The Treasury Department has created a brand new committee called the Treasury Advisory Committee on Racial Equity. The committee will consist of 25 members from different colleges and universities, advocacy groups, and the business world.
Felicia Wong, the president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute, was announced to serve as the nascent racial equity committee’s vice chair. Ms. Wong is the author of several reports that would make her an excellent candidate to serve as outreach director to Communist dictatorships.
“True equity means equity of outcome, and not accepting the promise of ‘opportunity’ within a system that continues to systematically exclude,” Wong wrote. “It demands redistribution of resources—especially when wealth for some has been extracted from many — and a redistribution of decision-making power.”
Wong co-authored a report titled “A New Paradigm for Justice and Democracy,” which argued that “all policy, from vaccine distribution to higher education funding to tax reform, will have racialized effects. Recognizing this reality, and always considering race in policy design, is therefore vital.”
Wong and the authors wrote that a “skills-based, opportunity-focused liberalism” is outdated and ignores systemic racism, and that “our mainstream politics has yet to recognize, prioritize, and make central the reckoning, race equity, and self-determination that a multiracial democracy would require.”
Best, then, to radicalize mainstream politics to bring it into sync with the party line.
The report praised the idea of wealth redistribution in the name of racial justice and argued that “equity” means equal outcomes, not equal opportunities.
“True equity means equity of outcome, and not accepting the promise of ‘opportunity’ within a system that continues to systematically exclude,” Wong wrote. “It demands redistribution of resources—especially when wealth for some has been extracted from many—and a redistribution of decision-making power.”
The notion that “true” equity means “equity of outcome” is false. You might be able to achieve “equity of outcome” in North Korea but at what cost to freedom and human liberty?
Wong is, in essence, giving up on the credo of the United States — that equality of opportunity is the justest path to achieving racial equality/justice. “Demands redistribution,” wealth “extracted,” redistribution of decision-making power” — nobody voted for this. The radical left has seized power and is imposing an ideology on the U.S that is hostile to capitalism.
How radical a vision is Wong’s notions of “equity”?
“These all have racial justice implications, since the current system prioritizes a lobbying and corporate interest–driven system that is dominated by those who are wealthy and white, and whose interest is in preserving the status quo,” it continued.
Just as an aside, “lobbying,” or “the redress of grievances,” is a guaranteed right in the Constitution’s First Amendment. It frightens me to think what other rights are impediments to the vision of “equity” in her mind.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member