Caring for the marginalised, downtrodden and vulnerable segments of society is a noble and necessary pursuit. It forms the mainstay of any left-leaning party’s political plank, many civil society organisations exclusively or partially fight poverty and other social ills, and the private sector does its bit through its corporate social responsibility programmes.
Every country – even the rich ones but some much more than others – on earth faces challenges with poverty, unemployment, hunger and drug addiction. Although not widely adopted around the world, the green agenda and Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) initiatives are aimed at making the world more egalitarian, sustainable and fairer to the poor. Affirmative action (AA) is officially seen as a measure to eradicate discrimination against members of the designated (or previously disadvantaged) groups.
But as Thomas Sowell noted: Any policy must be measured by its result and not its intent. And some of the well-intended policies cause greater harm than good, for the intentions become the yardstick for measurement, and not the outcomes. People who question these measures as ineffective or even immoral are often attacked for their lack of compassion and ignorance about suffering and history. And their advocates’ zero-sum thinking leaves no room for alternative proposals and debate. And so ineffective and dubious, but seemingly noble, policies are maintained in spite of the damage they may cause. But above all, they fall prey to short-termism and political expediency without remedying the underlying challenges that give rise to them.
Take, for instance, the newly-proposed regulations in terms of the Employment Equity Amendment Act. It seeks to impose racial quotas on the respective economic sectors and more stringently on the private sector. Nobody wants to prevent skilled black people from being appointed and promoted, but as has been shown in polls by the Institute of Race Relations (IRR), a large majority of South Africans oppose quotas that come at the expense of merit. It is consistently a very low priority for everybody and pale in comparison to issues such as crime, service delivery and unemployment.
Not only is it unfair to minority groups, but it will also do little to solve black poverty and unemployment. The economy grew at a paltry 0.4% in the first quarter of 2023 and shrunk in the last one of 2022. Hence, there are simply not enough jobs being created to lower the 33% (narrow definition) unemployment rate.
And the specialisation of labour means there are not enough suitably qualified people from the designated groups to fill positions that require specific skill sets. South Africa has an overabundance of unskilled labour that needs to be absorbed and only a faster growing economy with vastly greater freedom for entrepreneurs will deliver this.
Government has been overstaffed with people in managerial roles who know precious little about what they’re supposed to do. The poor and vulnerable invariably suffer due to these mismatches and irregular cadre deployments.
In the end, the vast majority of poor people are given “tea and sympathy” in policy documents and speeches – along with paltry handouts. Their schools are in disarray while rigid labour laws keep them from finding (any) unemployment. Another adverse effect is the entirely predictable exodus of skilled people out of the country or certain locales. This shrinks the national and local tax bases even further, and service delivery along with it.
Moving abroad, North American cities are being decimated by a permissive attitude to law enforcement, policymaking and homelessness. In cities ranging from San Francisco to Chicago, Seattle and Vancouver, drug-addicted and mentally-ill people are living in squalid conditions on the street.
As a matter of necessity, they resort to crime to feed their habits and render large parts of these cities unsafe and unpleasant. The mandarins in these leftist bastions do not wish to appear heartless or simply don’t know what to about it. So, they simply ignore it or even relax laws relating to shoplifting even further while cutting police budgets. Some authorities even make drug-use “safe and convenient” by providing drug paraphernalia to residents – free of charge.
This runs counter to the so-called “broken windows” theory that worked so well in turning New York City around after the mayhem of the 1970s and 80s. In essence, it entails fixing small problems first as a precursor to tackling the big issues. Not punishing petty crime (which never stays petty), or addressing drug addiction and homelessness, isn’t even utilitarianism because it benefits a very small elite who are largely insulated from these banes’ impact. Society at large – those who live on the streets and those that have to face the decay on their way to work – suffers a great deal by having their personal safety imperiled. Again, good people are voting with their feet and money by leaving Chicago and Los Angeles.
It's a pity that so many people do not seem to grasp the full impact of these measures, or refuse to listen to anything that disturbs their irrational preconceived notions. If the results of policies that seem noble in intent but breed entitlement, chaos and socialism in practice, the high road has been abandoned.
Dr Eugene Brink is an entrepreneur and independent commentator.
