The better path to black progress.

BEYOND CIVIL RIGHTS

BY GLENN CLouRY

THERE IS TODAY a great deal of serious discussionamong black Americans concerning fhe problems con-

fronfing fheni. Many, if nof most, people now concedefhaf not all problems of blacks are due fo discrimination,and that they cannot be remedied fhrough civil righfssfrafegies or racial polifics. I would go even furfher; usingcivil righfs sfrafegies to address problems fo which fheyare ill-suifed fhwarfs more direcf and effecfive action. In-deed, fhe broad application of fhese sfrategies to everycase of differenfial achievemenf between blacks andwhites fhreafens fo make if impossible for blacks foachieve full equality in American society.

The civil righfs approach has fwo essenfial aspecfs: firsf,fhe cause of a particular socioeconomic disparity is identi-fied as racial discriminafion; and second, advocates seeksuch remedies for fhe disparity as fhe courfs and adminis-frafive agencies provide under fhe law.

There are fundamenfal hmifations on this approach de-riving from our liberal polifical herifage. Whaf can fhissfrafegy do abouf fhose imporfanf confractual relation-ships fhaf profoundly affect one's social and economicsfafus buf in which racial discriminafion is roufinely prac-ficed? Choice of marifal parfner is an obvious example.People discriminafe here by race wifh a vengeance. Ablack woman does nof have an opporfunity equal to thatof a whife woman fo become fhe wife of a given whifeman. Since whife men are on fhe whole befter off finan-cially fhan black men, fhis racial inequality of opporfunifyhas subsfanfial monefary costs fo black women. Yef surelyif is fo be hoped that the choice of husband or wife willalways be beyond fhe reach of fhe law.

The example is nof facefious. All sorfs of volunfaryassociafions—neighborhoods, friends, business partner-ships—are fhe resulf of choices offen influenced by racialcriteria, buf which lie beyond fhe reach of civil righfs laws.A fair housing law cannof prevenf a disgrunfled whiferesidenf from moving away if his neighborhood becomespredominantly or even partly black. Busing for desegrega-fion cannof prevenf unhappy parents from sending fheirchildren fo private schools. Withdrawal of universify sup-porf for sfudenf clubs wifh discriminafory selection rules

Glenn C. Loury is professor of polifical economy af Har-vard's John F. Kennedy School of Government and iscurrenfly on leave af fhe Insfifufe for Advanced Sfudy atPrinceton.

cannof prevenf sfudent cliques from forming along raciallines. And a vasf majorify of Americans would have if noofher way.

As a result, the nondiscrimination mandate has notbeen allowed to interfere much with personal, privafe,and infimafely social infercourse. Yef such exclusive socialconnecfions along group Hnes have important economicconsequences. An extensive liferafure in economics andsociology documenfs fhe crucial importance of family andcommunify background in defermining a child's later suc-cess in hfe. Lacking fhe righf "nefworks," blacks wifh fhesame innafe abihfies as whifes wind up less successful.And fhe ehminafion of racial discriminafion in the eco-nomic sphere—but not in pafferns of social affachment—will probably not be enough fo make up the difference.There are thus elemental limifs on what one can hope toachieve fhrough fhe appHcafion of civil righfs strategies towhat must of necessify be a resfricfed domain of personalinferacfions.

The civil righfs strategy has generally been restrictedfo fhe domain of impersonal, public, and economic frans-actions such as jobs, credit, and housing. Even in theseareas, fhe efficacy of fhis strategy can be questioned. Thelagging economic condition of blacks is due in significanfparf fo the nature of social life within poor black communi-fies. After fwo decades of civil righfs efforts, more thanthree-fourfhs of children in some inner-city ghettos areborn out of wedlock; black high school dropout rafes hov-er near 50 percenf in Chicago and Defroif; fwo-fiffhs ofmurder victims in fhe country are blacks killed by ofherblacks; fewer black women graduafe from college thangive birth while in high school; more than two in fiveblack children are dependenf on public assisfance. WhifeAmerica's lack of respecf for blacks' civil righfs cannotbe blamed for all fhese sorry facts. This is nof to denyfhaf, in some basic sense, mosf of these difficulfies arerelated fo our hisfory of racial oppression, buf only tosay fhaf fhese problems have taken on a life of theirown, and cannot be effecfively reversed by civil rightspolicies.

Higher educafion is a case in poinf. In the nof too distantpast, blacks, Asians, and women faced severe obstacles foaftending or teaching at American colleges and universi-ties, especially af the mosf prestigious insfifufions. Evenaffer black scholars studied af fhe greaf insfifutions, theironly possibihties for employment were af the historically

THE NEW REPUBLIC

black colleges, where they faced large teaching loads andburdensome administrative duties. Their accomplish-ments were often acknowledged by their white peers onlygrudgingly, if at all.

Today opportunities for advanced education and aca-demic careers for blacks abound. Major universitiesthroughout the country are constantly searching for quali-fied black candidates to hire as professors, or to admit tostudy. Most state colleges and universities near black pop-ulation centers have made a concerted effort to reach thosein the inner city. Almost all institutions of higher learningadmit blacks with lower grades or test scores than whitestudents. There are special programs funded by privatefoundations to help blacks prepare for advanced study inmedicine, economics, engineering, public policy, law, andother fields,

YET, WITH ALL these opportunities (and despite im-provement in some areas), the number of blacks ad-

vancing in the academic world is distressingly low. Thepercentage of college sfudents who are black, after risingthroughout the 1970s, has actually begun to decline. Andthough the proportion of doctorates granted to blacks hasrisen slightly over the last decade, a majority of blackdocforates are still earned in the field of education. Despiteconstant pressure to hire black professors and strenuousefforts to recruit them, the percentage of blacks on eliteuniversity faculties has remained constant or fallen in thepast decade.

Meanwhile, other groups traditionally excluded aremaking impressive gains. Asian-Americans, though lessthan two percent of the population, make up 6.6 percentof U.S, scientists with doctorates; they constitute 7.5 per-cent of the students at Yale, and nine percent at Stanford,The proportion of doctorates going to women has risenfrom less than one-seventh to nearly one-third in the lastdecade. Less than two percent of Harvard professors at allranks are black, but more than 25 percent are women.

Now, it is entirely possible that blacks experience dis-crimination at these institutions. But as anyone who hasspent time in an elite university community knows, theseinstitutions are not racist in character, nor do they denyopportunities to blacks with outstanding qualifications.The case can be made that just the opposite is true—thatthese institutions are so anxious to raise the numbers ofblacks in their ranks that they overlook deficiencies whenmaking admissions or appointment decisions involvingblacks.

One obvious reason for skepticism about discriminationas the cause of the problem here is the relatively pooracademic performance of black high school and collegestudents. Black performance on standardized college ad-missions tests, though improving, still lags far behindwhites. In 1982 there were only 205 blacks in the entirecountry who scored above 700 on the math component ofthe SAT, And, as Robert Klilgaard shows convincingly inhis book Choosing Elites, post-admissions college perform-ance by black students is less than that of whites, even

when controlling for differences in high school gradesand SAT scores. These differences in academic perform-ance are not just limited to poor blacks, or to high schoolstudents. On the SAT exam, blacks from families withincomes in excess of $50,000 per year still scored 60 to 80points below comparable whites. On the 1982 GraduateRecord Exam, the gap between black and white students'average scores on the mathematics component of this testwas 171 points. According to Klitgaard, black studentsentering law school in the late 1970s had median scoreson the LSAT at the eighth percentile of all students'scores.

Such substantial differences in educational results areclearly a matter of great concern. Arguably, the govern-ment should be actively seeking to attenuate them. But itseems equally clear that this is not a civil rights matter thatcan be reversed by seeking out and changing someone'sdiscriminatory behavior. Moreover, it is possible thatgreat harm will be done if the problem is defined andpursued in those terms,

T'AKE THE CONTROVERSY over racial quotas at theBoston Latin School, the pride and joy of the city's

public school system. It was founded before Harvard, in1635, and it has been recognized ever since as a centerof academic excellence, Boston Latin maintains its veryhigh standards through a grueling program of study, in-cluding Latin, Greek, calculus, history, science, and thearts. Three hours of homework per night are typical. Col-lege admissions personnel acknowledge the excellence ofthis program; 95 percent of the class of 1985 will go tocollege.

The institution admits its students on the basis oftheir marks in primary school and performance on theSecondary School Admissions Test, In 1974, when Bos-ton's public schools became subject to court-ordered de-segregation. Judge Arthur Garrity considered closing Bos-ton Latin, because the student population at the time wasmore than 90 percent white. In the end, a racial admis-sions quota was employed, requiring that 35 percent of theentering classes be black and Hispanic. Of the 2,245 stu-dents last year, over half were female, 57 percent white, 23percent black, 14 percent Asian, and six percentHispanic,

Historically the school has maintained standardsthrough a policy of academic "survival of the fit-test." Those who were unable to make it through theacademic rigors simply transferred to another school.Thus, there has always been a high rate of attrition;it is now in the range of 30 percent to 40 percent. Buttoday, unlike the pre-desegregation era, most of thosewho do not succeed at Boston Latin are minority students.Indeed, though approximately 35 percent of each enferingclass is black and Hispanic, only 16 percent of last year'ssenior class was. That is, for each non-Asian minoritystudent who graduates from Latin, there is one who didnot. The failure rate for whites is about half that. Someadvocates of minority student interest have complained of

OCTOBER 7, 1985 23

discriminafion, saying in effect that the school is not doingenough to assist those in academic difficulty. Yef surelyone reason for fhe poor performance of fhe black andHispanic sfudenfs is Judge Garrify's admissions quofa. Tobe considered for admission, whifes musf score af fhe70fh percenfile or higher on fhe admissions exam, whileblacks and Hispanics need only score above fhe 50thpercentile.

RECENTLY THOMAS Atkins, former general counsel. of fhe NAACP, who has been representing the black

plaintiffs in the Boston school desegregation lawsuit,which has been going on for fen years, proposed fhaf fhequota at Boston Latin be raised to roughly 50 percentblack, 20 percent Hispanic and Asian, and 30 percentwhife—a reflecfion of fhe racial composifion of fhe resf ofBoston's public schools. Unless fhere were a significanfincrease in the size of the school, this could only be accom-plished by doubling the number of blacks admifted whilecutting white enrollment in half. This in furn, under plau-sible disfributional assumptions, would require that thecurrent difference of 20 poinfs in fhe minimum test scoresrequired of black and white students accepted be approxi-mately doubled. Since the additional black sfudenfs ad-mitted would be less prepared than those admitted underthe current quota, one would expect an even higher failurerate among minorities were this plan to be accepted. Thelikely consequence would be that more than three-fourthsof those leaving Boston Latin without a degree would beblacks and Hispanics. It is also plausible to infer fhaf suchan action would profoundly alter, if not destroy, the aca-demic climate in the school.

This is nof simply an inappropriate use of civil rightsmethods, though it is surely that. It is an almost wantonmoral surrender. By what logic of pedagogy can fhesestudenfs' difficulfies be attributed to racism, in view of thefact that the school system has been run by court order forover a decade? By what calculus of fairness can thoseclaiming to be fighting for justice argue fhaf outstandingwhite students, many from poor homes fhemselves (80percenf of Lafin graduates require financial aid in college),should be denied fhe opportunity for this special educa-tion so thaf minorify sfudenfs who are nof prepared for ifmay nonetheless enroll? Is there so little faith in fhe apfi-fude of fhe minorify young people fhat the highest stan-dards should not be held out for them? It would seem thaffhe real problem here—a dearfh of academically outsfand-ing black high school sfudents in Boston—is not amenableto rectification by court order.

Anofher example from fhe fleld of education illustratesthe "opportunity costs" of the civil rights strategy. In 1977the Ann Arbor public school system was sued by publicinferesf lawyers on behalf of a group of black parenfs wifhchildren in the primary grades. The school system wasaccused of denying equal educational opportunity fo fhesechildren. The problem was fhat fhe black studenfs werenot learning how to read at an acceptable rate, though thewhife youngsters were. The suit alleged fhaf by failing fo

take into account in fhe feaching of reading fo fhese chil-dren fhe facf that fhey spoke an identifiable, distinct dia-lect of fhe English language--Black English—fhe blacksfudenfs were denied equal educafional opportunity. Thelawsuit was successful.

As a result, in 1979 the court ordered that reading teach-ers in Ann Arbor be given special "sensifivify" fraining sofhaf, while feaching sfandard English fo fhese children,fhey might take into account the youngsters' culturallydistinct patterns of speech. Ann Arbor's public schoolsystem has dutifully complied. A recent discussion of thiscase with local educators revealed that, as of six years afterthe initial court order, the disparity in reading achieve-ment between blacks and whites in Ann Arbor persists at alevel comparable fo the one before the lawsuit wasbrought. If was their opinion thaf, though of enormoussymbolic imporfance, the entire process had producedlittle in fhe way of posifive educafional impacf on fhestudents.

This is not intended as a condemnation of those whobrought the suit, nor do I offer here any opinion on whefh-er promotion of Black English is a good idea. Whaf is ofinferesf is fhe process by which fhe problem was defined,and ouf of which a remedy was soughf. In effect, theparents of these children were approached by lawyers andeducators acfive in civil rights, and urged fo help theirchildren learn to read by bringing this action. Literallythousands of hours went info conceiving and frying fhiscase. Yef, in fhe end only a hollow, symbolic victory waswon.

But it is quite possible fhaf fhis line of aftack on theproblem caused ofher more viable sfrategies not fo bepursued. For example, a campaign fo tutor the first andsecond graders might have made an impact, giving themspecial attention and extra hours of sfudy through thevoluntary participation of those in Ann Arbor possessingthe relevant skills. Wifh roughly 35,000 students af fheUniversify of Michigan's Ann Arbor campus (a fair num-ber of whom are black), it would have required that only afraction of one percenf of fhem spare an afternoon orevening once a week for there to be sufficient numbers toprovide the needed services. There were at most only afew hundred poor black students in the primary gradesexperiencing reading difficulties. And, more fhan provid-ing this needed aid for specific kids, such an undertakingwould have helped to cultivate a more healthy relation-ship between the university and the town. It could havecontributed to building a tradition of direcf services fhafwould be of more general value. But none of this hap-pened, in part because fhe civil rights approach was al-most reflexively embraced by the advocating parties

THE DANGER fo blacks of foo broad a rehance on civilrights sfrategies can be subtle. It has become quite

clear thaf affirmative acfion creates uncertain perceptionsabout the qualifications of those minorities who benefitfrom if. In an employment situation, for example, if if is

24 THE NEW

known that different selection criteria are used for differ-ent races, and that the quality of performance on the jobdepends on how one did on the criteria of selection, thenin the absence of other information, it is rational to expectlower performance from persons of the race that was pref-erentially favored in selection. Using race as a criterion of

incentives for customers, co-workers, and others to takerace into account after the employment decision has beenmade.

The broad use of race preference to treat all instancesof "underrepresentation" also introduces uncertaintyamong the beneficiaries themselves. (See "Rumors of Infe-riority" by Jeff Howard and Ray Hammond, September 9.)It undermines the ability of people confidently to assert, ifonly to themselves, that they are as good as their achieve-ments would seem to suggest. It therefore undermines theextent to which the personal success of any one black canbecome the basis of guiding the behavior of other blacks.Fewer individuals in a group subject to such preferencesreturn to their communities of origin to say, "1 made it onmy own, through hard work, self-application, and nativeability, and so can you!" Moreover, it puts even the "bestand brightest" of the favored group in the position ofbeing supplicants of benevolent whites.

And this is not the end of the story. In order to defendsuch programs in the political arena—especially at the eliteinstitutions—it becomes necessary to argue that almost noblacks could reach these heights without special favors.When there is internal disagreement among black intellec-tuals, for example, about the merits of affirmative action,critics of the policy are often attacked as being disingenu-ous, since (it is said) they clearly owe their own promi-nence to the very policy they criticize. The specific circum-stances of the individual do not matter in this, for it ispresumed that all blacks, whether directly or indirectly,are indebted to civil rights activity for their achievements.The consequence is a kind of "socialization" of the individ-ual's success. The individual's effort to claim achievementfor himself (and thus to secure the autonomy and legitima-cy needed to deviate from group consensus, should thatseem appropriate) is perceived as a kind of betrayal.There is nothing wrong, of course, with acknowledgingthe debt all blacks owe to those who fought and beat JimCrow. There is everything wrong with a group's mostaccomplished persons feeling that the celebration oftheir personal attainments represents betrayal of theirfellows.

IN HIS RECENT, highly esteemed comparative historyof slavery. Slavery and Social Death, sociologist Orlando

Patterson defines slavery as the "permanent, violent dom-ination of natally alienated and generally dishonored per-sons." Today's policy debates frequently focus on (or per-haps more accurately, appropriate) the American slaveexperience, especially the violent character of the institu-tion, its brutalization of the Africans, and its destructiveeffects on social life among the slaves. Less attention is

paid nowadays to the dishonored condition of the slave,and by extension, of the freedman. For Patterson thisdishonoring was crucial. He sees as a common feature ofslavery wherever it has occurred the parasitic phenome-non whereby masters derive honor and standing fromtheir power over the slaves, and the slaves suffer an ex-treme marginality by virtue of having no social existenceexcept that mediated by their masters. Patterson rejectsthe "property in people" definition of slavery, arguingthat relations of respect and standing among persons arealso crucial. But if this is so, it follows that emancipation—the ending of the master's property claim—is not of itselfsufficient to convert a slave (or his descendant) into agenuinely equal citizen. There remains the intractableproblem of overcoming the historically generated "lack ofhonor" of the freedman.

THIS PROBLEM, in my judgment, remains with us. Itseventual resolution is made less likely by blacks'

broad, permanent reliance on racial preferences as reme-dies for academic or occupational under-performance. Acentral theme in Afro-American political and intellectualhistory is the demand for respect—the struggle to gaininclusion within the civic community, to become coequalparticipants in the national enterprise. This is, of course, aproblem that all immigrant groups also faced, and thatmost have overcome. But here, unlike some other areas ofsocial life, it seems that the black population's slave ori-gins, subsequent racist exclusion, and continued depend-ence on special favors from the majority uniquely exacer-bates the problem.

Blacks continue to seek the respect of their fellowAmericans. And yet it becomes increasingly clear that, todo so, black Americans cannot substitute judicial and leg-islative decree for what is to be won through the outstand-ing achievements of individual black persons. That is,neither the pity, nor the guilt, nor the coerced acquies-cence in one's demands—all of which have been amplyavailable to blacks over the last two decades—is sufficient.For -what ultimately is being sought is the freely conveyedrespect of one's peers. Assigning prestigious positions soas to secure a proper racial balance—this as a permanent,broadly practiced policy—seems fundamentally inconsis-tent with the attainment of this goal. It is a truthworth noting that not everything of value can be redistrib-uted.

If in the psychological calculus by which people deter-mine their satisfaction such status considerations of hon-or, dignity, and respect are important, then this observa-tion places basic limits on the extent to which public policycan bring about genuine equality. This is especially so withrespect to the policy of racially preferential treatment, be-cause its use to "equalize" can actually destroy the goodthat is being sought on behalf of those initially unequal. Itwould seem that, where the high regard of others is beingsought, there is no substitute for what is to be wonthrough the unaided accomplishments of individualpersons. °