I watched a campus debate between a male and a female student. The female student is a typical "白左" (bái zuǒ) "white left" or "white liberal." It implies someone on the political left who is perceived as excessively idealistic, hypocritical, or naive about social justice issues.
The man asked, "Why do Black Americans, who make up 13% of the total population, represent 55% of the prison population?"
The woman highlighted the intersection of race and economic status, arguing that discrimination keeps many minorities in lower economic positions, contributing to their higher incarceration rates.
The man followed up, asking, 'Why do economically disadvantaged Asian minorities have low crime rates?'
The woman responded by noting that many Asian immigrants come from relatively stable economic backgrounds. However, a woman from the crowd stood up and rejected this view, sharing her experience as a 'boat person' refugee from Vietnam.
When the woman struggled to answer, the man introduced additional statistics: 75% of Black youth grow up in fatherless households, which he stated is the most significant predictor of future incarceration. He argued that the prevalence of single-parent Black families is influenced by three factors: government subsidies for single-parent households, cultural dynamics, and community acceptance of this structure. He referenced Thomas Sowell's book and the Nanny State to support his argument.
The woman countered by suggesting that the government could help change this culture by increasing subsidies for healthcare and education, making it easier for fathers to remain with their families.
The man disagreed, pointing to historical data: government subsidies for Black families began in 1965 when single-parent households were around 25%. Today, he claimed, that figure has risen to 75–80%. He argued that increasing financial support has coincided with a rise in single-parent families, suggesting a counterproductive effect.
His final statement was, "Don't dance around the core of the issue."
...............
The debate highlighted the multifaceted nature of social problems in America, including social, race, cultural, and economic factors. It also underscored two contrasting explanations for these issues. Different people hold varying views on both the causes and solutions.
Ultimately, the conversation about race, class, culture, crime and social justice requires honesty and a willingness to confront raw facts and the root causes of these problems, rather than simplifying them into one-sided narratives or beating around the bush, bai zuo style.