Socially-Tolerable Discrimination

Amegashie, J. Atsu (2008): Socially-Tolerable Discrimination.

Abstract

History is replete with overt discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age, citizenship, ethnicity, marital status, academic performance, health status, volume of market transactions, religion, sexual orientation, etc. However, these forms of discrimination are not equally tolerable. For example, discrimination based on immutable or prohibitively unalterable characteristics such as race, gender, or ethnicity is much less acceptable. Why? I develop a simple model of conflict which is driven by either racial (gender or ethnic) discrimination or generational discrimination (i.e., young versus old). When the conflicts are mutually exclusive, I find that racial discrimination is socially intolerable for a much wider range of parameter values relative to generational discrimination. When they are not mutually exclusive, I find that racial discrimination can be socially intolerable while generational discrimination is socially tolerable. The converse is not true. My results are not driven by a stronger intrinsic aversion to discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics. I am able to explain why some forms of discrimination (e.g., racism) are much less tolerable than other forms of discrimination (e.g., age discrimination) without making any value judgements about either form of discrimination.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: conflict, contest, discrimination, gender, race, generation
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D74 - Conflict ; Conflict Resolution ; Alliances ; Revolutions; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D72 - Political Processes: Rent-Seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior; K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior > K41 - Litigation Process

References

Acemoglu, D., and Robinson, J.A. (2000). Why did the West Extend the Franchise? Democracy, Inequality, and Growth in a Historical Perspective. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 1167-1199.

Amegashie, J.A. (2006). A Contest Success Function with a Tractable Noise Parameter. Public Choice 126: 135-144.

Ayres, I., and Brown, J.G. (2005). Straightforward: How to Mobilize Heterosexual Support for Gay Rights. Princeton University Press.

Balkin, J.M. (1997). The Constitution of Status. Yale Law Journal 106: 2313-2374.

Basu, K. (2005). Racial Conflict and the Malignancy of Identity. Journal of Economic Inequality 3: 221-241.

Baye, M.R., and Hoppe, H.H. (2003). The Strategic Equivalence of Rent-Seeking, Innovation and Patent Games. Games and Economic Behavior 44: 217-226.

Benabou, R, and Ok, E. (2001). Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The POUM Hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 447-487.

Esteban, J., and Ray, D. (2008). On the Salience of Ethnic Conflict. American Economic Review, forthcoming.

Fullerton, D., and McAfee, P. (1999). Auctioning Entry into Tournaments. Journal of Political Economy 107: 573-605.

Harvard Law Review (1969). Developments in the Law: Equal Protection. Harvard Law Review 82: 1065-1192.

Robinson, J.A. (2001). Social Identity, Inequality, and Conflict. Economics of Governance 2: 85-99.

Siegel, R. (1997). Why Equal Protection No Longer Protects: The Evolving Forms of Status-Enforcing State Action. Stanford Law Review 49:1111-1148.

Skaperdas, S. (1996). Contest Success Functions. Economic Theory 7: 283-290.

Swift, J. (2006). Justifying Age Discrimination. Industrial Law Journal 35: 228-244.