I’ve often thought that affirmative action recruiting is just good business sense, and the Democratic Party is showing why it’s a good idea. I don’t know how I managed to miss this, as it’s almost a month old, now, but the DNC has created a registry of minority owned and operated political consulting firms.
Man, this is brilliant.
And I don’t say this because of the whole blah blah blah more voices blah blah blah diversity blah blah blah Wax Ecstatic Distribution Curve of Lefty Sunshine Love blah blah blah anything with the word “minority” is autogood blah blah blah thing, although I suppose that there’s a lot of that to consider, too. (Sorry, Ali, I just cannot stand the self-righteousness of most such things. ;->)
This is smart for reasons beyond any of that. Here’s why I think so.
1. People who are up and coming, and trying to get established, work harder. The DNC is pretty much putting together a list of people who are willing to go the extra mile and a half in order to get a good reputation. Good on them.
2. This will bring huge market forces to bear upon the world of political consulting. Currently, there are way too few firms who do the bulk of business with Democrats. It’s the same old warhorses drawn out over and over again, and frankly, it hasn’t done much good. Bob Shrum, anyone? BLECH. Bringing all kinds of new competitors into the mix can only shake things up and make the competition better.
Thoughts?
Dheeraj
Share This
8 Comments
That’s kinda like what we’re doing here.
That’s what I hope we’re doing here, Ali. I’m so sick to death of this idea of the poor minority, trembling outside the halls of power like Oliver Twist, waiting and begging to be let in. I’ve never known a single minority community like that. When we’re shut out, we build our own networks.
The trick is to connect the two and allow them to influence and transform each other.
-dx
It’s actually a bit of a stretch to call this affirmative action. From a commercial perspective, as you say, it’s simple good sense. When tendering for work, you want the pool of potential suppliers to be as diverse as possible. Smaller firms (which may as you say be more dynamic by definition) will generally find it difficult to get themselves noticed, a register such as this makes them easier to find.
It doesn’t become affirmative action until that list is used exclusively or preferentially to pick candidates. That ain’t necessarily what’s going on here.
On a more cynical note, it’s useful for WASPish Dems to be able to more easily find people who might be able to help them communicate with minorities.
Dheeraj,
Don’t we qualify?
Maybe you should register us and see what happens.
I love the idea in a really practical way. It makes good business sense and good public relations sense.
Ya Haqq!
Ali,
We don’t qualify because we are merely administering and running a blog, and not providing services that do that.
Dheeraj
Idiot_boy,
You seem to believe that anything that’s beneficial to the empowered party in addition to the disempowered party cannot be affirmative action. I think that this is a false model of what affaxn is and should be - I maintain that it’s net beneficial to all concerned.
In other words, it’s not just about the past. It’s about the present and the future.
It’s not just good for the disempowered. It’s good for the empowered.
Thoughts?
Dheeraj
Dheeraj,
That’s an entirely fair interpretation of what I wrote though not necessarily what I think :). You are right that the implication of what I wrote is that AA is a one way benefit (to the ‘recipient’). I do not think that is the case and will address the point at the end of this comment. What I do believe however, is that AA is tokenism and ultimately unhelpful in improving the economic and social position of minorities and women.
AA as I see it formulated in the US can only really address the hopes and aspirations of a comparatively small number of individuals. What it totally fails to address are the underlying problems which led to its in the first place.
It is the case that the ‘recipients’ of AA are being helped to overcome the exceptional hurdles that society has placed in their way. Crime, poor schools, poverty, racism and myriad other issues prevent talented individuals and companies from achieving. What AA does not achieve though is any long term effect on the economic and societal pathologies that built and strengthen those hurdles.
In other words, AA is a means for government and sometimes organisations, to demonstrate ‘action’ without actually having to address the difficult problems that face a society. It can help individuals and their families but in order to demonstrate a wider effect, one has to appeal to some kind of ‘liberally’ bowlderised version of trickle-down economics. My impression of AA at base then is one of tokenism.
Which brings me to why I don’t feel the DNC list should be considered AA. The way I read the development of this list is that it simply provides visibility to those who didn’t previously have it. That is precisely the kind of help that minority entrepreneurs need. A minority entrepreneur is likely to lack the ‘old-boy networks’ which provide easy visibility for some of their competitors - a list such as this helps redress the balance.
In other words, it doesn’t seem all that ‘affirmative’. Rather it looks like removal of a barrier to entry.
In summary, AA is a useful tool at the individual, corporate and governmental level. As social policy though, it sucks.
One Trackback
[…] in my last post, I wrote the following: And I don’t say this because of the whole blah blah blah more voices blah […]