Sharing the Prize: The Economics of the Civil Rights Revolution in the American South
Sharing the Prize: The Economics of the Civil Rights Revolution in the American South
复制标题
分享奖项：美国南部民权革命的经济学
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gavin J. Wright
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gavin J. Wright
民权运动也是一场争取经济正义的斗争，直到现在还没有自己的历史。分享奖展示了显着的物质收益黑人南方人取得了改善就业机会，教育质量，医疗保健，从20世纪60年代到70年代及以后。加文·赖特认为，因为黑人的进步并不是以牺牲南方白人为代价的，所以民权斗争是最罕见的社会革命：一场对双方都有利的革命。从一开始，黑人活动家就在充分的法律的权利之外寻求经济正义。南部的公共汽车抵制和午餐柜台静坐是著名的公民不服从行为，但他们也要求在被剥夺黑人的服务工作。在1964年民权法案和1965年投票权法案通过后的强制废除种族隔离期间，南方黑人工人的工资急剧增加。赖特对这一事实的艰苦记录破坏了政府干预是不必要的，歧视是非理性的，一旦市场被允许运作，隔离就会逐渐消失的信念。赖特还解释了为什么南方白色人长期捍卫一个未能为他们自己的最大利益服务的制度。分享奖项清楚地表明，20世纪60年代民权法案的物质利益与道德利益一样重要，这是一项特别及时的成就，因为这些具有里程碑意义的立法以及更广泛的政府干预的有效性面临新的挑战。
The civil rights movement was also a struggle for economic justice, one that until now has not had its own history. Sharing the Prize demonstrates the significant material gains black southerners made—in improved job opportunities, quality of education, and health care—from the 1960s to the 1970s and beyond. Because black advances did not come at the expense of southern whites, Gavin Wright argues, the civil rights struggle was that rarest of social revolutions: one that benefits both sides. From the beginning, black activists sought economic justice in addition to full legal rights. The southern bus boycotts and lunch counter sit-ins were famous acts of civil disobedience, but they were also demands for jobs in the very services being denied blacks. In the period of enforced desegregation following the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the wages of southern black workers increased dramatically. Wright’s painstaking documentation of this fact undermines beliefs that government intervention was unnecessary, that discrimination was irrational, and that segregation would gradually disappear once the market was allowed to work. Wright also explains why white southerners defended for so long a system that failed to serve their own best interests. Sharing the Prize makes clear that the material benefits of the civil rights acts of the 1960s are as significant as the moral ones—an especially timely achievement as these monumental pieces of legislation, and the efficacy of governmental intervention more broadly, face new challenges.