The report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities has now been published.
Good to see that it does at least recognise persistent, large and systemic discrimination in the labour market (whether or not you call it "institutional"..)
By contrast, this is just sloppy/lazy. I'm *not* an expert here & am not advocating a particular view but you can't make a claim and then cite research *that says the opposite*!
[Report text left: ONS analysis cited by report on right]
On *very* first glance, much of the evidence in the report is familiar - if you leave aside the silly spin in today's press and the occasional unevidenced generalisation, this is mostly old news. The recommendations themselves are both broadly welcome/sensible and very bland..
This is just bizarre. Apparently racial disparities in outcomes are either
a) definitely *not* the result of racism
b) of unknown origin
There are no other possibilities.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One interesting point: I have *never* in 35 years of both producing & consuming government reports seen one where the evidence & analysis has been so comprehensively discredited so quickly and completely across a *very* wide range of topics/domains.
I & others have pointed to errors/misrepresentations in the report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Diversities. To be fair, there is plenty of good or uncontentious stuff.
But leaving aside the specific empirical analysis, a short thread on the conceptual framework. (1/7)
The key point (as many have noted) is their very clear statement that if you can explain disparities with respect to factors other than race, then race is not a factor. (2/7)
In other words, if your empirical analysis shows that controlling for occupation, black people are no more likely to die of covid-19 then you’ve “explained” the disparity in covid death rates and race isn’t a factor.
What the Commission on Race & Ethnic Disparity said about why ethnic minority people are more likely to die from covid-19 (left).
What the ONS report they cite to support this claim actually says (right).
[This is basically the academic version of the Van Halen brown M&M story/legend (look it up!). As I tell my students, nobody really cares about citations/references. They're just there to show you've actually done the work.]
As many have pointed out, of course even if it is the case that disparities in outcomes (health or otherwise) are (in an econometric sense) "driven" by other factors (SES, poverty, etc) that in itself doesn't tell you ethnicity doesn't matter!
I'd go a bit further than @sundersays and say that it suggests the Commission/government aren't very confident that the report/evidence would stand up to scrutiny by experts.
It *is* antisemitic to hold Jews as Jews collectively or individually response for Israel's conduct, to assume they are loyal to Israel or to promote Jewish conspiracy theories.
It is *not* antisemitic to describe Israel as an apartheid state or support boycotts/sanctions
[makes very clear why Professor David Miller's comments and views are unacceptable, as set out by me and others here: …erningbristoluniversity.wordpress.com But also why likening Israel's treatment of Palestinians to apartheid South Africa is an entirely legitimate political stance]