Here’s the thing about equality intersectionality.
A serious effort to reduce socio-economic inequality (that did nothing on race or gender) would inevitably have disproportionate benefits to BAME communities and women.
Because they are more likely to be poor. (1/?)
Because the middle classes - including BAME people and women in them - are good at protecting their privilege.
As I said: reduce inequality and women and BAME people will disproportionately benefit.
BUT
So if you want to complete the job on socio-economic opportunity you’ll need to tackle racism and misogyny on the way.
More from Economy
What a year: 203 essays about degrowth in English since the beginning of March. Here is a selection of some of my favourites. Thank you @fem_degrowth, @beth_stratford, @thedownshifters, @corbinkbarthold, @degrowth_info for these brilliant texts.
THREAD/
https://t.co/1lFaJM52RX
https://t.co/i5HOfZ19r7
https://t.co/DuPSrrqnzz
https://t.co/0ANveWdvFO
THREAD/
https://t.co/1lFaJM52RX
https://t.co/i5HOfZ19r7
https://t.co/DuPSrrqnzz
https://t.co/0ANveWdvFO
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".