Systemic Racism

The existence of systemic racism, especially in the US, is undeniable. To illustrate this, we can take a hypothetical case of a small business owner having to choose between hiring a straight white man in his early 30s and a black lesbian woman in her late 50s. They are equally well qualified for the job, so the choice between the two should be a toss up. However, to suggest that a small business owner who cares deeply about his business will go with the black woman is wishful thinking. The business owner will go for the white guy, and the reason is simple. The white guy is way cheaper to hire than the black woman, even if the black woman offers to do the work for less than the white guy.

It doesn't matter if the business owner is black himself, the rational choice is to go with the white guy because the system favors him above the black woman. No matter which race the small business owner is, the white guy is the cheaper option, and the reason for this can be found in various laws that favor white straight men.

What is frequently forgotten when it comes to the cost of hiring people, is the risk of litigation. Risk is a cost that must be factored in for all decisions, including decisions on hiring people. Since the cost of a mistake in this regard can be tremendous, it must weigh heavily on the employer's assessment.

So, let's say that the small business owner has a diverse work force of five employees, then the only risk as far as litigation related to race issues are concerned is the possibility that the white guy turns out to be a complete bigot. The new hire picks a fight with colleagues of minority background. However, if that happens, then the business owner can nip the problem in the bud and kick him out. Problem solved. But if the business owner picks the black woman, and she turns out to be a rabid loony. What can he do? If he fires her, he might get a lawsuit handed to him based on race, gender, sexual orientation and/or age, and even if he doesn't fire her, she might still try to shake him down or control him in other ways.

There's no guarantee that new hires are as good as they appear in interviews. Business owners must therefore pick those that come with the least cost to get rid of, and that's white straight men, because they have little legal protection. Heavily protected minorities are potential disasters, even if the business owner is as pure as can be, because minorities are not only protected against the conduct of their employers. They are protected against the conduct of their colleagues as well. If a minority employee gets into a fight with a colleague, a business owner can be sued for not having done enough to prevent it. Minority employees can shake down business owners in all sorts of ways that straight white men can't.

Laws that supposedly protect minorities, are in fact making things worse. They introduce a cost related to the protected minority that does not exist for others.

Thanks to Peter Schiff for pointing this out.

By Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link