centuries-long accumulations of knowledge written in Western European languages.
Literacy was not the only thing that moved from west to east in Europe. So did coins, printing presses, castles, crossbows, paved streets, and vaccinations, among other economic and social advances. But all of this took time, sometimes centuries. Moreover, people from Western Europe—Germans, Jews and others—were often a majority of the population in Eastern European cities in earlier centuries, while Slavs remained a huge majority in the surrounding countrysides. For example, before 1312 the official records of the city of Cracow were kept in German—and the transition, at that point, was to Latin. Only decades later did Poles become a majority of the population in Cracow.52 The towns of medieval East Central Europe were often cultural enclaves of foreigners—again, mostly Germans, but with many Jews as well and, in the Balkans, Greeks and Armenians, joined in later centuries by Turks.53
In short, there has been for centuries, not only a disparity between the opportunities and advances in the two halves of Europe, but great disparities within Eastern Europe itself between the indigenous peoples of the region and the transplanted Western Europeans living in Eastern Europe, the Baltic and the Balkans. Neither genes nor discrimination are necessary to explain this situation, though some intellectuals and politicians have chosen to claim that the differences have been due to race and others have chosen to blame social injustices. Many other racial and other groups in many other parts of the world have likewise ended up with large disparities in opportunities and achievements, for reasons that range across a wide spectrum and cannot be reduced to genes or injustices.
There is no need to replace genetic determinism with geographic determinism. While there are other factors which operate against the presumed equality of developed capabilities among people with equal potential, the point here is that geography alone is enough to prevent equality of developed capabilities, even if all races have identical potentialities and there is no discrimination. Nor is it necessary to determine the relative weights of geographic, demographic, cultural and other factors, when the more fundamental point is that each of these factors makes equal outcomes among races, classes or other subdivisions of the human species less likely.
Historical happenstances—the fact that certain decisive battles could easily have gone the other way and changed the future of whole nations and races—are among those other factors. Had the battle of Tours in 732 or the siege of Vienna in 1529 gone the other way, this could be a very different world today. But these other factors besides geography tend to remove equal developed capabilities even further from the realm of reality. Moreover, since the geography of the planet is not something “socially constructed,” the misfortunes of lagging groups are not automatically a social injustice, even if they are injustices from some cosmic perspective, in the sense that many peoples have suffered serious deprivations through no fault of their own. Putting the onus on society by calling these deprivations a violation of “social justice” may be a verbal sop to those who are lagging, but it points them away from the paths by which other lagging groups have advanced themselves in the past.
Cultural attitudes, which in some societies create a rigid division between “women’s work” and “men’s work,” or which make manual labor repugnant to people with education, or caste-ridden societies which drastically limit the sources from which particular talents can be drawn for accomplishing particular tasks, all affect the economic potential of a given society. A society which throws away the talents and potentialities of half its population by making many economic roles and endeavors off-limits to women can hardly be expected to match the economic performances of societies which do not restrict their own prospects like this. In a society with rigid class or caste divisions, the highly varied talents and potentialities which arise among individuals may not arise solely, or even predominantly, among those individuals who happen to be born within the rigid class or caste stratifications in which their talents and potentialities are appropriate, or in which they can reach fruition.
This is yet another reason why societies, races and civilizations are extremely unlikely to have identical achievements, even in the complete absence of genetic deficiencies or social injustices.
Examples of differences in particular capabilities and achievements, among groups, nations or civilizations around the world that are not due to discrimination could be multiplied almost without limit.54 But what is crucial is that no examples of an even or statistically random distribution of groups in any country have been necessary to establish the prevailing dogma, the vision to which American employers, lenders and others must conform, at the risk of facing the heavy penalties of the law.
The views of those who reason as if discussing abstract people in an abstract world were exemplified in the dissenting opinion of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case of Wal-Mart v. Dukes. Justice Ginsburg objected to Wal-Mart’s “system of delegated discretion” in which individual managers in its stores across the country assess the job performances of the individuals working under them, and determine pay and promotions accordingly. This can lead to “discriminatory outcomes,” she said, due to “arbitrary and subjective criteria.”55
While discrimination can certainly affect outcomes, it does not follow that outcomes tell you whether or not there is discrimination. To believe the latter would be to say that those whose managerial decisions convey differences among groups are the cause of those differences among groups—that the groups themselves cannot possibly behave or perform differently. Moreover, to say that judgments made by those directly observing the behavior or performances of individuals are “subjective” is to imply that “objective” standards prescribed by distant third parties who have never laid eyes on the individuals involved would be more accurate.
That would be true if the individual workers’ performances could be assessed from afar as if they were abstract people in an abstract world, rather than having all the differences that have been common for centuries among individuals and groups. Alternatively, it would be true if those making managerial decisions were so vastly inferior to distant third parties, either intellectually or morally, that surrogate decision-makers’ unsubstantiated assumptions could be relied upon to produce more accurate assessments.
What does all this boil down to?
1. Grossly uneven distributions of racial, ethnic and other groups in numerous fields of endeavor have been common in countries around the world and for centuries of recorded history.
2. The even, proportional or statistically random distribution of these groups, which has been taken as a norm, deviations from which have been regarded as evidence of either genetic differences in ability (in the early 20th century) or as evidence of maltreatment by others (in the late 20th century) has seldom, if ever, been demonstrated empirically, or even been asked to be demonstrated.
3. The current widespread use of an even, proportional or statistically random distribution of groups in particular fields of endeavor, or at particular income levels, as a benchmark from which to measure maltreatment by others, is taken as axiomatic, not because of empirical support for this conclusion but because that benchmark is a foundation for other social beliefs and political agendas.
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:48
Abstract people have an immortality which flesh-and-blood people have yet to achieve. Thus, a historian writing about the newly-created state of Czechoslovakia after the First World War, said that its policies regarding the ethnic groups within it were designed “to correct social injustice” and to “put right the historic wrongs of the seventeenth century”56—despite the fact that actual flesh-and-blood people from the seventeenth century had died long before, putting the redressing of their wrongs beyond the reach of human power.
Абстрактните хора са безсмъртни - нещо, което все още чакаме хората от плът и кръв да постигнат. Така историк, пишещ за новосъздадената държава Чехословакия след Първата световна война, казва, че политиките й по отношение на етническите групи в нея са създадени „да поправят социалната несправедливост“ и „да оправят историческите неправди на 17-ти век“  - въпреки факта, че действителните хора от плът и кръв от 17ти век отдавна са вече мъртви, факт, който поставя компенсацията им извън обсега на човешките способности.
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:52
Much the same kind of reasoning has continued to be ideologically powerful among the intelligentsia in twenty-first century America, who speak of “whites” and “blacks” as intertemporal abstractions with centuries-old issues to be redressed, rather than as flesh-and-blood individuals who take their sins and their sufferings with them to the grave. There is surely no more profound difference between human beings than the difference between the dead and the living. Yet even that difference is glided over verbally when speaking of races as intertemporal abstractions, of whom the current living generation is just the latest embodiment.
Почти същият вид разсъждения продължава да бъде идеологически могъщ сред интелигенцията в Америка от 21-ви век, които говорят за „белите“ и „черните“ като междувременните абстракции с вековни проблеми, които трябва да бъдат отстранени, а не говорят като за хора от плът и кръв, които отнасят със себе си извършените грехове и преживяните страдания в гроба. Със сигурност няма по-дълбока разлика между човешките същества от разликата между мъртвите и живите. И въпреки това дори тази разлика се вербално се изплъзва, като се започне да се говори за раси като междувременни абстракции, за които настоящото живо поколение е само последното въплъщение.
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 10:57
Unlike real people, abstract people can be sent “back” to places where they have never been. Thus millions of descendants of German families who had lived for centuries in parts of Eastern Europe and the Balkans were sent “back” to Germany after the Second World War, as the majority populations of these regions reacted bitterly to having been mistreated during Nazi occupation by imposing a massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from their midst after the war. Many of these flesh-and-blood individuals of German ancestry had never laid eyes on Germany, to which they were being sent “back.” Only as intertemporal abstractions had they come from Germany.
За разлика от истинските хора абстрактните хора могат да бъдат изпращани „обратно“ на места, където те никога не са били. По този начин милиони потомци на германски семейства, живели в части от Източна Европа и на Балканите векове наред са били изпратени "обратно" в Германия след Втората световна война, as the majority populations of these regions reacted bitterly to having been mistreated during Nazi occupation by imposing a massive ethnic cleansing of Germans from their midst after the war. Много от тези хора от плът и кръв имащи немското потекло никога не са виждали с очите си Германия, в която са изпращани „обратно“. Само като междувременни абстракции те "са дошли" от Германия.
thegreenmarker 1.03.20 в 11:00
It was much the same story with so-called Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka who, in the 1960s, were sent “back” to India, from which their ancestors had emigrated in the nineteenth century. Similarly, when people of Indian and Pakistani heritage were expelled from Uganda in the 1970s, most of them had been born in Uganda and more of them resettled in Britain than in India or Pakistan. Perhaps the most persistent efforts to repatriate intertemporal abstractions were nineteenth-century American proposals to free the slaves and then send them “back to Africa”—a continent which in most cases neither they nor their grandparents had ever seen.