QUICK SUMMARY
Alba holds that there are three ways white ethnics were assimilated into the mainstream: a) the vast expansion of educational opportunity brought on by the GI Bill, (b) suburbanization that promoted intra-white integration and (c) a cultural shift where the excluded white classes have the opportunity to assimilate in massive number- this being brought about by WW2.
With these 3 conditions the dominant northern European whites granted assimilation to lesser whites, satisfied that said others would not threaten their power. Per one review : "Alba notes that the key to upward movement of these white ethnics toward the top and the disappearance of the three-tier social hierarchy lay in the fact that these groups were legally white. This legal reality allowed them to take advantage of federal government policies in higher education, labor, and housing, enabling them to move up and be accepted by the mainstream."
So far so good, but Alba goes on to claim that the retirement of baby boomers opens up the same opportunities for blacks and browns to be assimilated, and that this can be done by a new commitment of public resources to this end. In other words the retirement of the baby boomers facilitates a vast new spigot of govt spending to help the darker brethren, just as it did the white ethnics before them. Supporting this is the diversification of the workforce with more ethnicities that is occurring as the baby boomers retire. There are a number of weaknesses to Alba's argument:
1) The retirement of baby boomers does not necessarily mean vast new opportunities opening up- for a new set of post baby-boom whites are taking their places with plenty of incentives to rig and game the system to their own profit and prestige. Decent jobs can be firewalled by using a subtle web of "race neutral" barriers that make the costs of entry high and/or discourage competition. High barriers to entry mean LESS blacks and browns in decent paying jobs. The barriers can be inflated educational "qualifications" and credentials, union restrictions on hiring, government or union restrictions on how flexible work assignments and pay scales, or zoning or rent controls to reduce the supply of available housing and drive up housing costs, etc. In short, white post-baby boomers can lock out blacks and browns with such barriers, all the while smiling and claiming to be "post racial" progressives.
One sees this in the French labor market with its close shop unionism and government regulations that make it very hard to fire workers or pay wages below a certain standard. Mandatory minimum wages and hiring restrictions for example mean that competition from hungry persons of Arab, African or other descent can be suppressed, consigning them to less stable, lower wage work while whites control the bulk of the better paying slots, property and ultimately power.
In short the reduction in baby boomers, though it will free up more jobs as the economy replaces the boomers, does not necessarily mean the alleged huge vistas of new opportunity Alba claims.
2) Baby boomers may retire, but there may be plenty of white post-boomers take their place due to the substantial entrance of white women into the workforce. Given that most working age white women now work rather than be homemakers, it is by no means clear that there will be all these new "opportunity slots" opening up.
3) It is also by no means clear that a vast expansion of new government spending will actually help blacks and browns to the extent Alba claims it will. In fact, as history shows- where government dollars are for the taking, the first in line to siphon off the bulk of said dollars are whites. Numerous white ethnics for example have done pretty well off government jobs, especially the white Irish in urban areas but even white southerners (witness the large number of military bases and their economic importance in the south). On into the 1970s whites manipulated such jobs in a self-serving, discriminatory way to enhance their own privilege.
Furthermore as the history of the Great Society shows- building political support for new federal spending means that whites expect to rake off most of the money. The infusion of federal dollars into education in the 1960s to help blacks for example sent many more of such dollars to better off white schools than black ones. Furthermore many segregated black schools were torn down and the jobs of numerous experienced black teachers, coaches and administrators eliminated, to be replaced by whites, even as black students were relocated to other facilities where the funding was also tightly controlled by whites. Likewise much new "magnet school" funding benefited mostly white children as the schools catered to them (to maintain white body counts) while black students were excluded or kept on long waiting lists so more white bodies could fill the seats of the spanking new facilities (Patterson 2008, Dorn 2007)
"Mo money" from the feds as advocated by Alba might simply repeat this long established pattern.
4) Alba himself cautions that many whites may not want to live near blacks which puts the "suburbanization" part of his assimilation framework in jeopardy.
5) The great expansion of WW2 helped a great deal- opening up a massive number of new jobs, so many that white were forced to hire blacks to fill the need, and even then there was substantial opposition to blacks getting any but the lowest. WW2 also promoted more shared values and togetherness- made more poignant by the crusade to defeat the Nazi architects of the Holocaust. But WW2 was an exceptional phenomenon, highly unlikely to occur again with such favorable circumstances for the United States in this Meltdown/Bailout/Recession era. The election of Barrack Obama, while a positive step for race relations, can be easily repeated with some other black candidate in future years and comes up very short against the massive, unique, transformational event that was WW2.
SUMMARY
Alba misses the internal front:
In short, Alba’s prescriptions appear shaky, both as to baby boomer opportunities or massive new federal spending. Furthermore he says relatively little about a key factor- the INTERNAL mobilization and effort needed within CERTAIN SECTIONS (not all as claimed by some right wingers) of the black community towards self-improvement as a basis for assimilation. This means more family stability, less out-of-wedlock births, more diligence and hard work in school, more emphasis on skills and willingness to work.
Contrary to some right wing (and left wing) claims, black folk already know how to “do” such things. Black out of wedlock births prior to the mid1960s for example were a fraction compared to the almost 70% level of today. Every census between 1890 and 1940 show that blacks posted higher marriage rates than whites, and black teenage unemployment prior to the 1960s is a fraction of what it is today. All back schools like the old Dunbar High prior to the 1960s posted equal or higher IQ scores in some years than surrounding white schools with better attendance and disciplinary records. Heavily black schools in NYC in the 1940s posted performances surpassing, or close to comparable white schools- sometimes lower, sometimes higher but never miles behind as in SOME heavily black urban schools of today. Even before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when blacks faced ugly segregation and discrimination, most blacks had ALREADY pulled themselves above the poverty line. See the detailed analyses of Thomas Sowell (1972, 1991, 1984, 2004 etc).
The key today is how such positives can be again repeated in a REAL way, not with the soothing lip service that floats around so cheaply. Everyone from the black civil rights establishment to assorted black politicians mutter the standard platitudes, (“yes of course we know discipline is important” they say- then go on to spend most of their time and energy looking for a government solution. How much has the NAACP spent on hard-nosed tutoring efforts to raise black educational performance at ground level for example compared to lobbying for various left wing causes or politicians for example? Which is better- 50,000 to elect one politician, or 50,000 to help 1000 black kids improve school performance and self-discipline via a hard-nosed afterschool program? Yah, we already know the answer as to where the civil rights establishment will put its MONEY. Plenty of platitudes in the suites, precious little cash on the street.
Until these CERTAIN segments of the black community show they are serious with actual results on the ground, they will continue to be viewed as “problems” and not taken seriously as far as assimilation. This is one glaring key Alba misses.
Alba misses ambivalence: Assimilation based on what?
Which brings up a second point about “assimilation.” Alba fails to note that there is a distinct strand of black opinion that is ambivalent about producing northern European clones. If that is desired option fine- it should be open to any, but not all blacks are thrilled about so-called “assimilation” and are unimpressed by both the character and behavior of alleged northern European “role models.”
Some have concluded that it is not necessary for black folk to hang out in the suburbs with white people, contract a vast number of intermarriages with them (but don’t hassle those that freely exercise that option however), dress like white people, speak like white people, or even have white people “like” them to be considered “assimilated.” The key bottom lines for such are family stability, neighborhood safety, increased law-abidingness basic (not substandard) educational performance and relentless acquisition of skills and work hours in a variety of jobs as a launch pad for future growth in income or investments. Having white people “like” “accept” live near or “assimilate” you is fundamentally irrelevant to these core bottom lines.
Pursuit of such core lines will promote numerous profitable points of contact, mutual benefit, cross-fertilization in culture, the arts, the economy and religion, and yes, intimacy, even as other points remain distinctive. This “bottom line focus” however, does not make “assimilation with white people” the lodestar of future existence. Unlike the Italian or the Jew, black folk having this perspective know they do not have the option of “becoming white” and fundamentally, no longer care about “whiteness” as some sort of goal. They simply want certain basics, certain cores, substantially worked out and substantially achieved.
Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
Discover the latest buzz-worthy books, from mysteries and romance to humor and nonfiction. Explore more
Popular titles by this author
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
