Debate: Implicit Race Bias and the 2008 Presidential Election: Much Ado About Nothing?
posted by University of Pennsylvania Law Review
Implicit Race Bias and the 2008 Presidential Election: Much Ado About Nothing?
Dr. Gregory Park and Professor Jeffrey Rachlinksi debate Professor Richard Epstein on the implications of President Obama’s election on race-based policies such as affirmative action and antidiscrimination laws. Dismissing claims that a “post-racial America” has arrived, Parks and Rachlinski argue that the presidential campaign simply demonstrated that modern racism “operates not as an absolute barrier, but as a kind of tax on members of racial minorities.” Because a typical minority job applicant does not have access to the “enormous resources” available to Obama, affirmative action and antidiscrimination laws are still necessary. Epstein, on the other hand, argues that while Parks’ and Rachlinski’s analysis of the campaign is flawed, the debate itself is a “sideshow.” Instead, “any private individual or firm can hire a person for good reason, bad reason, or no reason at all” and the market, not public force, should end unsavory hiring practices.
As always, please visit PENNumbra to read previous Responses and Debates, or to check out pdfs of the Penn Law Review’s print edition articles.
March 10, 2009 at 10:15 am
Posted in: Law Rev (Penn), Law Rev Forum
Print This Post
Responses (1)
A.W. - March 10, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Yeah, we elected the most unqualified presidential candidate in over 100 years… who has been, as I feared, an unadulterated flop, but race only worked against him.
Let’s face it. If Barrack Obama, had just been Barry O’Connor, a white guy, he would be lucky to be a senator, let alone president. of course obama benefitted from a democratic party sick of the Clintons, and an electorate sick of republicans, but you can’t shake the feeling that if he was white, we would have President McCain, today, or President Hillary Clinton.
Leave a Reply