The Hindu : A private matter?

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Mar 31, 2004

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

A private matter?

By Hasan Suroor

Is there such a thing as a purely private or academic opinion, which you leave behind at home when you go to work?

IT IS all too common for people in public life to explain away politically unacceptable remarks saying that these are their personal views and have no bearing on the job they are doing. But does it wash? Indeed, is there such a thing as a purely private or academic opinion, which you leave behind at home when you go to work?

In Britain, a senior Government official whose job is to promote equal opportunities for all finds himself at the centre of a raging controversy after it emerged that, in a book he wrote before taking up his current assignment, he openly advocated racial and gender discrimination. In Against Equality of Opportunity, he declared that he did "not believe in equal opportunities" or "in equal anything" — and that under certain circumstances, it was right for White employers to "discriminate against Black applicants," and "rational" not to hire women under the age of 40 because they may take time off to have babies.

Matt Cavanagh, a former philosophy lecturer at the Oxford University, is a special adviser on race to the Home Secretary, David Blunkett, a position that gives him significant clout. He may not have direct influence on policy-making but from where he sits he can steer the direction of racial issues. Understandably, the presence of such a person in the heart of a Government committed to racial and gender equality has raised eyebrows and angry Asian and Black Labour Party members have called for Mr. Cavanagh's dismissal arguing that his views are in conflict with the "core" values of the party and official agenda of the Government.

What has angered them still more is that Mr. Blunkett, according to a spokesman, was aware of Mr. Cavanagh's ideas when he hired him last year, but regarded them as a philosophical analysis with no relevance to his job. Mr. Cavanagh insists that his book was meant for an "academic philosophical audience" and simply intended to stimulate debate, but he remains unrepentant about the thrust of his argument vividly reflected in the following passage: "A company realises that its customers, who are predominantly White, tend to prefer to do business with White staff ... it might be rational for the company to discriminate against Black applicants on the basis that, for this reason alone, they tend to be less good at the job."

He would only say: "I'm not sure if I still stand by it; it's a complicated area." Yet he also insists that it is "irrelevant to what I do now."

Even those not normally swayed by the politically surcharged mood in Westminster believe that Mr. Cavanagh is waffling. His attempt to suggest that philosophical views need not be taken seriously by those who live in the real world has got philosophy academics worked up. Taking exception to his argument that what he wrote for a philosophical audience is "irrelevant" to his job, a former professor of Philosophy protested in a letter to The Guardian: "That is the sort of remark that gives philosophy a bad name. If his philosophical theory doesn't stand up when applied to real cases, then it's bad philosophy."

Or — more dangerously — is it the case that Mr. Cavanagh takes his philosophy seriously enough to have found a job that would allow him to apply his philosophical ideas in real life? According to an Oxford academic, Mr. Cavanagh's book is one of political and social philosophy, "one of the areas in which philosophers might aspire to some influence outside their own discipline."

It is pointed out that there is no such a thing as a purely philosophical abstraction. According to Dr. Sophie Allen, an academic philosopher, even hypothetical situations, such as those portrayed by Mr. Cavanagh, reflect the writer's belief in those situations. "... it is difficult not to come to the conclusion that the author believes some of these `hypothetical' circumstances (the non-suitability of Browns/Blacks for some jobs) to be the case. If not, why write the book," she asks adding that if Mr. Cavanagh was only indulging in a hypothetical academic exercise why did he "never consider the multitude of factors (hypothetical, of course) which might count against the suitability of a White, middle-class man for an enormous range of jobs over those of different races and or gender?"

In other words, abstract situations are conjured up by clever academics to prop up their deep-seated prejudices which, when challenged, are sought to be passed off as idle musings unrelated to the "real" world.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

FIXING INFLATION

KARNATAKA ELECTORAL PROSPECTS

Secularism under siege

Theft at Shantiniketan

Non-NATO ally

Musharraf's remarks

Water crisis