Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for March, 2011

Originally posted at In Mala Fide.

As many of my readers can attest, sometimes it’s a real drag being an endlessly talented, stunningly attractive, impeccably dressed, impossibly brilliant über-alpha living in a world of worker bees.

Tell me about it.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the heck out of it most days. It’s just that it makes debating an exercise in frustration. When you’re ten thousand times cleverer than your opponents, there simply isn’t much sport in proving them wrong. So, to level the playing field a little and add a modicum of challenge, I’ve decided that today I will rebut them in song form.

It’s a reactionary musical extravaganza!

Act I

No Bells Curve Here (April 1996): “a new study by researchers at Columbia and Northwestern Universities suggests that poverty and early learning opportunities — not race — account for the gap in IQ scores between blacks and whites. … Adjustments for socioeconomic conditions almost completely eliminate differences in IQ scores between black and white children, according to the study’s co-investigators.”

The IQ Gap
If you want to measure factors
Like environmental actors,
Then ignoring DNA’s the greatest sin.
In controlling for the gene,
Just as on the dating scene,
It’s better when she brings along her twin.

Act II

Letter about Hispanic Students in Glendale Spurs Controversy (March 2011): “I asked the students why they refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance and they responded by saying, ‘we are Mexicans and Americans stole our land.’ … Most of them stated they were in the country illegally, White Americans are racist, and that they came here for a better life.”

Immigrants
If our white majority nation
Has so much discrimination,
Let me float a plan to help the NAMs* survive:
Line them up, in any order,
Send them south across the border —
Hispanics can’t be racist, so they’ll thrive!

*Non-Asian Minorities: blacks and Hispanics.

Act III

UCLA Student’s YouTube Video ‘Asians in the Library’ Prompts Death Threats; Violent Responses Criticized As Equally Damaging (March 2011): “A UCLA student has received multiple death threats in response to her video ‘Asians in the Library,’ which was posted Friday. … Speaking Sunday night, a university spokesman called the video ‘repugnant.'” The (highly entertaining) video may be found here.

Asians in the Library
The Asian horde informs me: UCLA is full of hate.
They cry for social justice — well, they cry, at any rate.
A white girl hurt their feelings — “assimilate”? How cruel!
Thank God the campus thought police could force her out of school.

Intermission

Random heckler: “Level the playing field with Bulworth’s advice: everyone has to fuck everyone else until we’re all the same color. I’ll take a Halle Berry or a Jessica Alba… [racist ranting].”

Ad-lib
Despite your moral clucking
About race quotas for fucking,
You think that hating white folk is all right.
And it’s just a little scary
That you plan on “taking” Berry:
You’d double white-on-black rape overnight!

Act IV

Why Do Parents Let Their Daughters Dress Like Sluts? (March 2011): “We are the first moms in history to have grown up with widely available birth control, the first who didn’t have to worry about getting knocked up. [And now] scads of us don’t know how to teach our own sons and daughters not to give away their bodies so readily. We’re embarrassed, and we don’t want to be, God forbid, hypocrites.”

The Sexual Revolution
A man prefers his woman to be chaste,
So a tramp who spreads so readily is just the biggest waste.
Now, she might suffice tonight, because he knows she loves to screw,
But she’s a temporary hole until he finds somebody new.

Act V

Beat Whitey Night (August 2010): “Over the weekend, mobs of Black youths roamed the Iowa State Fairgrounds and randomly assaulted White attendees in what was openly called ‘Beat Whitey Night.’ … Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad (D-Des Moines) said he ‘doesn’t have enough information’ to determine whether or not the attacks were racially motivated.” More here, and a similar story here.

Hate Crimes
There’s gangs of thugs who base
All their violence on your race.
A clearer case of hatred, you can’t name.
When these racist whites attack —
Wait, you’re telling me they’re black?
I take it back, those kids can’t be to blame!

Appendix: The IQ Gap Revisited

Lest the audience go home dissatisfied with the depth of my musical analysis, I will mention my previous rebuttals — in the more conventional prose form — of IQ gap denialism’s greatest hits: Income and IQ and Your ideas are stupid and so are you (part 2).

(Do musicals even have appendices?)

Read Full Post »

Today, Unamusement Park’s special two-month anniversary commemorative series on stupid ideas and the stupid people who have them continues from where we left off: insulting those people and demolishing their cherished beliefs.

We are lucky to have the field reports on which this series is based, as my crack squad of Research Assistants is prone to drinking, dancing, gambling, whoring, petting small furry animals, and falling into rock quarries. They are, however, astonishingly good at listening, with glazed eyes and blank expressions, to hour after hour of droning racial polemic with neither food nor water to sustain them, as my experiments have shown. This makes them ideal candidates for today’s mission: infiltrate that notable bastion of left-wing “anti-racist” stupidity, Colorlines!

3. All the news that’s fit to spew, if you do not have a clue (and other stories by Dr. Seuss)

Colorlines (“News for Action”) describes itself as “a daily news site offering award-winning reporting, analysis, and solutions to today’s racial justice issues.” However, a more accurate description would be: a daily left-wing propaganda machine offering hopelessly biased reporting, totally uncritical analysis, and solutions to whatever mythical problems today’s minorities are whining about, especially if it’s something white people are doing (like staying in school, getting good grades, not doing drugs, keeping out of jail, succeeding in life without government handouts, and so on).

Its proudly multiracial staff includes

So what constitutes a racial justice issue? Why, whatever Colorlines is bitching about, of course! Perhaps the finest example of a stupid idea from these stupid people is Drop the I-Word, their campaign to ban the use of the word “illegal” to describe illegal aliens (i.e., people who are in this country illegally). In honor of their campaign against good sense, today I am going to use the word “illegal” as much as possible.

People are not “illegals” [even the illegal ones]. Pledge to drop the i-word [illegal] and ask [you mean “racially blackmail”?] media to do the same.

“I am not an illegal,” declares a parade of photogenic illegals and their pals (plus one downright sinister Sikh). “You wouldn’t call someone a [wetback], or [a nigger].” Clearly, sir, you underestimate me! “Saying ‘illegals’ is just as bad.” Well, first, that just makes it more fun to say! And second, why?

Why can’t we call illegals “illegals”?

Let’s find out. “The I-Word creates an environment of hate” — this is a statement without any meaning — “by exploiting racial fear and economic anxiety” — fear and anxiety based on the realities of illegal immigration — “creating an easy scapegoat for complex issues” — complex issues on which you must agree with their simplistic analysis, or else it’s just hate speech — “and OK-ing violence against those labeled with the word.” Again, they’re talking about the word “illegal” doing all this.

The aforementioned photogenic illegals and their pals (plus that one Sikh guy who can’t help looking like he’d rather be out beheading journalists than posing for their photographers) have their own reasons for rejecting the term:

  • We [illegal aliens] Have Too Much Love To Accept the I-Word:

    They love themselves too much to accept being called criminals,

    despite the fact that they are criminals by definition.

  • I Am… Undocumented (and therefore illegal):

    My name is Him Ranjit and I am undocumented.

    Well, hopefully now that you’ve admitted you have no visa, you will be documented, then deported.

    Colorlines asks: “Do some families have the right to be together more than others?” To that, I can only say:

    Get the fuck out of my country, Ranjit.

  • I am… [an illegal] Witness to History:

    When Christopher Columbus came to what we call America, Native Americans were already here. … People want to continue a legacy of hate and call immigrants ‘illegals.’ By this logic, Native Americans could call the first settlers ‘illegals.’

    Your logic notwithstanding, in order to be an illegal immigrant, you must be breaking the law, which means you must be in a country with laws, rather than creating one out of a wilderness sparsely populated by extremely violent* hunter-gatherers, as the settlers did.

  • I Am… [an illegal] Mother [of illegal alien babies]:

    The children [i.e., illegal immigrant anchor babies?] of this country are our future and when they hear the i-word [I forget, is it “illegal”?], they are receiving the message that they don’t belong —

    No, clearly they are not receiving the message, because they are still here. Allow me to clarify:

    YOU DON’T BELONG.

*Read about violence in hunter-gatherer societies here, here, and here.

Issues (Think About It)

What’s most offensively stupid about Drop the I-Word is not its assault on free speech, nor its surprise early-morning raid against “using words to accurately describe objective reality” (which isn’t a Constitutional right, but maybe it ought to be). What’s most offensively stupid is that these people really believe this is an important issue. Please allow me to illustrate.

I don’t really need your permission, so I’m going to illustrate anyway.

Here is one example of an actual immigration issue: an unusually high percentage of illegal aliens are violent sex offenders. I guess they had so much love for themselves, it just sort of spilled out onto a bunch of American women and children.

Okay, that might have gone too far.

Anyway, from The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration (emphasis in original):

Researcher Deborah Schurman-Kauflin Ph.D. of the Violent Crimes Institute, reports on the analysis of 1,500 violent crimes from January 1999 through April 2006 that included serial rapes, serial murders, sexual homicides and child molestation committed by illegal aliens. The data is found in her report, The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants in the United States, which notes that, based on a figure of 12 million illegal immigrants and the fact that more of this population is male than average, sex offenders among illegal aliens are a higher percentage than sex offenders in the general population.

… In 82% of [child molestation] cases the victims were known to their attackers. “In those instances, the illegal immigrants typically gained access to the victims after having worked as a day laborer at or near the victims’ homes,” she says. “Victims ranged in age from 1 year old to 13 years old, with the average age being 6.”

Schurman-Kauflin states that the illegal alien population includes 240,000 sex offenders – a “conservative estimate,” she says. She goes on to say, “This translates to 93 sex offenders and 12 serial sexual offenders coming across U.S. borders illegally per day.” She points out the 1,500 offenders in her study had a total of 5,999 victims, an average of four victims for each sex offender and says, “This places the estimate for victimization numbers around 960,000 for the 88 months examined in this study.”

… The Schurman-Kauflin study noted that “Nearly 63% of the offenders had been deported on another offense prior to the sex crime.”

By comparison, here is the most important thing Colorlines had to say about illegal aliens on Friday, March 25, 2011: Georgia 3rd Graders Asked What U.S. Does to ‘Illegal Aliens.’ As usual, emphasis mine, stupidity theirs.

Here’s a frightening report from Atlanta’s local NBC affiliate WXIA. Kelly Avalos, interviewed in the video that’s above, was alarmed that her brother and his entire 3rd grade class at Chesney was sent home with a homework assignment about “illegal aliens” [note the scare quotes, as if they weren’t really here illegally] that includes the following awful question:

What does the U.S. do with illegal aliens?

A. The U.S. puts them to work in the army.

B. The U.S. shoots them into outer space.

C. The U.S. puts them to death.

D. The U.S. sends them back where they came from.

It seems to me that the question was intended to explain that the United States does not horribly mistreat the people (illegals) who invade it (illegally), and instead treats them like human beings, despite the rising racial paranoia of organizations like Colorlines, and unlike some other places I could mention.

They disagree. At length.

Hate speech ain’t what it used to be

It’s outrageous that this website for educators provides such insidious anti-immigrant messages… As harmful as it is for children to indirectly imbibe hate speech… it is much more atrocious and harmful when that hate speech is being provided to them under the guise of education… racial slurs and hate-filled messagesi-word hate speech… the racist worksheet… take down the racist material… catch similar horrors in your local news…

Alright, look. I didn’t want to do this, but I guess I have to. This is not hate speech. It would be hate speech if the question read, say:

Why are Mexicans so bad?

A. They’re Mexicans.

B. They’re all criminals.

C. They steal our jobs.

D. They eat all the nachos.

E. They smell bad.

F. All of the above.

And how, exactly, does the dreaded “I-word” (illegal) tie into this? “The i-word… teaches [non-illegal students] that it’s ok to evoke violence against other human beings…”. This literally means: the word “illegal” teaches kids that it’s okay to mention violence. I guess they exhausted their supply of shitty arguments and now they’ve got no arguments left at all.

We also learn that the word (illegal) also teaches illegal students “to feel worthless if they are on the receiving end.” Gee, it would be a real shame if my constant use of the word “illegal” made them feel so worthless that they (the illegals) went back to their own damn country.

Illegals illegals illegals illegals illegals illegals illegals!

Meanwhile, in the real world, Steve Sailer is addressing real issues of immigration.

Dazed and Confused: The Continuing Saga of Tim Wise

Oh, Tim Wise. You so crazy.

In his sole article at Colorlines.com, Wise — proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that white people can be stupid too — declares that the “twisting” and “besmirching” of Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy by “(mostly white) reactionaries” and “conservatives” (Wise’s codeword for white people) is causing the following “injustice and suffering”:

  1. opposition to affirmative action
  2. the “subprime mortgage crisis” — and note that although “[p]redatory lending aimed at racially segregated minority neighborhoods [by evil white people]… fueled the housing crisis” (Reuters) —

    — at the same time, “the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which encourages [i.e., forces] banks to make loans in the low- and moderate-income [i.e., black and Hispanic] areas where they operate… had little impact on the crisis” (emPower Magazine). Hmm.

  3. “double-digit unemployment”
  4. “white folks running around, speaking against health care reforms from which they would personally gain, all because of a fear that some of the benefits might go to ‘undeserving’ immigrants of color, or lazy folks (typically perceived as black and brown) who don’t want to pay for their own care” — surely a fair and balanced way to describe anyone not on board the ObamaCare express train to crushing debt!

As a result, Wise hallucinates, “we compartmentalize [King’s] non-violence message [as well as his socialist income redistribution message and his discriminatory affirmative action message…], much as we compartmentalize books about King and the movement in that section of the bookstore established for African-American history; much as we have compartmentalized those streets named for the man, locating them only in the blackest and often poorest parts of town.”

In the real world, the part of town with a street named after Martin Luther King Jr. (a Republican) is also the poorest part of town for the exact same reason it has that street: because it’s full of black people, with lower-than-average IQs and higher-than-average crime rates. In Tim Wise’s fantasy world, evil white conservatives will only allow streets in the “blackest” part of town to be named after Martin Luther King Jr., while at the same time forcing the people who live there into poverty, through the Godlike power of “institutional racism,” and all of this can be tied to the way bookstores discriminate against the poor, helpless, innocent black folks… by giving them a whole goddamn section of their own.

Crazy shit Tim Wise believes

I really should add all this crazy shit to my big list, which started here and continued here:

  • Race isn’t biological, despite the fact that Asian people stubbornly insist on having Asian kids.
  • People of all races, ethnicities and nationalities should put aside their differences and come together to fuck their cousins and kick the shit out of short, slow, weak people. Evolutionarily speaking, that is.
  • Only white people can be racist. Conversely, all white people are racist.
  • The white race does not exist. If you think it does, then you’re a white nationalist.
  • The family is a social construct, and if you disagree, then it’s straight to bed with no dessert, mister, and you don’t get to fuck your hot cousin. Plus, you’ll have no free will.
  • We should embrace racial diversity (as well as our hot cousins), because it’s possible to have wars without it.
  • Parents only care for their children because they are legally obligated to do so. That explains so much about my childhood.
  • If white people were in charge — this is during one of his (psychotic?) episodes when, for convenience, he forgets that he believes they are in charge — if they were in charge, they would all decide they want to live in the ghetto, and kick all the black people out.
  • etc.

This is the same man whose website describes him, in the words of Dr. Molefi Kete Asante*, as “one of the brilliant voices of our time.”

[*Radical Afrocentrist and Professor Extraordinarius of African American Studies. I’m not making this up.]

Variations on a stupid theme

The same theme frequently recurs in this kind of mindless pro-black “analysis”: blame white people for not doing enough, or blame white people for doing too much, but either way make sure you blame white people for everything that goes wrong.

Minorities complained about banks racially discriminating against them. In reality, banks were “discriminating” against poor people who couldn’t be trusted with loans, but no matter. They got their Community Reinvestment Act. Now minorities are defaulting on their mortgages, because as it turns out, they were poor and couldn’t be trusted with loans. So, of course, they blame the banks for lending to them!

According to this thinking, minorities are the nanny state’s helpless wards, unable to survive on their own without constant handouts — because of white people being such awful racists, of course. I can’t believe I’m going to say this, but…

I have a higher opinion of both white and non-white people than so-called anti-racists like Tim Wise.

Read Full Post »

In discussing matters political, I occasionally test the limits of sportsmanlike behavior — insisting on absurd handicaps, for instance, like — oh, I don’t know, rebutting my opponents in song form? But I always exercise caution, and so should you.

There’s an art and a science to being an arrogant bastard: how you argue, and what you argue about. Style and substance, if you will. No one, least of all me, can teach you style — how to please your supporters and infuriate your detractors at the same time (preferably while balancing something on your head). As for substance — well, if you’re going to act like you’re the smartest person in the room/world/universe, you’d better have a handle on the facts.

Substance is where our next subject goes horribly wrong.

2. “Irrefutable”

Over at abagond‘s place again, my badly wounded Research Assistants uncovered a Valentine’s Day gem: a guest post entitled Mephisto on race & IQ.

Too many “Arm Chair Internet Geneticists” and “Know Nothing HBDers” (redundant, I know) like to use the same drivel, that is almost effortlessly debunked with irrefutable (and even entry level) facts:

Mephisto is right, of course — if by “almost effortlessly debunked” he means “I couldn’t be bothered to put in any effort,” and also all the other words mean different things too. What, pray tell, are these irrefutable facts?

Two or three years after “The Bell Curve” came out, Myerson, Rank, Raines & Schnitzler at Washington University in Saint Louis, looked at the VERY SAME longitudinal database that Murray and Herrnstein used to demonstrate this persistent IQ gap between whites and blacks. They found something Murray and Herrnstein didn’t mention.

What they discovered was that when African Americans in the US go to college, they raise their IQ FOUR TIMES FASTER than whites who go to college, and in the process close the average IQ gap between whites and blacks in half in just 4 years. This would not be possible if IQ was fundamentally related to biology, and yet it was EXACTLY (going by the very database that Murray and Herrnstein used) actually demonstrated: [broken link]

So there goes the entire argument of the book, and every single related study.

The link is broken, but fortunately the study* was not hard to find. Downloading the short (four-page) paper through my university library afforded me an opportunity apparently denied Mephisto: the opportunity to actually read the damn thing before I open my big mouth.

[*Myerson, Rank, Raines, and Schnitzler. “Race and general cognitive ability: The myth of diminishing returns to education.” Psychological Science, 9, 139–142 (1997).]

Critical thinking

From the study, we learn that indeed “it was the black college students who made the largest gains between the end of high school and college graduation, with their test scores increasing more than four times as much as those of white college students.” Thus the test score gap shrank by about half from one standard deviation.

Well, that’s still a gap, and there’s no apparent reason it couldn’t be “fundamentally related to biology,” especially given that we already know that intelligence is at least 50–70% heritable, from studies that actually control for genes. Myerson et al.’s study doesn’t even consider genes, so it has nothing to tell us about their role in IQ differences.

But the gap definitely shrank, right? Well, consider the following:

  • The relative effects of shared environment versus genes. Not only does the heritability of IQ increase as we age, “[t]he effects of shared environment [on human behavioral traits] are small (less than 10 percent of the variance), often not statistically significant, often not replicated in other studies, and often a big fat zero” (Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate, p. 379). This alone makes it highly unlikely that a college environment could really be smartening up the kids.

    Raising their IQs, that is. It probably is teaching them stuff they didn’t know before, like how to make a bong out of an apple.

  • Obvious sample bias: college students. The black students making the supposed large gains were all smart enough to get into college. Therefore they were smarter than the majority of American blacks.
  • Less obvious sample bias: neglecting dropouts. “To control for attrition [dropping out] during the education process,” the authors write, “we compared the scores of individuals who ultimately attained the same level of education…” In fact, their analysis of college students only “examined the data from individuals who ultimately graduated from college.” They admit, “[i]t is certainly true that there is greater attrition among black college students than among white college students in general, as well as among [participants in the study].”

    Even though more black students than white drop out of college, their scores simply weren’t counted. If dropouts tend to have lower than average test scores (a safe assumption), then the authors’ methods artificially inflate the average black score.

The authors even admit the sample bias and dropout problem in the discussion, but declare — as if it had any relevance to those methodological issues — that “this fact [that black college students are more likely to drop out and not be counted] only makes the failure to profit from high school by the highly select group of black future college graduates [my emphasis] all the more remarkable, and raises the possibility that the increases they showed in college resulted from the removal of whatever may have been handicapping them during high school” (p. 141). Pure speculation. They didn’t study “whatever may have been handicapping them during high school.”

Further reading

Unfortunately, we’re still not done. (Effort alert! Academic integrity is such a drag.) We’ve got to compare this study’s findings to all the other studies out there. There’s a substantial 2003 study** by Flowers and Pascarella, for instance:

The data revealed overwhelmingly that the negative cognitive disadvantages for African American [college] students remained consistent throughout the study, even when statistical controls were introduced for all of the variables in the regression model (i.e., direct effects equation). …

The average percentile point advantage [for Caucasian students] across all of the end-of-first-year cognitive outcomes was 9.2. The average percentile point advantage across all of the end-of-second-year cognitive outcomes was 17.2. The average percentile point advantage across all of the end-of-third-year cognitive outcomes was 15.3. Taken as a whole, the average percentile point advantage (for Caucasian students) across all of the end-of-first-year, end-of-second-year, and end-of-third-year cognitive outcomes was 13.2.

[**Flowers and Pascarella. “Cognitive effects of college: Differences between African American and Caucasian students.” Research in Higher Education, 44, 21–49 (2003).]

Incidentally, Dr. Flowers is black.

That makes one for me, one for you, Mephisto. (Unlike the archangel Michael, I’m not afraid to throw down with the Devil.)

It’s been fourteen years since Myerson and friends made their contribution to politicized science. There’s a whole new world of research, a new fantastic point of view on race differences in intelligence! No one can tell us no, or where to go, or say we’re only dreaming. I’m like a shooting star: I’ve come so far, I can’t go back to where I used to be. With respect to behavior genetics, that is.

Sincerest apologies to Walt Disney.

Anyway, there are hundreds of studies to choose from, but it seems like your typical race denialist is only interested in one: the first, or perhaps the only one he found that, through dubious methodology and liberal*** use of statistical “corrections,” reaches a conclusion he finds politically palatable. His is a shallow, uncritical analysis, motivated not by an honest desire to learn, but by slavish devotion to an article of faith:

Human skin cells and muscle cells and heart cells may have been evolving ever since our species first walked out of Africa, but human brain cells haven’t.

No amount of blustering is going to make that true.

[***Pun: always intended.]

Read Full Post »

As part of the ongoing anniversary celebration here at Unamusement Park, I dispatched my crack squad of Research Assistants into the field to collect data on a disturbing cultural trend: stupidity levels, already unsustainably high since the late 90s, are still rising. The following chart should prove illuminating.

My Research Assistants returned almost immediately to demand more funding, as they had exhausted their original funding in the course of “field research” conducted at a bar, a casino, an exotic dance club, an Oriental massage parlor, and a petting zoo. I had them thoroughly and repeatedly beaten by my crack squad of Research Assistant Motivation Specialists, and sent them back into the field where, confused and disoriented from their recent thorough beatings, they tumbled into a rock quarry.

Their third, fourth, fifth, and sixth attempts met with similar calamities.

Nevertheless, they eventually succeeded and were rewarded with several hours of that special secret French secret thing, which makes regular sex seem like hammering nails into your face. Meanwhile, I sequestered myself in Unamusement Park’s main Hate Laboratory, where I distilled their rambling, incoherent, and likely-hallucinatory observations into a series of mean-spirited posts.

This is the first of those posts.

1. Racial paranoia on the rise

It’s hard to avoid, says racist* blogger abagond:

whites in America pretty much control what gets taught in school, reported in the newspapers and shown on television. They control the image that whites and blacks have. So they generally put whites in a good light and blacks in a bad light. …

That means you cannot trust what white people say. … They are not an honest people. Not everything that comes out of their mouths is a lie, of course, but way too much of it is. They twist facts, they play up certain facts and leave out others. They even flat-out make stuff up.

[*It’s okay, he only hates white people.]

Surely this delusional view of the American education system and news media must be limited to a handful of insignificant Internet imbeciles. It couldn’t possibly be more widespread than that. Could it?

Consider this 2001 study, brought to you by the radicals at Berkeley Media Studies Group and the criminal-lovers at the Justice Policy Institute (and parroted unquestioningly by left-wing news organizations), which looks at racial bias in the media — no, not the good kind of media bias, the kind that makes white people look bad. The racist kind.

The authors observed that “a disproportionate number of perpetrators on the news are people of color, especially African Americans,” and concluded that “[t]he news media, particularly television news, unduly connect race and crime, especially violent crime” (emphasis mine). They formed this conclusion without ever looking at crime rates by race. This alleviated them of the troublesome responsibility (sometimes called “scientific integrity”) of asking: “Is it possible that the news is full of black criminals because a disproportionate number of criminals are black?”

I encourage you to check the report yourself for evidence of critical thinking. This is about as close as it gets:

The one study that examined youth portrayals in magazines had the most to say about race. … A March 1965 Newsweek article was the first to connect crime with Black crime. The first use of “young Black male” in a Time or Newsweek cover story was in 1970 when Time reported that “though victims of Black crime are overwhelmingly Black, it is chiefly young Black males who commit the most common interracial crime: armed robbery.”

It goes without saying that making this connection is bad. (Also recall that in 1994 blacks committed over 90% of interracial crime, and more than half of all black violence was directed against whites.)

The author [examining youth portrayals in magazines] argues that the story cemented the connection by focussing on Washington, DC, which had the highest proportion of Blacks in US cities and high rates of crime. [Not particularly surprising.] Two years later Newsweek made the same connection. In later stories in the 1970’s, both Time and Newsweek portrayed crime as “largely perpetrated by ‘young Black males'”. Later, Hispanic males were added to the picture. [And the crime rates by race during the 1970s were…?] The author suggests that a combination of modern racism, media framing, and public discourse of crime as a problem of the Black urban poor has led to the racialization of crime

Well, obviously. The only alternative would be that the racial realities of crime have somehow led to the racialization of crime. And that would be crazy.

Read Full Post »

Today the Internet’s #1 source for racial blasphemy and incitement to genocide turns two months old. You can’t see it from where you’re sitting, but I just set off three thousand fireworks —

— in the general direction of a black orphanage.

Hooray!

Sadly, one of those months was February, the shortest and therefore gayest month. Why do you think we let black people have it? Twenty-eight days of black history is enough, thank you. And don’t even get me started on leap years. Last time I swear they tried to come up with a new civil rights hero to fill in the extra day. Her name was Posa Rarks and she refused to sit on the back of a tandem bicycle.

I feel somewhat like a cat who’s just had his birthday cake confiscated. The only thing that could make me feel better would be a picture of exactly that, but where would I possibly —

ALL BETTER!

I feel for you, Birthday lol-Cat. I really do.

Birth of a Blog: The First Two Glorious Months: A Retrospective

Let us now commemorate this monumental event in the history of race relations — bigger than I have a dream; bigger than the Emancipation Proclamation; bigger even than the first time someone said: “Hey, you know what would be great? If black people did our jobs for free.” Here are some of the good times we’ve shared and fond memories we’ve made together, you ungrateful shitheads.

  • Welcome to the Politics of Equality. It’s not science, and it’s ruining everybody’s shit.
  • Savage beating, torture, rape, and murder — or, as the black defendant puts it, “rough fantasy sex.”
  • I hear there’s a bunch of crazies living in caves, sticking bombs in their underwear in between jerking off to 72 wide-eyed, non-menstruating virgins. Oh yeah, and they want to take over the world.
  • If my mother were starving, I would care enough to do something about it. If her mother were starving, I would still do something about it, but I’d complain a lot and make her feel guilty. If my mother’s cat were starving, I’d be all over that situation — shit would get done.
  • Your horoscope: while pondering a Zen koan, you will become disoriented and aroused, and fall down an open manhole. On the way down, your engorged member will ensnare a ripe strawberry, which will taste unusually good.
  • Turns out there’s no reproductive advantage to getting mad about a little girl-on-girl action. God bless you, science.
  • If I were a racist, I wouldn’t stand here debating with you. I’d just call you a “nigger-lover” and get on with my day.
  • Fighting the national epidemic of rabid woodchucks mauling picnickers.
  • This conversation doesn’t end with me saying “and so you see, that’s why Hitler was so cool.” I don’t get my statistics from a little-known appendix to The Turner Diaries.
  • A black woman has been convicted of tampering with records, for doing nothing more than tampering with records? It’s the next Posa Rarks!
  • Your emotional response to an idea tells us nothing about that idea’s validity — unless of course the idea was that people never get offended by ideas.
  • Yes, yes. Your awed silence and slack-jawed dribbling are quite appropriate for the magnitude of my genius.
  • The NBA is obviously discriminating against Asians, who as everyone knows are just as athletically gifted as — oh, wait. It sounds incredibly stupid when I put it that way.
  • Fanatical anti-white bigot Tim Wise makes his first (but sadly not last) appearance.
  • “Oh Unamused, you sexy devil. I bet you’re just trying to steal all the mayonnaise sandwiches in the world and seal them up in a giant climate-controlled mayonnaise sandwich vault under Lake Michigan where no one can get at them.”
  • White people are smart, responsible, polite, peaceful, and law abiding, beautiful, inventive, artistic, and nice to all the other races! Why not be nice back?
  • People are like noodles: they both stick together, they both taste delicious, and they’re both racist.
  • Happy Valentine’s Day! Go fuck your hot cousin!
  • I’m such a sucker for French girls and their je ne sais quoi’s and their voulez-vous couchez avec moi’s and their penchant pour les blowjobs.
  • Sluts and players, feminists and faggots, shrieking harpies and supplicating eunuchs. Oh, my!
  • If you want to really cash in on the diversity sweepstakes, you should say your child is a black/black/black/gay/crippled/black hermaphrodite. Kid’s gonna get teased some, though.
  • The “logic” of gun control would make Aristotle weep. Apparently, soooo many criminals are using guns against defenseless victims that we, uh — we can’t allow citizens to carry guns.
  • Unamusement Park is your source for all French things, including hot girls, typical and ordinary girls, hot “fuks,” sexy “grels,” women’s faces, traditional dresses, ethnic heritage, and of course… boobs.
  • “I demanded to be transferred at once to an exotic particle physics research facility in a cooler climate where I would not be subjected to a continuous barrage of monsoons, tidal waves, sunstroke, tropical skin diseases, and the incursions of those abominable monkeys.” (Not Japan.)
  • Maybe whites won’t need that race war after all! Awwwwww. Now I’m a sad panda bear — the least racist of all bears!
  • Tonight: poor, helpless racial minorities and the good, liberal whites who fuck them.
  • A rather unfortunate catastrophic total failure of the reactor’s containment shields. (Not Japan.)
  • Bullshit nonsense gibberish like “critical race theory” and “critical white studies” are now considered legitimate fields of research.
  • It’s all pointless. Everything is pointless. Fuck it. [kills self]
  • Isn’t it time the Crusaders Against Racism left their ziggurats and wrenched open some poor woman’s mouth to see if it’s full of racism?
  • We support your right to rainbows and sunshine and kittens, and ice cream for dinner every day!
  • Bowling, speed skating, and the luge: it’s a black-on-white showdown!
  • Your unique environment includes getting in a freak zeppelin accident after winning the lottery.
  • “It’ll lick the salt from my cerebral cortex! Dangle my genitals for Christmas decorations!” (Possibly Japan…)
  • Today’s race-conscious African-American male seeks to overcome historical barriers to inter-racial unions, as well as discriminatory female consent practices.
  • Minorities are our friends with special benefits.
  • If you are a black person arguing for the cognitive superiority of your race, it helps your case if you (a) support your claim with scientific data and coherent argumentation, rather than a plagiarized compilation of remarks by 2,000-year-old architects and 1,300-year-old grammarians; and (b) are capable of spelling three-syllable words correctly.
  • I’m too hateful for your blog, too hateful for your blog, your blog’s going to leave me./I’m too hateful for my shirt, too hateful for my shirt, so hateful it hurts. (Don’t watch this.)

What glorious months they were! The dizzying highs! The terrifying lows! The creamy middles! The overuse of punctuation! Especially! Exclamation! Marks!

Who was I arguing with then?

Unamusement Park would not be possible — actually, it would be possible, but a whole lot less fun for me, if not for the generous contributions of random Internet losers, who have donated their ignorant, inconsistent, idiotic opinions to fuel my white-hot white rage and give me something to make fun of when I can’t think of anything substantial to write. Which is nearly always.

On this day, these men shall be honored for their generosity in the only truly appropriate way: by first insulting, then ignoring them.

By popular demand: a gratuitous French girl

What do you think, gratuitous French girl? Please, share with us your thoughts on Unamusement Park’s two-month anniversary, or as I like to call it, “International Call-a-Random-Black-Person-‘Nigger’ Day.”

Very gratuitous and extremely French.

Je pense que — oh, I am so sorry. En Anglais, oui? I believe zat zere is nothing sexier zan a man who can rebut a socioeconomic theory of race differences in intelligence. I would love to give him several hours of — er, you do not have zis word in your language. It is a special secret French sexy thing zat is taught to all our sexiest young girls. It is to regular sex what regular sex is to hammering nails into your face. I will particularly enjoy zis because Unamused has such a huge —”

Alright, thank you, that’s plenty.

“But I was just about to tell zem about your enormous —”

THANK YOU, gratuitous French girl. You can go now.

“But… you promised me a croissant. May I please have my croissant now?”

We close on the gentle sounds of a gratuitous French girl nibbling happily on her delicious croissant.

Read Full Post »

Full-time anti-white racist blogger and part-time abagond-mouthpiece omasiali has a new post up called “How to argue like a white racist.” My comment was too hateful to survive moderation, so I’m posting it here instead.

The validity of a theory is determined not by the weakest argument for it, but by the strongest. Omasiali and the other bigots can refute a million stupid arguments but that doesn’t make mine any less convincing.

Furthermore, many of those “common arguments that white racists use” are valid in certain contexts. For example, quoting rape statistics is appropriate in a discussion of race differences in crime. Pointing out that one’s family never owned slaves, or that most “minorities” have no slave ancestors, is appropriate in a discussion of reparations, affirmative action, and other special treatment for minorities. And, as I’ve noted before, having black friends is actually pretty good evidence that you’re not racist against blacks.

Finally, #16 in particular is bizarre:

Demand proof – Make them prove it beyond a reasonable doubt with facts and figures. Find holes in whatever facts they present. Find counter-facts.

That’s how to argue like a white racist? Everything in that list is not merely an example of good argumentation; it is essential to it. If you can’t prove your claim with facts and figures, if your opponents keep finding holes in your argument, if they have counter-evidence that contradicts you, then find a better argument or admit you’re wrong.

It’s called honesty.

I guess I forgot to mention the third option: refuse to listen to anyone who disagrees with you. What a moron.

Read Full Post »

Put your notes and books away, class. It’s time for a quiz. Read the title of this post and answer these questions:

  1. Who said it?
  2. Who is the “filthy savage” to whom it refers?

All right, pencils down. The correct answers are

  1. anti-white racist blogger BLACKPHANTOMX, whose recent post “Why the filthy caucasion [sic] savage does not deserve your sympathy” is appropriately tagged as Endgame WaR!!!, and anti-white racist blogger omasiali, who posted the same thing (without credit) the next day; and
  2. white people, obviously, whom they both clearly despise.

“Why the filthy caucasion [sic] savage does not deserve your sympathy” is nothing more than a collection of choice historical quotations, from the 4th century BC to the 19th century AD, intended to paint whites as an inferior race, and black and brown people as their natural masters. It is also completely plagiarized.

The first twenty-one paragraphs (and the subtitle) have been copied and pasted, unedited, from the essay “Black and White Intelligence” by Charles M. Six, the white president of Ending Stereotypes for America. Everything else except the third-to-last paragraph has been copied and pasted, with many omissions and unnecessary paragraph breaks but otherwise unedited, from the essay “Black and White Morality” by the same author. (That is why there are so many references to non-existent endnotes.) The third-to-last paragraph is merely a quotation from Julius Caesar’s Commentaries on the Gallic Wars, Book 6, probably via this site, since both refer to it as “Gallic War, Book VI”.

As far as I can tell, BLACKPHANTOMX’s only contributions to his own post are as follows:

  1. changing the word “Negroes” to “Africans” in a quotation from the 14th century Arab scholar Ibn Battua
  2. adding “AND LOOK !!!” before paragraph 31
  3. adding “The OTHER SIDE oF the coin” before paragraph 33
  4. deleting all references to druids from Julius Caesar’s account of the Gallic Wars (an omission which, for some reason I can’t fully explain, is very funny to me)

Update: in the comments, BLACKPHANTOMX reveals that he literally does not know the difference between quoting a book, with an endnote giving your source (i.e., research), versus copying and pasting someone else’s work without credit (i.e., plagiarism).

Curiously enough, the stated mission of Ending Stereotypes for America is to “[u]se history to prove that Americans of different ethnicities are not innately different and are all truly Americans”. This, from the group that brought you such odes to black supremacy as “Black and White Intelligence” and “Black and White Morality”.

I am open to debate on the subject of (the existence of) race differences in intelligence. And obviously two bloggers are not representative of their race. However, I must point out that if you are a black person arguing for the cognitive superiority of your race, it helps your case if you (a) support your claim with scientific data and coherent argumentation, rather than a plagiarized compilation of remarks by 2,000-year-old architects and 1,300-year-old grammarians; and (b) are capable of spelling three-syllable words correctly. To put it bluntly, BLACKPHANTOMX, omasiali, and even Charles M. Six are so stupid, there is no point or pleasure in attempting to jackhammer some semblance of logic through their infinitely dense skulls and into their shriveled, knowledge-starved brains.

Okay, there’s some pleasure in it.

Still, I have neither the patience nor the inclination to list every stupid thing in “Why the filthy caucasion [sic] savage does not deserve your sympathy” — or rather, “Black and White Intelligence” and “Black and White Morality.” Therefore I will limit myself to five points.

First, the human race as a whole was, until quite recently, almost unimaginably violent, vicious, callous, and cruel. This has very little to tell us about race differences in intelligence. On the other hand, the relative progress of different nations, kingdoms, empires, civilizations, and — yes — races in recent, less violent centuries (even decades) might be more informative. So how’s Africa doing, now that the evil, stupid white colonists have all absconded from the land of the ancient super-moral warrior-geniuses?

Second, the unscientific beliefs of ancient people also have very little to tell us about race differences in intelligence, especially with the (white) author’s hilariously blatant bias in favor of all things black. For example, it is said of the philosopher Aristotle, who believed that men had more teeth than women because of men’s “abundance of heat and blood”, that he also

believed that, “The races that live in… Europe are full of courage and passion but somewhat lacking in skill and brain power… Those who are too black are cowards, like for instance, the Egyptians and Ethiopians. But those who are excessively white are also cowards… The complexion of courage is between the two.” Aristotle believed, liked many Greeks and Romans, that they lived in the perfect, “mid-position geographically,” between the intelligent, yet cowardly dark skinned southerners, and brave, yet dull pale-skinned northerners.

Charles M. Six is willing to accept black cowardice and southern European superiority in exchange for northern European stupidity and possible cowardice. On the other hand, he describes the dissenting philosopher David Hume as follows (emphasis mine):

In 1748… David Hume — ignoring or blatantly lying about history — demonstrated the ridiculous propaganda that was accepted by an unknowing public with the following quote: “I am apt to suspect the Negroes, and in general all the other species of men, to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was any civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even say individual eminent in action or speculation.” Sadly this type of propaganda was accepted among white Europeans; they just didn’t know any better. Unfortunately the propaganda led whites to discriminate and commit violence against people with darker skin tones, especially blacks, because of lies like the one above.

See if you can spot the bias! (While you’re at it, make a list of civilized nations and eminent individuals, and count the black ones.)

Third, Aesop was not Ethiopian.

Fourth, the Magical Negro and Noble Savage stereotypes do not constitute evidence of blacks’ superior intelligence and morality, no matter how many thousands of years old they are.

Fifth, the conclusion of “Black and White Intelligence” seems to be that historical sources prove that black and brown people are at least as smart as white people; the conclusion of “Black and White Morality” is explicitly that “the ancient and medieval sources destroy the myth that black people are naturally inclined to act immorally or without reflection.” However, even if we accept every reference to black intelligence, morality and thoughtfulness, no matter how ancient or biased, as accurate and representative, and every reference to black stupidity, immorality and thoughtlessness as ignorance, lies and propaganda, this still does not account for the observed fifteen-point IQ gap between contemporary black and white Americans nor the staggeringly high black crime rate, and neither do socioeconomic status, unsubstantiated white racism, or any other non-racial (i.e., non-genetic) explanation.

And now for something completely different

“Why the filthy caucasion [sic] savage does not deserve your sympathy” is not the subject of today’s post. It is merely my little introduction to the pro-black, anti-white blogosphere. The real subject is a series of more coherent posts by blogger abagond and duly re-posted by Tweedledum and Tweedledee (as “Crackraism [sic?]- a mindset of hate!”): “white privilege mindset,” “Fanon: The So-Called Dependency Complex of the Colonized,” and “hate crime rate.”

The third post, “hate crime rate,” is a shallow look — a glance, really — at racial hate crime in contemporary America. I have already debunked these myths in “Hate crimes: I hate ’em.” Therefore I will just mention one point here: abagond believes that hate crimes scale by the number of victims. Thus he calculates the number of black victims per million blacks, the number of Muslim victims per million Muslims, and so on. Is it not obvious that the relative number of perpetrators is vastly more significant here? There are, indeed, only 37 million black people in the United States. Yet, if someone hated black people enough to commit a hate crime against them, would he really have twice as much trouble tracking down a lynching victim if there were only 18 million of them? Isn’t the number of non-black people (potential perpetrators) more salient here? Similarly, the number of black-on-white hate crimes is mainly determined not by the number of white people — if you want a white victim, you’ll find one — but by the number of black people.

If abagond were willing to think critically about hate crime statistics, he would see a very different picture. From La Griffe du Lion’s “Crime in the Hood” (emphasis mine):

The best and most complete evidence [regarding racial hate crimes] comes from the Justice Department. Its annual National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) canvasses a representative sample of about 80,000 Americans, from roughly 43,000 households. From this survey, a picture of crime is painted by its victims. The last full report of the NCVS was issued in 1994. From it we learn that blacks committed 1,600,951 violent crimes against whites. In the same year, whites committed 165,345 such offenses against blacks. Despite being only 13 percent of the population, blacks committed more than 90 percent of the violent interracial crime. Less than 15 percent of these had robbery as a motive. The rest were assaults and rapes.

The asymmetry of interracial crime goes still deeper. More than half the violence committed by blacks is directed against whites, 57 percent in 1994. Less than 3 percent of the violence committed by whites is directed against blacks. Population and NCVS statistics reveal that in 1994 a black was 64 times more likely to attack a white than vice versa. In the city, the races live mostly apart from one another, so that the most convenient victims of thugs are others of the same race. Only a hunter’s mentality could account for the data. Given a choice, a black thug will select a white victim.

The second post, “Fanon: The So-Called Dependency Complex of the Colonized,” merely summarizes a chapter of a book rebutting a French psychoanalyst named Maud Mannoni, who believed — among many other simply fascinating things — that white colonials had something called a Prospero complex, but the natives suffered from dependency and inferiority complexes. If my name were Maud Mannoni, or if I based any of my theories about race on his psychoanalysis of natives under colonial rule, of which I have only just now become aware, then I might care enough to address it. I do not.

We are therefore left with “white privilege mindset.”

I am white, so everything I say is wrong, including this

abagond defines the white privilege mindset as “the way of thinking that grows out of having white privilege, from the advantages of being white in America,” and lists ten beliefs which indicate that the believer has this mindset. The first is: “[t]here is no such thing as white privilege.” Well, obviously. The only reason why anyone would doubt that white people are advantaged in America would be that their white advantage has blinded them to itself. To get a sense of how silly that is, imagine if I seriously put forth the joke argument I alluded to earlier: “these two (presumably) black bloggers aren’t smart enough to understand the evidence that black people aren’t smart, so black people must not be smart.”

The first belief in the list is essentially true. The second, third and fourth sound like something Bill Cosby would say. The fourth and fifth are equivalent and amount to a belief that blacks should be treated equally, not specially. The sixth and seventh reflect an accurate understanding of affirmative action. The first half of the eighth is unverifiable; the second half is certainly true. The ninth is true: we shouldn’t have black or white or women’s history months, we should just teach the goddamn kids history. The tenth is a colossal understatement: blacks are much more racist than whites. Oh no, I have a 95% chance of a white privilege mindset! How can I possibly redeem myself?

According to abagond, “the statements make the most sense to someone who has never experienced racism, to someone who can take white privilege for granted.” It should go without saying that he does not provide any evidence of widespread white-on-black racism, nor of the supposed advantages to being white in America.

White History Month [i.e., wanting one to match Black History Month] is the clearest example. From Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty or give me death” to “manifest destiny” to America as “the great melting pot”, American history is not merely taught from a white point of view, it is taught as if blacks, Mexicans and Native Americans do not truly count as people. White History Month is the month that never ends.

It is not clear what this is supposed to me. Did Patrick Henry not say those words? Did manifest destiny, and the related idea of American exceptionalism, not play an important role in pre-Civil-War America? Is a melting pot not an accurate metaphor for the way that every minority except, apparently, blacks and Hispanics — Irish, Italians, Japanese, Jews, Koreans, etc. — has successfully integrated into the great society of Anglo-Saxon America? The notion that American history is taught “as if blacks, Mexicans and Native Americans do not truly count as people” is absurd after one glance at American high school history curricula (absurder, after two, three, or four glances).

The real complaint about American history is not that we overemphasize white contributions to it, but rather that blacks haven’t contributed very much to American history besides their victimhood. They were slaves, then they weren’t. They didn’t have civil rights, then they did. They weren’t allowed do something, then they were. (If necessary, to create the “right” history, minor actions are blown out of proportion and unpleasant details glossed over.) Indeed, black history all too often reads like a list of the first black people to do something, or the only black people to do something, or how difficult it was for black people to do something — in other words, a chronological account of how black people have always played catch-up to white people.

Black achievements in music and sports are trumpeted because their achievements in science and technology are insignificant. You can’t create a history of black nuclear physicists or black mathematicians or black Second World War heroes out of thin air, and this (i.e., reality) is a source of endless frustration for some people. It’s Big Lie #3 — reality is racist, followed immediately by Big Lie #2 — racism is everywhere:

That is pretty easy to see if you are black. But whites are so used to having everything told from their point of view – from history to news to Hollywood films – that many fail to see it as a point of view at all.

Affirmative action is the same way: whites are so used to being favoured in the labour market that they fail to see it as white affirmative action.

A white point of view in Hollywood? Whites favored in the labor market? Do these people live in the same universe as me?

For the DIY types, if you want to build your own white privilege mindset, here are abagond’s easy-to-follow instructions:

  1. “Notice any small advantage blacks have while overlooking the even greater advantages of whites.” If you don’t want a white privilege mindset, you should scrape together any insignificant discrimination against blacks, while overlooking the much greater discrimination against whites.
  2. “Blame all disadvantages blacks suffer from on them.” If you don’t want a white privilege mindset, you should blame all “disadvantages” (i.e., failures) blacks suffer from, on whites.
  3. “Use the Anything But Racism argument as needed.” If you don’t want a white privilege mindset, you should use the Blame Anyone But Black People argument.
  4. “Discount anything black people say. Only take what white people say seriously.” If you don’t want a white privilege mindset, you should discount any evidence that contradicts what you feel to be true. But make sure to believe black people unquestioningly, unless of course they disagree with you, in which case they’re Uncle Toms.
  5. “Never try to see anything from a black point of view.” If you don’t want a white privilege mindset, you should bow down before your black masters (of public opinion) and beg them to spare you a branding with the dreaded R-word.

If you’re not black — well, first of all, you’d better be sorry for everything your people have done to Eric Holder’s people, but more to the point: don’t worry, it’s not just black people who get to play the discrimination card to explain away any and all of their failings. Anyone except straight white Christian men can do it.

You can replace “black” with “Latino”, “Native American”, “Muslim” and so on.

In fact, you can pretty much replace “white” and “black” with any privileged/marginalized pair: rich and poor, male and female, straight and gay, Christian and Jew, etc. Because it is not so much about race but power and how power affects thinking.

When you’re totally committed to your opinions, and you have absolutely no concrete evidence to back them up, but some jerk-face insists on finding “facts” and “data” and “history” that contradict them, your only option is to declare that all those jerk-faces are inherently incapable of understanding anything, because their thinking — their racist, sexist, homophobic, evidence-based thinking — has been corrupted by their power, which we know they have because we say so, and anyone who disagrees is speaking from a position of power, so their thinking is corrupted…

Round and round the stupid goes, and where it stops nobody knows.

Read Full Post »

TalkingRace is a new blog about “exploring ideas & issues regarding race.” Sounds like my kind of blog! The author, bluesenbop, describes himself as

a theater artist, painter, poet who has worked in higher ed for the past 8 years running a diversity program. Also, for the past several years, I have co-taught a class called “Pathways to Cultural Competency.” I self-identify as African American though I have mixed race heritage. I am puzzled, saddened, fascinated, distraught and immensely curious about all things race related.

And here he is, this puzzled, saddened, fascinated, distraught, immensely curious man (no, not that one):

If I wanted to find a path to cultural competency, I would ask this man to lead the way.

Anyway, with such an impressive resume (“will party 4 $$”), I’m sure this self-identified African American will welcome the opportunity to disprove my — oh, who am I kidding.

Just the (convenient, unexamined) facts, ma’am

Here’s what everyone needs more of: the news as interpreted by an expert on diversity and cultural competency. Since my comment there was far too hateful to survive moderation, I will discuss the post here. It’s amazing how much intellectual dishonesty can be crammed into three short paragraphs.

BLUESENBOP: According to the 2010 census report, poverty among Black children is three times as high as that for White children. 40% of Black children in America are born poor, compared to 8% of White children.

Usually, race denialists will scrounge up some difference, any difference, between black people and white people, and declare it evidence of racial discrimination. This is, of course, a fallacy: disparate impact does not imply disparate treatment. The only way that implication could be valid is if race doesn’t exist, which is stupid. (Technically, the difference doesn’t have to actually exist, as long as it can be interpreted as discrimination against minorities.)

But bluesenbop, in the interest of streamlining his diversity racket, has taken the logical next step: omitting the accusation, or rather leaving it implicit (but obvious). It’s just faster that way—plus, there’s no way to rebut it, because it’s not even there! “Just the facts, ma’am,” he says, by which he means: “just the facts which, if presented out of context, will reinforce my target audience’s unscientific beliefs, given that they are morons and cowards who can be trusted not to critically examine anything even tangentially race-related.”

The debate on the bus goes round and round

BLUESENBOP: Meanwhile, a Raleigh, North Carolina school committee, with a direct relationship to the local Tea Party, is in the process of converting area schools into “neighborhood” schools, effectively creating immediate re-segregation of those same schools.

Oh really? The story begins in March 2010, when the Wake County school board voted to end a policy of busing students far away from neighborhood schools to force diversity upon them (which means spreading out the black students among as many schools as possible to minimize the damage they cause). The new assignment policy is “aimed at placing students in schools near their homes.” Those FASCISTS!

Of course, they were disrupted by protesters, resulting in three arrests. Let’s see what those protesters have to say. We, after all, are civilized people, capable of dealing with dissent without crying and screaming and lashing out in all directions.

State NAACP chief William Barber recently accused the new board majority of having “racist attitudes” after the chairman referred to his opponents as “animals out of the cages.”

Spurious allegations of racism: check.

The NAACP supported the long-standing policy that uses socio-economic background rather than race to assign students, and Barber continued to question the board’s plans during Tuesday’s meeting.

Failing to acknowledge the causative relationship between race and race substitutes like socioeconomic status: check.

“It’s morally wrong. It’s legally wrong. It’s economically wrong,” he said of the proposed changes. “Your press to go backward will only serve to intensify our moral, political and legal fight to go forward. We will never go back.”

Imagining themselves as civil rights heroes fighting against discrimination, but actually just “[seeking] cheap grace by denouncing trivial offenses”: check, check.

Falling into theater

This would not be the last time the Wake County school board encountered opposition. It happened again in July 2010.

A mid-meeting disruption brought tonight’s Wake County school board meeting to a halt with a group of chanting protesters refusing to relinquish the microphone and police arresting more than a dozen of them.

During what had been a relatively quiet meeting, speaker Carolyn Coleman began a loud complaint to the board, then brought more than two dozen protesters forward to join her in chants of “forward ever! backwards never!” [Blah blah blah.] . . .

Duane Cutlip, a candidate for state house in Wake County, said the demonstration was unfortunate because it wasn’t a productive way of solving problems and because it involved adults taking advantage of young people.

“We have to come together as adults and discuss the differences rather than falling into theater,” Cutlip said.

Well, we should probably start by treating black people like adults who are responsible for their own actions, not as children. Definitely not as demigods.

In all, sixteen protesters were arrested that day, among them . . . wait for it . . .

Rev. William Barber, head of the state NAACP, and Rev. Nancy Petty, senior pastor at Pullen Memorial Baptist Church . . . arrested by Raleigh police as they stepped onto the property of the Wake school board administration building, defying a school district letter barring them from the grounds.

It’s not all bad, though. (It rarely is.)

Bill Randall, a black congressional candidate, said the diversity program is not the root of problems among low-achieving students.

“Let this school board do what they were elected to do,” Randall said.

Okay, that’s enough out of me. I could go on (and on and on) about this school desegregation business, but I think I’ve proved my point: there’s more to the story than bluesenbop would like us to believe.

It’s the third paragraph of his post that really bothers me, anyway.

Phase 1: Collect underprivilege. Phase 2: ? Phase 3: Prison.

BLUESENBOP: And, according to the 2010 census report, Black men (with supposedly infinitely enhanced educational opportunities) were 337 times more likely to be in prison than his Southern antebellum counterpart. Accordingly, if one includes those Black men on probation and parole, the total number exceeds the total number of American slaves in 1850.

Hm. He seems to be suggesting three things:

  1. blacks don’t really have enhanced educational opportunities, despite the hundreds of scholarships set aside for them, and their over-representation in colleges (note that this does not even factor in their lower average cognitive capabilities)
  2. a lack of “enhanced educational opportunities” is causing modern blacks to be in prison, presumably by causing them to commit crime (especially inter-racial crime) at a ridiculously high rate
  3. putting black criminals in prison is sort of like slavery

I think I’ve covered this before. My question is this: how many all-black scholarships must there be, before the supposed lack of enhanced education opportunities stops explaining black crime?

Minorities are our friends (with special benefits)

Just one more post to look at today. Because there’s so little substance to his arguments, I will be brief. Here, too, my comment was deleted.

BLUESENBOP: So, today, when we read or hear Tea Party advocates or any Right Wing talk show host raving about “minority privileges” and “minority rights,” we need to ask ourselves just what those privileges and rights are . . .

Here, let me clear that up for you. “Minority rights” are the same as everyone else’s in America. See: the Civil Rights Act. “Minority privileges” are how reasonable people describe, for example, the aforementioned hundreds of scholarships set aside for minorities; enforced affirmative action and racial quotas in hiring and university enrollment; the massive effort to close the achievement gap, which aims to improve blacks’ scholastic achievement only (as improving whites’ would be counterproductive); etc.

. . . and whether poor education, sub-standard housing, elevated prisoner status (the new Jim Crow), and low-life expectancy are part of this “special” benefits package.

The sad truth is that despite all the special privileges accorded blacks in America today, they have proven to be incapable, as a race, of attaining the same success as whites, as a race. This is very likely due to blacks’ lower average IQ (i.e., intelligence)—a fact for which I would be glad to provide overwhelming evidence.

Lower average IQ contributes to blacks’ lower rates of college graduation (for obvious reasons), lower income (thus the housing gap), and greatly elevated crime rates, which he euphemistically refers to as “elevated prisoner status”—as if the number of blacks in prison was not a consequence of their committing assault, robbery, rape, and murder at much higher rates than whites, or Asians for that matter! Again, overwhelming evidence available on request.

Okay, I’m done now. Have a wonderful day.

Read Full Post »

It all started over at Foseti. Blame him.

Welcome to the United States of Post-Racial America. Make sure to collect all luggage and small children, and have your passport and seven other forms of TSA-approved photo identification ready for the first of thirteen security checkpoints. After checkpoint one, would all travelers please line up in an orderly fashion for irradiation, enhanced interrogation, and full cavity search. Travelers with a “Religion of Peace” exemption may proceed directly to checkpoint thirteen.

Please remember that discrimination is illegal at all times and in all places in the United States of Post-Racial America. If you see, hear, suspect, feel, or sense discrimination by a white, male, or heterosexual person, report it immediately to the nearest Diversity Kiosk, located on every street corner in every city. For your convenience, here is a list of examples of unacceptable statements—also known as “hate facts”—and how to correct them.

For your own safety, of course.

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “Black men just keep raping white women at a ridiculously high rate.”

    ACCEPTABLE: “Today’s race-conscious African-American male seeks to overcome historical barriers to inter-racial unions, as well as discriminatory female consent practices.”

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “There’s black people out there, rioting, looting, and setting fire to grocery stores!”

    ACCEPTABLE: “Although partially blinded by my white privilege, I think I see some oppressed minorities fighting back against institutional racism, seeking social justice through involuntary reparations, and opening a combustion-based dialogue with the Korean community.”

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “Affirmative action and racial quotas are special treatment for minorities.”

    ACCEPTABLE: “Affirmative action and racial quotas are necessary to overcome the legacy of slavery which is still keeping any non-Asian minority from succeeding in Post-Racial America. Besides, white people are all rich, connected, and racially privileged, so the very notion of treating them unfairly is racist and stupid, and you are racist and stupid for saying it.”

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “Black people are different from white people.”

    ACCEPTABLE: “Race does not exist, except black people are better than white people in every way, and white people are all a bunch of racist assholes who deserve to be murdered in their sleep, and their bodies set on fire.”

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “A black woman is being held accountable for her own felonious behavior.”

    ACCEPTABLE: “It’s the next Rosa Parks!”

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “American blacks are not assimilating.”

    ACCEPTABLE: “American blacks are assimilating too much!”

  • UNACCEPTABLE: “President-For-Life and Supreme Ruler Obama is not the greatest leader in the history of the world, the perfect human being, and a living manifestation of the Divine, which is to say the Second Coming of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”

    ACCEPTABLE: You figure it out.

Read Full Post »

The Nuclear Contingency has been posted over at the Fiction Quarantine Zone, which (as the name suggests) is where I put my attempts at short fiction. If you came here to read about race and other serious things, feel free to skip.

Anyway the story won’t make sense if you haven’t read parts one and two. (Actually, it probably won’t make sense even if you have.)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: