A somewhat tortured article from the Washington Post about how the new mayor of DC, who is himself black, hired a lot of "non-black people" - the Post's words - for key government jobs. I don't know what bothers me more, the creation of this new term "non-black people," or the long-standing notion that if you don't hire all (or mostly) non-non-black people for key jobs in DC you're somehow selling out. I get that DC is 57% black, but does that mean that the mayor's senior staff has to be 57% black? If he goes over 57% does he have to fire some people to get racial quotas back in harmony? And in cities where blacks are only 5% or 10% of the population does that mean they're only permitted 5% or 10% of the really good jobs? Not to mention, should Burmese and Malians and Andorrans kiss their chances of ever getting a good city job goodbye, until they buck up their demographics?
Long-standing notions haven't solved this city's horrendous crime problem, poverty, and education woes. Perhaps our new mayor, and his crazy ideas about hiring competent people, can.
