> A good while ago, me and Eric Beck had a disagreement about "Keynesianism."
> I said that his anti-Keynesian position, if acted on, would have negative
> real-world consequences. Although I didn't mention it, in practice those
> consequences would be much worse for blacks than for whites. By the logic of
> state-of-the-art anti-racism, that would mean Eric's position (in my
> understanding of how the world works) was racist,
Of course there are many ways to approach the question, but it's not a certainty that it would be worse for blacks. For instance: In 1979, 40% of all black children lived below the poverty level; in 2001 the number was 30%. So the era of High Neoliberalism saw a rather large decrease in African American child poverty levels, ones much, much lower than the 65% in 1965, the apex of Keynesianism/Fordism, or even 1969, when it was also 40%.