Welfare: A white Secret

(1) Come on, my fellow white folks, we have something to confess. No, nothing to do with age spots or those indoor-tanning? creams we use to get us through the winter without looking like the final stages of TB. Nor am I talking about the fact that we all go home and practice scaring dance moves behind drawn shades. Out with it, friends, the biggest secret known to whites since the invention of powdered rouge?: welfare is a white program. Yep. At least it’s no more black than Vanilla Ice is a fair rendition of classic urban rap.

(2) The numbers go like this: 61% of the population receiving welfare, listed as “means-tested cash assis-tance” by the Census Bureau, is identified as white, while only 33% is identified as black. These numbers not-withstanding, the Republican version of “political correctness” has given us “welfare cheat” as a new term for African American since the early days of Ronald Reagan. Yet if the Lakers were 61% white and on a winning streek?, would we be calling them a “black team”?

(3) Wait a minute, I can hear my neighbors say, we’re not as slow at math as the Asian Americans like to think. There’s still a glaring disproportion there. African Americans are only 12% of the population as a whole, at least according to the census count, yet they’re 33% of the welfare population — surely evidence of a shocking ad-diction to the dole?.

(4) But we’re forgetting something. Welfare is a program for poor people, very poor people. African Ameri-cans are three times as likely as whites to fall below the poverty level and hence to have a chance of qualifying for welfare benefits. If we look at the kind of persons most likely to be eligible — single mothers living in poverty with children under 18 to support — we find little difference in welfare participation by race: 74.6% of African Americans in such dire straits are on welfare, compared with 64.5% of the poor white single moms.

(5) That’s still a difference, but not enough to imply some congenital? appetite for a free lunch on the part of the African-derived. In fact, two explanations readily suggest themselves: First, just as blacks are ______ likely to be poor, they are disproportionately likely to find themselves among the poorest of the poor, where welfare eligibility arises. Second, the black poor are more likely than their white counterparts to live in cities, and hence to have a chance of making their way to the welfare office.

(6) So why are they so poor? I can see my neighbor asking as visions of slack idlers dance before his nar-rowed eyes. Ah, that is a question white folks would do well to ponder. Consider, for a start, that African Americans are more likely to be disabled (illness being a famous consequence of poverty) or unemployed (in the sense of actively seeking work) and far less likely to earn wages that would lift them out of the wel-fare-eligibility range.

(7) As for the high proportion of black families headed by single women (44%, compared with 13% for whites): many deep sociohistoric reasons could be referred to, but none of them is welfare. A number of re-spected studies refute the Reagan-era myth that a few hundred a month in welfare payments is a sufficient in-centive to desert one’s husband or get pregnant while in high school. If it were, states with relatively high wel-fare payments — say, about $500 a month per family — would have higher rates of out-of-wedlock births than states like Louisiana and Mississippi, which expect a welfare family to get by on $200 a month or less. But this is not the case.

(8) So our confession stands: white folks have been swallowing up the welfare budget while blaming someone else. But it’s worse than that. If we look at Social Security, which is another form of welfare, although it is often mistaken for an individual insurance program, then whites are the ones who are crowding the trough. We re-ceive almost twice as much per capita, for an overall advantage to our race of $10 billion a year — much more than the $ 3.9 billion advantage African American gain from their disproportionate share of welfare. One sad reason: whites live an average of six years longer than African Americans, meaning that young black workers help subsidize a huge and growing “over-class” of white retirees. I do not see our confession bringing much re-lief. There’s a reason for resentment, though it has more to do with class than with race. White people are poor too, and in numbers far exceeding any of our more generously pigmented? social groups. And poverty as de-fined by the government is a vast underestimation of the economic terror that persists at incomes — such as $20,000 or even $40,000 and above — that we like to think of as middle class.

(9) The problem is not that welfare is too generous to blacks but that social welfare in general is too stingy? to all concerned. Naturally, whites in the swelling “near poor” category resent the notion of whole races sup-posedly indulging over their expense. Whites, near poor and middle class, need help too — as do the many African Americans, Hispanics and “others” who do not qualify for aid but need it nonetheless.

(10) So we white folks have a choice. We can keep pretending that welfare is black program and a scheme for transferring our earnings to the pockets of shiftless, dark-skinned people. Or we can clear our throats, blush prettily and admit that we are hurting too — for cash assistance when we’re down and out, for health insurance, for college aid and all the rest.

(11) Racial scapegoating? has its charms, I will admit: the surge of righteous anger, even the fun — for those inclined — of wearing sheets and burning crosses. But there are better, nobler sources of white pride, it seems to me. Remember, whatever they say about our music or our taste in clothes, only we can truly, deeply blush.

【參考譯文】福利制度：白人的秘密

(1)來吧，我的白種同胞們，我們得好好坦白一下。不談老人斑的事，也不談我們擦了古銅膚色乳液來度過漫長的冬天，只為了不讓自己看起來蒼白得像是患有晚期肺癆的樣子。我也不是在說那件大家都在做的事：回到家，拉起窗簾，偷練新潮舞步。勇敢地說出來吧，朋友們，這是發(fā)明腮紅粉餅以來白人之間比較大的秘密：福利制度是為白人設(shè)的。沒錯(cuò)，如果要說福利制度是黑人的，那等于說凡尼拉? 艾絲（香草冰）是正統(tǒng)都市拉普音樂的代名詞一樣：同樣是違反事實(shí)。

(2)實(shí)際數(shù)字顯示，接受福利援助的人口，在人口普查局記錄中列為“經(jīng)查驗(yàn)謀生能力，予以現(xiàn)金援助”的這一類，其中有61% 是白人，而黑人只占33%。雖然統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字俱在，可是自從里根年代初期開始，共和黨式的“政治立場正確”用語中“詐騙福利金的騙子”，就仿佛成了非裔美國人的同義詞。但是，假如洛杉磯湖人隊(duì)中有61% 是白人，并且一路奏捷，到那時(shí)我們還會(huì)叫它“黑人球隊(duì)”嗎？

(3) 等等！——我可以聽到我的鄰居說著——我們的數(shù)學(xué)能力還不至于像亞裔美國人所想的那么差。這些比例數(shù)據(jù)當(dāng)中還有很大的誤差。非裔美國人只占全美人口12%，至少人口普查結(jié)果是這樣。可是他們卻占了領(lǐng)取福利金人口的33%——這絕對(duì)是黑人極度倚賴救濟(jì)金的鐵證。

(4) 可是我們忘了一點(diǎn)。福利制度是為收入微薄，尤其是特別窮困的人辦的。非裔美國人當(dāng)中收入不及比較低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，因而可以符合領(lǐng)救濟(jì)金資格的比例，是白人的三倍。假如我們挑出一種比較可能符合救濟(jì)資格的人——單身媽媽貧戶，家中有未滿18歲的子女要撫養(yǎng)的——那么接受福利救助的人就沒有什么種族差異了：非裔美國人的單親媽媽貧戶有74.6% 在領(lǐng)救濟(jì)金，白人貧戶的單身媽媽則有64.5% 靠救濟(jì)。

(5) 這兩項(xiàng)數(shù)字之間顯然仍有差距，可是差別不大，不足以用來解釋非洲血統(tǒng)的人先天就特別喜歡白吃的午餐。有兩個(gè)原因可以解釋這個(gè)差別。第一，黑人不僅貧窮的比例偏高，而且其中大多數(shù)是赤貧階級(jí)。這點(diǎn)就足夠讓他們符合領(lǐng)救濟(jì)金的基本條件。條二，和白人窮人比起來，有比較多的黑人貧困戶住在都市，因而較有機(jī)會(huì)到社會(huì)福利處領(lǐng)救濟(jì)金。

(6) 他們窮要怪誰呢？——我可以看到我的鄰居質(zhì)問著，他的雙眼瞇起，眼前舞動(dòng)著好吃懶做的黑人影像。唉！這個(gè)問題，白人倒真應(yīng)該好好的思考一番。譬如，可以先想想這一點(diǎn)：非裔美國人殘障的比例就偏高（大家都知道貧窮容易帶來疾�。�，也很容易失業(yè)（不是不積極去找工作），而且又不容易有夠高的收入使自己脫離對(duì)救濟(jì)金的依賴。

(7)至于黑人家庭之中單身媽媽的比例為什么特別高（比例高達(dá)44%，白人之中的單身媽媽則只占13%），其原因可以從許多社會(huì)、歷史的層面來探究，可是都和社會(huì)福利無關(guān)。里根時(shí)代制造出一種神話——區(qū)區(qū)一個(gè)月數(shù)百元的救濟(jì)金給付就足以誘使黑人婦女棄夫出走或是在高中時(shí)代就懷了孕。這種說法已遭到好幾項(xiàng)有分量的研究所駁斥。如果神話屬實(shí)，那么，相較于像路易斯安那和密西西比這些月付在200元以下的州，救濟(jì)金給付額度高的州——比如說一個(gè)家庭月付500元——非婚生子的比例應(yīng)該比較高�？墒菍�(shí)際情形并非如此。

(8) 所以，我們理當(dāng)坦承：白人一直在吞吃福利預(yù)算，卻怪在別人頭上�？墒鞘聦�(shí)尚不只于此。光看社會(huì)安全制度就可以了解全局。社會(huì)安全也是一種福利，雖然它常被誤認(rèn)為是一種個(gè)人的保險(xiǎn)計(jì)劃。在社會(huì)安全制度中獨(dú)享其利的是白人。非裔美國人固然以過高比例在領(lǐng)取社會(huì)福利金�？偨痤~達(dá)到39億美元，可是在社會(huì)安全給付方面，我們白人平均每人領(lǐng)取的金額幾乎是黑人的兩倍，總金額更是高達(dá)一年100億美元，幾乎是39億美元的三倍之多。這其中有一項(xiàng)頗為悲哀的原因：白人領(lǐng)得多，是因?yàn)樗麄兊钠骄鶋勖�比黑人多六歲。這表示年輕的黑人工人要幫助補(bǔ)貼一個(gè)龐大而且日漸增加的“上層階級(jí)”——白種退休人員。盡管如此，我們的這番自白看不出能帶來多大的幫助。社會(huì)福利引起的憎恨其來有自，可是其中涉及階級(jí)的因素超過種族的因素。白人也很窮，而且總數(shù)還超過其它皮膚色素比較發(fā)達(dá)的社會(huì)團(tuán)體。此外，政府所界定的貧窮標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，完全無法反映經(jīng)濟(jì)恐慌——它存在于我們慣稱的中產(chǎn)階級(jí)，像是年收入2萬美元甚至4萬美元以上這個(gè)階級(jí)。

(9) 問題的關(guān)鍵不在于社會(huì)福利對(duì)黑人太優(yōu)渥，而在于整個(gè)的福利制度對(duì)一切需要幫助的人太吝嗇，當(dāng)然，日漸增多的“接近貧窮”階級(jí)的白人一想到有整個(gè)種族好像在享受他們的付出，便會(huì)忿忿不平。其實(shí)，接近貧窮者和中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的白人他們本身也需援助，此外還更有許多非裔美國人、西裔美國人與“其他”人種，他們雖然不符合援助標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，可是仍然需要幫助。

(10)于是，我們白人面臨一項(xiàng)抉擇。我們可以繼續(xù)自欺欺人，假裝福利制度是黑人制度，是將我們所得轉(zhuǎn)移到懶惰無能的黑皮膚人種的口袋的計(jì)劃。或者，我們可以清清喉嚨，很矜持地臉紅一下，承認(rèn)我們也在受苦，在不如意時(shí)需要救濟(jì)金，需要醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)，需要大專教育援助等各式各樣的幫助。

(11) 我承認(rèn)，以別的種族來做代罪羔羊，有它迷人的地方：可以陶醉于突發(fā)的義憤中，甚至對(duì)于有此癖好的人來說，可以從中獲取頭頂白床單，焚燒十字架的樂趣�？墒俏矣X得白種人能從更好、更高貴的事物當(dāng)中發(fā)現(xiàn)他們的驕傲。記住，不論他們?cè)趺凑f我們的音樂或我們穿衣服的品味，只有白種人能真正的、深度的臉紅。