On April 14, 2020 Gonzalo Schwarz, President and CEO of the Archbridge Institute, conducted the following interview with Dr. James J. Heckman. Dr. Heckman is the Henry Schultz Distinguished Service Professor in Economics and the Director of the Center for the Economics of Human Development at the University of Chicago.
S: Without going into detail, what do you think are the main barriers to income or social mobility? (Could be micro level such as agency and family structure or on a bigger scale in terms of labor markets, entrepreneurship, etc.)
H: The main barriers to developing effective policies for income and social mobility is fear of honest engagement in the changes in the American family and the consequences it has wrought. It is politically incorrect to express the truth and go to the source of problems. Public discourse, such as it is, cannot speak honestly about matters of culture, race, and gender. Powerful censorship is at play across the entire society.
S: In your research you discuss the key importance of family structure for social mobility. Why do you feel so strongly about this issue?
H: The family is the source of life and growth. Families build values, encourage (or discourage) their children in school and out. Families — far more than schools — create or inhibit life opportunities. A huge body of evidence shows the powerful role of families in shaping the lives of their children. Dysfunctional families produce dysfunctional children. Schools can only partially compensate for the damage done to the children by dysfunctional families.
ME: Despite the "censorship at play" American academics are still far more open and prone to research families objectively. NZ just doesn't go there. For instance NZ has little interest in the relationship status between couples with dependent children and how that impacts (but I am working on how to correct that.)
1 comment:
Hi Lindsay
For decades, our academic elite has had the natural family in its sights, deconstructing it at every turn. Is there a politician that would dare to enunciate a definition of family that has any resemblance to its historical foundations?
The neo Marxist view of family is that it is a vehicle of oppression, a perfect expression of the patriarchy and a tool for the subjugation of women. And yet it persists, not perfect, subject to human frailty, but still the foundation of our social and cultural order.
The family is the primary means by which culture, faith, and virtue is communicated from one generation to the next. The architects of our brave new future have moved on from a frontal attack on the family, and are now concentrating their efforts on owning those institutions that shape the minds of our children through the next and subsequent generations.
Schools, Universities and the Media all have become ideological tools in the hands of these ideologues.
Yes there are some in America who still speak in defence of the natural family, partly I believe because they are grounded in a faith based liberty ways that we are not. However, the same corrosive forces are at work there.
Sadly, the above institutions have become inhospitable for those who are not of the ideological left, and so those who are otherwise inclined are not attracted to them for employment. The same is true of the State sector. Unfortunately, this has had self-reinforcing effect, with all these institutions now having a defacto neo Marxist ideology.
Appreciate your efforts in this space.
Post a Comment