整合、不平等与正义的必要性:一篇评论文章

IF 2.1 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Tommie Shelby
{"title":"整合、不平等与正义的必要性:一篇评论文章","authors":"Tommie Shelby","doi":"10.1111/PAPA.12034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Black Americans continue to be a disadvantaged group in the United States. Compared to whites or Asians, they are, on average, significantly worse off with respect to wealth, income, educational achievement, employment, life expectancy, and other indicators of well-being. Some—for instance, those who reside in racially segregated and severely disadvantaged metropolitan neighborhoods (sometimes called “ghettos”)—are particularly bad off. These deep, pervasive, and longstanding inequalities also have negative repercussions for black political empowerment and civic inclusion. Despite such continuing and salient disadvantages, blacks’ charges of injustice are frequently dismissed as lacking merit. Racism and discrimination are widely viewed as no longer affecting black life chances, and blacks’ disadvantages are regularly attributed to the failings of blacks themselves. This trend toward postracial ideology notwithstanding, some people remain steadfast in their conviction that existing racial inequalities represent social injustices that urgently demand remedy. Among these are many who believe that aggressive enforcement of antidiscrimination laws, an expansion of economic and educational opportunities, a more equitable distribution of income and wealth, and","PeriodicalId":47999,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Public Affairs","volume":"42 1","pages":"253-285"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/PAPA.12034","citationCount":"50","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integration, Inequality, and Imperatives of Justice: A Review Essay\",\"authors\":\"Tommie Shelby\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/PAPA.12034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Black Americans continue to be a disadvantaged group in the United States. Compared to whites or Asians, they are, on average, significantly worse off with respect to wealth, income, educational achievement, employment, life expectancy, and other indicators of well-being. Some—for instance, those who reside in racially segregated and severely disadvantaged metropolitan neighborhoods (sometimes called “ghettos”)—are particularly bad off. These deep, pervasive, and longstanding inequalities also have negative repercussions for black political empowerment and civic inclusion. Despite such continuing and salient disadvantages, blacks’ charges of injustice are frequently dismissed as lacking merit. Racism and discrimination are widely viewed as no longer affecting black life chances, and blacks’ disadvantages are regularly attributed to the failings of blacks themselves. This trend toward postracial ideology notwithstanding, some people remain steadfast in their conviction that existing racial inequalities represent social injustices that urgently demand remedy. Among these are many who believe that aggressive enforcement of antidiscrimination laws, an expansion of economic and educational opportunities, a more equitable distribution of income and wealth, and\",\"PeriodicalId\":47999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy & Public Affairs\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"253-285\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/PAPA.12034\",\"citationCount\":\"50\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy & Public Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/PAPA.12034\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Public Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/PAPA.12034","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 50

摘要

美国黑人仍然是美国的弱势群体。与白人或亚洲人相比,他们在财富、收入、教育成就、就业、预期寿命和其他幸福指标方面的平均状况要差得多。有些人——例如,那些居住在种族隔离和严重弱势的大都市社区(有时被称为“贫民窟”)的人——情况尤其糟糕。这些深刻、普遍和长期存在的不平等也对黑人政治赋权和公民包容产生了负面影响。尽管存在这些持续而突出的不利条件,黑人对不公正的指控却常常被视为缺乏依据而不予理睬。种族主义和歧视被普遍认为不再影响黑人的生活机会,黑人的劣势通常被归咎于黑人自身的失败。尽管有这种后种族意识形态的趋势,一些人仍然坚定地认为,现有的种族不平等代表着迫切需要纠正的社会不公正。其中许多人认为,积极执行反歧视法,扩大经济和教育机会,更公平地分配收入和财富,以及
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Integration, Inequality, and Imperatives of Justice: A Review Essay
Black Americans continue to be a disadvantaged group in the United States. Compared to whites or Asians, they are, on average, significantly worse off with respect to wealth, income, educational achievement, employment, life expectancy, and other indicators of well-being. Some—for instance, those who reside in racially segregated and severely disadvantaged metropolitan neighborhoods (sometimes called “ghettos”)—are particularly bad off. These deep, pervasive, and longstanding inequalities also have negative repercussions for black political empowerment and civic inclusion. Despite such continuing and salient disadvantages, blacks’ charges of injustice are frequently dismissed as lacking merit. Racism and discrimination are widely viewed as no longer affecting black life chances, and blacks’ disadvantages are regularly attributed to the failings of blacks themselves. This trend toward postracial ideology notwithstanding, some people remain steadfast in their conviction that existing racial inequalities represent social injustices that urgently demand remedy. Among these are many who believe that aggressive enforcement of antidiscrimination laws, an expansion of economic and educational opportunities, a more equitable distribution of income and wealth, and
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
23
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信