I must begin by pointing out that this is really not what I wanted to be writing about. This is EconLog, for crying out loud; a virtual property of Econlib. They don’t just let anyone natter on here, and for that reason, I would rather my introduction to the readers here be a message of freedom and hope. It was a mere few days ago that NASA launched a rocket built by SpaceX into space, ferrying humans to the International Space Station from American soil for the first time since 2011, signaling the successful culmination of a public-private partnership (sort of) that may one day see mankind colonize the stars. But…I can’t engage you in a whimsical fantasy of our descendants enjoying Andorian ale in a bar on the joint colony at Titan.
Those of us tethered to the ground have been subject to pandemics, government overreach, massive loss of employment…and then there’s George Floyd. Those of us possessed of the masochism inherent in formal training in the social sciences have an obligation to review the world as it is, making data-driven observations, providing deep analysis of proximate causes, and generating recommendations aimed at making improvements and finding solutions. This last is the most difficult, because in matters involving race, I don’t necessarily know that here are any solutions outside of “we all need to be better.” Nor, in truth, am I an indifferent observer. As an African American myself, I have known too many George Floyds to remain indifferent.
It must be noted that the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis Police officers, and the resultant riots raging across the American landscape aren’t entirely about race. As Reason’s Christian Britschgi has so ably observed, a combination of coronavirus lockdowns, joblessness, and other related factors combined to form a perfect soup that boiled over the day Derek Chauvin and his cohorts essentially strangled Floyd to death. This, however, is an outcome, not a cause. While this matter isn’t entirely about race, it’s still about racial relations in America. As ostensible thinkers in the classical liberal tradition, those of us dedicated to the natural rights of all men often shrink from in-depth discussion of such matters, when we may be the only parties left with any shred of moral authority to lead the charge.
So, we’re going to have that discussion, no matter how uncomfortable it might be. We’re going to discuss public choice and path dependencies. The ruinous War on Drugs and its unholy offspring, the carceral state, are also on the docket. Institutional bias, uneven enforcement of laws that, by all right, shouldn’t even be laws…they’re on the table as well. The first step to solving a problem is admission that the problem exists, and we’re going to get to the root of it. We’re going to analyze through the filters of economics, sociology, political science, history…because we must. To channel Acemoglu, history happens when critical junctures mate with institutional drift, giving birth to persistent paradigms. We are, as the fires attest, at a critical juncture. To create new paradigms, we must facilitate changes within our institutions.
I will, of course, talk about other things. It is an honor for me to be here, and this isn’t the only issue that needs discussion. Nevertheless, this will be an ongoing conversation, and it is my hope that both author and readers benefit from it. The American apartheid system known as Jim Crow was relegated to the dustbins of history because men and women of good conscience did not bury their heads in the sand at a critical juncture in time, but the work is not yet done. It is up to us to find its completion, so that we can truly fulfill the obligations inherent in our credo “we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.”
Tarnell Brown is an Atlanta based economist and public policy analyst.
READER COMMENTS
Matt
Jun 4 2020 at 2:44pm
Thank you, and please keep pushing your colleagues to do the same.
Tarnell Brown
Jun 4 2020 at 3:15pm
I have no doubt that they will.
Greg L
Jun 4 2020 at 4:32pm
Well said, Tarnell. Uncomfortable as it may be for everyone, the conversation has to happen.
Maniel
Jun 4 2020 at 5:20pm
Welcome, Mr. Brown,
I am just a follower of this blog, but even I, a recovering Republican, can benefit from fresh ideas.
You say that, “We are, as the fires attest, at a critical juncture.” I believe that for any of us, each day can be a critical juncture. It is the human condition that we seem to self-divide along the lines of our perceived differences. Even the dreaded COVID-19 invader from outer space has failed to unite us.
The struggle never ends to find common ground through better listening, constantly re-examining our own long-held beliefs, and exercising civility and mutual respect.
I look forward to your posts to follow.
Maniel
cecil bohanon
Jun 5 2020 at 6:44am
Excellent article. Classical Liberals MUST engage on race or as you say the high ground will be left to the Socialists. More important a socialist agenda will never ameliorate the problem! Endless state control will never undermine the roots of racism.
RPLong
Jun 5 2020 at 8:00am
A worthy introduction. I look forward to reading your posts!
Tarnell Brown
Jun 5 2020 at 9:27am
Thank you, Roderick
JonSeed
Jun 5 2020 at 9:14am
I’m thrilled to read more of your well reasoned and data supported insights if this first post is any indication of what’s to come. Many of us are struggling to find the right course to take to institute real change and additional progress within our most struggling communities.
Me
Jun 5 2020 at 12:13pm
Welcome, conversations about the wider meaning of George Floyds death would be very useful. Unfortunately, I haven’t heard any exept here at Econlib. Specifically, I am interested on how cities can police the inter-city successfully, and thereby provide protection to some of our most vulnerable citizens, while minimizing collateral damage.
Marcus Jones
Jun 5 2020 at 12:36pm
Welcome to this wonderful intellectual community, Tarnell. Terrific and promising first post….can’t wait to follow your contributions regularly. Very thoughtful and well-put.
Bob Jones
Jun 5 2020 at 2:32pm
Mr. Brown,
Welcome! I look forward to your posts.
john hare
Jun 5 2020 at 5:47pm
I am a southern redneck with some black friends and coworkers. Used to have a lot more. Interested in some ways of getting back towards the good working relationships of a couple of decades back. I’ll be reading.
MarkW
Jun 6 2020 at 9:06am
While this matter isn’t entirely about race, it’s still about racial relations in America.
I respectfully disagree. You could fill the blog with stories of cops abusing and killing white people too (starting with Daniel Shaver). Strategically, if we make this primarily about specific police reforms, the probability of success seems much higher to me than if we make it primarily about systemic racism. I don’t doubt that there is a racial component to police misbehavior, but if cops can no longer get away with abusing people in general, they’re not going to be able to get away with abusing black people in particular.
We’re going to analyze through the filters of economics, sociology, political science, history…because we must.
Why must we? Why can’t we rewrite police contracts to eliminate all of the provisions that make bad cops so hard to get rid of? Why can’t we eliminate qualified immunity? Why not ban dangerous, nighttime raids? Get rid of asset forfeiture? Decriminalize drugs? There are so many urgent, useful things that could be done without re-litigating the whole history of race relations. If the latter approach is what we end up with, I fear that the exercise will ultimately bog down yet again in acrimony while exacerbating racial problems and failing to institute effective reforms.
Thomas Hutcheson
Jun 6 2020 at 10:26am
I think this overlooks the origins of laws and policing strategies that you rightly object to. The “Wars” on Drugs, Crime, Terror, were not simply random mistakes in calculating the NPV of specific policies.
Tarnell Brown
Jun 6 2020 at 12:04pm
If the issue was as simple as reforming the police apparatus, we would not be here at this point in our history. As Mr. Hutcheson has pointed out, certain public policy initiatives at the root of much police misconduct were specifically aimed at certain population subgroups.
As such, it is my position that we cannot relitigate that which has never been properly litigated in the first place. There is a certain amount of tension among subgroups with competing interests in a pluralist, heterogeneous society. Not all of it is bad, but lack of understanding between subgroups leads to outcomes such as what we are witnessing in recent days.
Police misconduct is simply a symptom of a much larger problem, so, yes; we must.
MarkW
Jun 6 2020 at 3:51pm
If the issue was as simple as reforming the police apparatus, we would not be here at this point in our history.
There’s nothing (politically) simple about reforming police policies. Have we actually <i>tried</i> any of the specific reforms I listed? And when implemented, did those reforms fail to produce results?
Police misconduct is simply a symptom of a much larger problem, so, yes; we must.
If the plan is 1) Solve the much larger societal problem and only then 2) Turn to addressing the specific problematic policing policies, I think the whole effort is doomed to failure (again — this is not even close to the first round of this by any means).
Ron W.
Jun 6 2020 at 5:20pm
Unfortunately most white people don’t care about police abuse in general, or bad laws in general. They do care about unfair and unequal treatment of African Americans, if only because of the mayhem that can result from incidents like the Floyd murder. But if we fix the system for blacks, whites will benefit as well.
Mark Z
Jun 7 2020 at 12:52am
This could be true, but it certainly contradicts conventional wisdom regarding politicians and racial issues. That is, prima facie, the opposite strategy would seem more plausible: if white people mainly care about other white people, and politicians care more about white people than other people, then convince white people to support a reform for their own sake which will in turn benefit everyone. If ‘racializing’ the issue actually increases white voters’ sympathy, that runs against not only self-interested but also group-interested models of political behavior. It’s plausible, but I’m skeptical.
MarkW
Jun 7 2020 at 8:33am
Unfortunately most white people don’t care about police abuse in general, or bad laws in general.
Do you think that’s true of the left-leaning white people in Hennepin County who voted for Clinton over Trump by more than 2:1? Or in Minneapolis proper where vote totals were almost certainly more lopsided than that? Why can’t cities like Minneapolis or Chicago (where Clinton received seven times as many votes as Trump) reform their own police forces, regardless of what white people who don’t live there think? For that matter, why can’t Detroit (where both the population and police force are predominantly black) implement police reforms–there just aren’t enough white voters in Detroit to make any difference. Detroit went for Clinton over Trump by a margin of — I am not making this up — of 95 to 3. Or look at Atlanta — another majority black city that went for Clinton over Trump by a 2:1 ratio. Why isn’t police reform a slam dunk there too?
Even supposing that, on average, white people had the attitudes you describe, what’s to prevent America’s liberal-voting big cities from adopting reforms locally for their own police forces?
William L. Anderson
Jun 7 2020 at 5:40pm
Tarnell, I look forward to reading your future posts. You seem to be blessed with that gift of insight and that is going to be useful to those of us reading your material.
If I may, I’d like to put out one idea or at least one observation. When we see something like the George Floyd killing, there invariably are calls for more training, especially in the area of racial sensitivity. We’ve all been through diversity training in our professions and are familiar with the language and the concepts the language represents.
However (and this is the academic economist in me speaking), it seems to me that if there were real systems of accountability built into policing — getting rid of qualified immunity, abolishing police unions, and making police pay settlements for killings and brutality out of their own retirement funds — that such changes would bring about less brutality and certainly fewer killings like w have seen recently.
In fact, I would wager that we would see better behavior from police if there were real accountability and even if officers carried racial biases than there would be if we had officers that had taken every diversity training course there was but the present system of non-accountability were to continue to exist.
I realize this is just conjecture and I look forward to reading your own viewpoints in your upcoming posts.
zeke5123
Jun 8 2020 at 9:52am
Welcome aboard! One thing — I hope — is that it is a real conversation. So often, I hear cries for a conversation on race, but what it seems to actually be is a call for a lecture: Side A speaks, Side B uncritically accepts Side A’s claim as true, just, and right.
That way lies madness.
Victor Carter
Jun 14 2020 at 8:28pm
I applaud you Mr. Tarnell Brown for your insight and keen sight of the overall big picture of why and how we are still having to deal with the social injustice, racial profiling, and racial bias that our forefathers fought and protested against decades ago. It is a combination of unlined issues and antiquated beliefs that must be contemplated and dealt with personally first before it can be resolved or discussed corporately and publicly. There must be a willingness to deny our self-centeredness and self-righteousness enough to see and try to comprehend another’s social background, cultural differences and unique experiences and perceptions. Until we are compassionate enough to walk in someone else’s shoes and see and feel from their point of view, then we will continue to have misunderstandings and misconceptions that lead us to more conflicts and racial tension. Saying and doing something is better than doing nothing.
I look forward to future blogs from you Tarnell that incite a progressive dialogue hopefully leading to a progressive change.
A. Vasudevan
Jun 15 2020 at 6:42am
Your piece contains a good suggestion that the issue of racial relations in the US needs to be discussed in open among not merely economists but also others in social sciences area.
I lived in the US in the 1980s for five years and in Africa in this century for about 5 years and have often visited the US in particular New Orleans. I have an idea of the challenges that the subject of race poses. But racism or racial relations have crossed the US borders and have gone to many other countries. And they add on to the complex set of social dissensions arising from languages, tribes, communities, caste and so on. I hope you would take this point into account while writing about racial relations in the US. I look forward to seeing your pieces.
Comments are closed.