Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Education’

I have updated my flyer on race and intelligence. The new and improved Version 2 is available in PDF format here and as a JPEG image below (click for the full-size image).

Again, I encourage you to share this flyer with anyone, anywhere. Give it to your friends. Give it to your enemies. Give it to your college professor. Go crazy. And use this information to utterly destroy your debate opponents.

Let me know if you find any mistakes, or if you would prefer a version with a less outrageous title.

Read Full Post »

Today, The New York Times and NewsOne (“For Black America”) are shocked — shocked — to find that Blacks and Hispanics still lag academically compared to Whites and Asians, after the College Board released a report entitled “The Educational Experience of Young Men of Color: A Review of Research, Pathways, and Progress” (.pdf version available here — at 96 pages, it’s not worth reading).

Of course, as we should all know by now, the achievement gap is the product of innate race differences in intelligence: Whites and Asians have superior mean cognitive abilities to Hispanics and (especially) Blacks, and the differences are largely genetic.

The intelligence gap is not my opinion. It is a scientific fact. Forget “The Bell Curve” (not that there’s anything wrong with it): you can read this in standard first-year college textbooks. And the data support a 50–80 percent genetic component to that gap.

The College Board report is just another example of how false assumptions about human nature, particularly race (specifically, that Blacks and Hispanics are just as smart as Whites and Asians) can create “racism” out of thin air.

1. False assumptions and unfounded conclusions

Of the College Board’s 2010 report “The Educational Crisis Facing Young Men of Color,” the author of the new report writes that after

two years of qualitative research into the issue of the comparative and, indeed, in some cases, the absolute lack of success that males of color are experiencing traversing the education pipeline… the findings in themselves were powerful reminders of the disparate opportunities available to different groups in the United States.

Of course, they did not actually find any evidence of “disparate opportunities,” meaning systemic White racism. They found evidence of disparate outcomes, and, assuming the non-existence of race differences in intelligence, pronounced them the product of malicious Whites keeping poor innocent minorities down.

Except Asians, of course, with their suspicious immunity to racism. Oh, and European Jews.

By “qualitative research,” they mean that they talked to some minorities:

These conversations, which we called Dialogue Days, engaged members of four groups — African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, Native Americans and Asian Americans — in a series of discourses designed to get at the issues confronting these young men as they followed or dropped out of the education pipeline.

There is no way this “qualitative research” could have told them anything about race differences in intelligence (or a lack thereof): the researchers didn’t administer intelligence tests, and they had an obvious sample bias, in that Black and Hispanic students who are willing to participate in “Dialogue Days” with education researchers are unlikely to be representative of Black and Hispanic students. This, however, does not stop the College Board from declaring that

[t]he conversations we held in 2008 and 2009 on this issue clearly showed one thing: There is no lack of talent in communities of color or among the young men in these communities.

Wishful thinking.

2. Comparisons are racist

It seems White intellectual superiority is fostering the perception of White intellectual superiority:

… although the notion of the “achievement gap” — particularly as it pertains to African American and white students — is prominently featured on all sides of mainstream education reform debates, some scholars argue that this framing of the problem is itself problematic (Perry, Steele et al. 2003; Love 2004). In a critical race theory analysis, Love (2004) posits that the achievement gap is a form of “majoritarian” storytelling that fosters the perception of white intellectual superiority. She notes, for example, that even though students of certain Asian ethnicities consistently outperform whites on various achievement measures, such disparities are never couched in terms of an achievement gap (Love 2004).

The reason why the East Asian-White achievement gap does not have to be “couched in terms of an achievement gap” is that Whites are not whiny little bitches, they are at least dimly aware of the staggering accomplishments of the White race, and they are capable of understanding concepts like averages. That is (roughly speaking) why, unlike Blacks and Hispanics, Whites don’t break down crying (or rioting) when you point out that East Asians are slightly more intelligent than they are, on average.

Perry, Steele and Hilliard (2003) suggest that the standard against which achievement disparities are assessed should be some measure of excellence for which all students should be striving rather than the performance of a norm group, which may in fact be mediocre.

So instead of comparing Blacks and Hispanics to Whites (the superior “norm group”), we are supposed to compare all races to “some measure of excellence” and see who’s the farthest from it, without ever comparing the groups to each. Brilliant.

If the performance of Whites is “mediocre,” what does that make Blacks and Hispanics? Abject failures?

3. The Asian sensation

The New York Times article on Asians:

The data about Asian/Pacific Islander men is particularly noteworthy. The authors cite the “model minority myth” — the assumption that a minority group is the superior, or “model,” group — and then challenge it, emphasizing that Asian men face problems similar to those of other minorities.

Actually, what the report has finally, sort-of discovered is that some Asians, like East Asians (mean IQ 105 at home, 101 in the USA), are smarter than other Asians, like Southeast Asians (mean IQ 87, 93 in the USA), Pacific Islanders (mean IQ 85), and South Asians (mean IQ 84) (source: Richard Lynn’s “Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis”).

Next, the New York Times is surprised to discover that affirmative action is working as intended, filling our schools with unqualified Blacks and American Indians, and keeping out smart Asians:

Perhaps one of the most surprising statistics is that Asian male enrollment over the last two decades (1990-2008) dropped by 9 percentage points. In comparison, African-American enrollment increased by 15 percent, while Native American enrollment increased by over 120 percent.

4. The cure for mythical White racism: a lot more anti-White racism

First among the College Board’s six uniformly idiotic and hopeless recommendations on how to fix tens of thousands of years of human evolution:

Policymakers must make improving outcomes for young men of color a national priority.

More affirmative action! More race quotas! More criminally inept Hispanic lawyers! More fatally incompetent Black doctors!

Merit? Fairness? Equality under the law? Forget it, White people. It’s Black-Run America.

Read Full Post »

I have previously noted that should you choose the path of compassionate reactionism and take this conversation off the Internet, it might help to have a few relevant fact sheets (like, say, “Black People Are More Criminal Than White People”) written by someone else, on whom the liberal rage and malice and cries of racism can be dumped, i.e. me.

To that end, I have prepared a second flyer, entitled “There Are Innate Racial Differences in Intelligence.” I had some help from Chuck at Occidentalist, but any outrageous errors or unsubstantiated opinions are all mine. A .pdf version is available here, and a .jpeg version is available below (click for the full-size image). Links to my sources (or equivalent) appear below.

I encourage you to share this flyer with anyone, anywhere. I hope you find it useful. Let me know if you find any mistakes, or if you would prefer a version with minor modifications of your choosing, such as a less outrageous title.

Sources

The statement “Mainstream Science on Intelligence” is available here.

Linda Gottfredson has plenty of papers on the general mental ability factor g. Hunter & Schmidt’s 2004 article “General Mental Ability in the World of Work: Occupational Attainment and Job Performance” is available for purchase here; Chuck sent me a copy (available on request).

The IQ gap (and the 80% heritability statistic for adults) are widely known; you can start with the American Renaissance guide. Find “Human Biological Variation” at your local library or college campus.

Roth et al.’s (in)famous 2001 meta-study “Ethnic Group Differences in Cognitive Ability and Educational Setting” is available in .pdf form here. You can read about the Kansas City desegregation experiment here. (The term “epic fail” springs to mind.)

Here is the source of Steven Pinker’s quotation. His dangerous idea (answer to the 2006 annual Edge question) is that “groups of people may differ genetically in their average talents and temperaments.”

Chuck at Occidentalist can tell you all about race, income, and SAT scores.

The Rushton and Jensen article “Wanted: More Race Realism, Less Moralistic Fallacy” (2005) is available in .pdf form here. The paper “Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies” in The American Journal of Human Genetics, available here, shows a 99.86 percent success rate matching self-reported race to genetic clusters. I wrote about the failure of studies claiming the gap is environmental without controlling for genes in my post “Income and IQ.”

Jared Taylor briefly discusses regression to the mean, in the context of Jensen’s research, in this issue of American Renaissance.

You can read about the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study on Wikipedia, for instance.

Here is Jensen (1994) talking about 1 in 4 Blacks having an IQ less than 75. Gottfredson’s “g: Highly General and Highly Practical” (2002) is available here. American Renaissance profiles Levin (1997) in this issue.

Read Full Post »

Believe it or not, the ever expanding “Blacks Mobs” series was originally intended to be a single post (maybe two) simply listing incidents of black flash mob violence. But my research turned up something much more disturbing (and therefore much more interesting): the nearly universal suppression of the “race angle,” i.e., the fact that the violent mobs seem to be 100 percent African-American.

So much for my “Black Mobs” series. I could hardly just list the articles without also exposing their race denialism. And there’s a lot of that to expose. So I blended ghetto black dysfunction (GBD) with liberal media bias (LMB), and somehow the result, “Black Mobs and the Second Law of Race and Crime” (part 1) is turning out to be much more critical toward blacks than a pure GBD article would have been.

It’s not really a mystery:

  • black people attacking white people: grrr, bad!
  • white people ignoring black people attacking white people: YOU F#@%*^$ IDIOT A*#%^!&@, LOOK WHAT THEY’RE DOING TO US etc.

(My condemnations of white delusions about black dysfunctions are nothing if not enthusiastic.)

Anyway, Unamusement Park has been unusually hard on black people these last few days — hardly in keeping with the (poorly defined) tenets of compassionate reactionism. I therefore resolve to sprinkle in some posts about black people I admire.

First and foremost is Thomas Sowell.

Who is Thomas Sowell?

Thomas Sowell is an economist, social theorist, political philosopher, and author, and currently a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution (a public policy think tank and library) at Stanford University.

He's black, which is very important to liberals, because it means he can't be racist.

Dr. Sowell has written books opposing affirmative action, supporting inherent ethnic differences, and exposing how white liberals are destroying black culture, among many other things. His articles (2000-present) are archived at Townhall.com, and we’ll be looking at a few of them tonight. Some of his essays are collected in Ever Wonder Why? and Other Controversial Essays, available in .pdf format here. Part VII is all about racial issues.

Sowell’s Critics

Some people criticize Dr. Sowell. Some of them criticize his ideas about race. Some of them are black. This post is not about those people. But here’s a taste, anyway: Deborah Toler writing in The Public Eye (September 1993).

For most African Americans the notion of a Black conservative is an oxymoron. The overwhelming majority of us [blacks] reject conservative political positions because we understand in concrete, everyday, practical terms what conservative policies are and who conservatives are, and we know both are racist. Conservative policies are Republican vetoes of civil rights bills, opposition to affirmative action, and Willie Horton campaign ads. Conservatives are Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Jesse Helms, David Duke, and Pat Buchanan. Enough said.

Got that? If you oppose affirmative action (i.e., discrimination against whites and Asians for the benefit of undeserving blacks and Hispanics, motivated by the “race is only skin deep” myth), then you might as well veto civil rights. And Ronald Reagan (“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”) is no better than David Duke (“the Holocaust is the device used as the pillar of Zionist imperialism, Zionist aggression, Zionist terror and Zionist murder”).

Well, that’s not crazy at all.

I'm paraphrasing.

Some Articles by Dr. Sowell

“The Fallacy of ‘Fairness'” (part 1), from February 2010, is a four-part series on — well, you figure it out. “Race and Politics” (part 1), from April, is another good four-parter. “Race Card Fraud” (July 20) is a much needed defense of the Tea Party.

“Bean-Counters and Baloney” (August 13) is all about the fallacy that disparate impact implies disparate treatment.

Anyone who has watched football over the years has probably seen at least a hundred black players score touchdowns — and not one black player kick the extra point. Is this because of some twisted racist who doesn’t mind black players scoring touchdowns but hates to see them kicking the extra points?

At our leading engineering schools — M.I.T., CalTech, etc. — whites are under-represented and Asians over-represented. Is this anti-white racism or pro-Asian racism? Or are different groups just different?

Finally, Sowell’s two-part series “The Multicultural Cult” is particularly appropriate in light of “Black Mobs and the Second Law of Race and Crime.” From part 1 (October 19):

Multiculturalism is not just a recognition that different groups have different cultures. We all knew that, long before multiculturalism became a cult that has spawned mindless rhapsodies about “diversity,” without a speck of evidence to substantiate its supposed benefits.

In Germany, as in other countries in Europe, welcoming millions of foreign workers who insist on remaining foreign has created problems so obvious that only the intelligentsia could fail to see them. It takes a high IQ to evade the obvious.

Multiculturalists condemn people’s objections to transplanting hoodlums, criminals and dysfunctional families into the midst of people who may have sacrificed for years to be able to escape from living among hoodlums, criminals and dysfunctional families.

The actual direct experience of the people who complain about the consequences of these social experiments is often dismissed as mere biased “perceptions” or “stereotypes,” if not outright “racism.” But some of the strongest complaints have come from middle-class blacks who have fled ghetto life, only to have the government transplant ghetto life back into their midst.

These rioting "teens" certainly defy description.

From part 2 (October 20):

[T]oday, attempts to get black or Hispanic youngsters to speak the language of the society around them are decried by multiculturalists. And any attempt to get them to behave according to the cultural norms of the larger society is denounced as “cultural imperialism,” if not racism.

The multicultural dogma is that we are to “celebrate” all cultures, not change them. In other words, people who lag educationally or economically are to keep on doing what they have been doing — but somehow have better results in the future than in the past. And, if they don’t have better results in the future, it is society’s fault.

And that’s just from 2010.

Some Videos Featuring Dr. Sowell

First: “Thomas Sowell Dismantles Egalitarianism,” in which black people in the United States are found not to express concern, damn it.

Black people have never supported, for example, affirmative action, quotas — anything of that sort. Wherever polls have been taken of black opinion, on such matters of “should people be paid equally?”… black people have never taken the position that you [Frances Fox Piven, socialist, AA supporter] describe.

Second: “Thomas Sowell – Diversity,” in which the magic powers of diversity are disputed.

[“Diversity”] is a word that has become magic! What does it mean, if anything? Are you saying to me that all black people are alike, therefore you’ve got to mix and match by race [i.e., implement affirmative action]?

Third: “Playing the Race Card at Every Turn,” in which race-baiting demagogues are denounced.

[Blacks of my generation] knew there was going to be a barrier. We would just keep going over and through them, around them, and whatever. But now you’ve raised a whole generation of people who think it’s absolutely hopeless.

[“Who’s telling them that?”] Oh, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton — you can run through the whole list of them.

[“But it can’t all be just blacks.”] No, there are all sorts of whites who are saying the same thing, you know: that every statistical disparity is proof that there are these huge barriers out there.

Fourth: “Thomas Sowell – Welfare,” in which welfare is seen for what it is.

What the welfare system and other kinds of governmental programs are doing is paying people to fail: insofar as they fail, they receive the money. Insofar as they succeed, even to a moderate extent, the money is taken away.

This is even extended into the school systems, where they will give money to schools with low scores. Insofar as the school improves its education, the money is taken away, so that you are subsidizing people to fail in their own private lives, and become more dependent upon the handouts.

Fifth: “Liberal Animosity” (short and to the point), in which a phenomenon familiar to conservatives, reactionaries, and realists of all stripes, is remarked upon.

People who have the constrained vision [conservatives] understand that people will make mistakes, and so therefore when someone says something they disagree with, that to them is just one of the examples of it [i.e., making a mistake]. They see no need to question his sincerity or honesty or whatever.

But for those with the unconstrained vision [liberals], what they believe seems so obviously true, that if you’re standing in the way of it, either you must be incredibly stupid, utterly uninformed, or simply dishonest.

As I’ve pointed out on a number of occasions, the more you know about race, the more likely you are to be called “ignorant” by someone who doesn’t actually know anything about the subject, “biased” by someone who will not be swayed by any amount of evidence, and “hateful” by… well, probably the nastiest people you’ll ever encounter.

Our Very First “Hobie”

In conclusion, I am pleased to announce that Unamusement Park’s first annual Big Smelly Hobo Hug Award for Excellence in Being a Black Conservative, or BSHHAEBBC — also known as the Hobie — goes to… Thomas Sowell!

Big smelly hobo hugs!

Wheeee

Read Full Post »

Colorlines is a great bastion of liberal lunacy, including but not limited to race denialism, anti-white bias, and illegal-immigrant advocacy (see “Your ideas are stupid and so are you (part 3)”). Since we’ve been talking about black flash mob violence in Philadelphia lately, I thought it would be fun to show you their take on the matter. It’s five sentences long, and it’s going to take me the rest of this post to break down everything that’s wrong with it.

For your consideration: “4 Campaigns Holding Big Media Accountable for How It Treats Us”. The third campaign is called “Philly Students Fight Back.”

Fight back? That’s odd. I didn’t realize the aggressor could do that.

1. “Sensationalized”

Black and brown youth in Philadelphia have gotten an especially bad wrap [sic] in recent years, thanks in part to often sensationalized media coverage of “flash mobs.”

The word “especially” implies that black and brown youth in Philadelphia have always gotten a bad rap; that is, that the news media are biased against black people. It’s one of those liberal talking points that everyone is supposed to accept unquestioningly. It couldn’t be more wrong.

It’s my Second Law of Race and Crime: the news media are biased in favor of black people. The coverage of flash mobs in Philadelphia is a spectacular example. Far from sensationalizing it, the media have been downplaying their increasing size, frequency, and severity of violence, and almost universally censoring the fact that the rioters are always black. In fact, just by putting the words “black and brown youth” and “flash mobs” in the same article (let alone the same sentence), Colorlines is giving the race angle more coverage than ABC, NBC, AOL, The New York Times, the New York Daily News, the Philadelphia Daily News, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and the Digital Journal… put together.

2. “The scourge of this country”

Maybe I’m not being fair to Colorlines. Sure, they didn’t bother to present any evidence of anti-black media bias, but maybe it’s out there somewhere. Let’s track it down.

Armstrong Williams is a conservative black commentator, and author of “The Media’s Bias Against Black Men in America”. He claims that certain “negative statistics” are being used to “consistently cast black men as the scourge of this country.” He accepts that they are “not altogether erroneous,” i.e. true. However, he says,

a statistic cannot give balance or provide a larger context to the story. The statistics often do not cover the remarkable advancement many American black men have made in the last half century, nor do they report on the collapse of many white men in the same era.

It is not clear why newspapers should be covering the advances of American black men (or the supposed collapse of many white men) in the last fifty or a hundred years. History textbooks? Yes. Encyclopedias? Sure. But newspapers?

What I really want to discuss are his statistics, which are supposed to prove the collapse of white men in America. Actually, there are only two sets of statistics: the race of young adult cocaine users, and the race of serial killers.

According to the federal Centers for Disease Control, a white adolescent male is four times more likely than his African-American classmate to be a regular cocaine user. Whites are 66 percent of 18- to 25-year-olds, and yet they are 70 percent of drug users in that age group. Blacks are 13.5 percent of persons in that age group and only 13 percent of young adult drug users…

And Hispanics adolescent males are twice as likely as whites to be regular cocaine users — fascinating stuff. Unfortunately, according to the Office of Applied Studies (OAS) of the US Department of Health and Human Services, blacks “significantly underreport” cocaine use, which has “important implications [for] racial/ethnic comparisons.”

A 2009 report by the Office of Applied Studies (OAS) of the US Department of Health and Human Services puts the overall rate of illicit drug use (all drugs, all ages, both sexes) at 10.1 percent for blacks and 8.2 percent for whites (.pdf). Did Mr. Williams just browse through combinations of drug and age group until he found a pair (cocaine and 18-25) that favored black men over white men? I don’t know. What are these statistics supposed to prove about media bias? I don’t know that either.

On the topic of serial killers, Mr. Williams has this to say:

Approximately 9 out of 10 serial killers are white males between the ages of 20 and 35. Yet we never hear these statistics repeated over and over again in the mainstream press, making these crimes synonymous with one particular race as is the case with blacks.

His statistic is wrong. According to research by the Society for Police and Criminal Psychology and Radford University, “[a]fter controlling for demographic changes across decades, the race of serial killers seems to mirror that of the United States.” Blacks make up 20.4 percent of serial killers (.pdf). (It’s also deceptive to use the number of serial killers per race instead of the rate by race. There are, after all, many more white people than black people.)

This is all a red herring anyway. Serial killers, of any race, are responsible for a negligible percentage of violence in the United States. Ghetto blacks, on the other hand… You see, statistically speaking, the crimes that are “synonymous” with blacks include robbery, assault, rape, and murder. This is especially the case with interracial crime: blacks target whites. (Blacks are over 100 times more likely to rob whites than vice versa, and almost 60 times more likely to commit any kind of violent crime against them.) The media try their best to avoid it, as we’ve seen, but you can’t always cover up the color of crime.

Media bias against blacks? I remain unconvinced. Try to find the evidence yourself. You may want to compare it to this series, or to Ian Jobling’s “Liberal Media Bias and the Myth of White Racism”.

3. “Public dancing”

Let’s get back to Colorlines and look at the second sentence.

The mobs, known for being spontaneous and sometimes confusing displays of public dancing, were widely reported as being violent and, sometimes, deadly.

… Wait, what?

First, it is a fact that the mobs were violent. This is indisputable. Second, it was never reported (let alone widely reported) that the mobs were deadly (i.e., killed someone). (See parts one and two of “Black Mobs and the Second Law of Race and Crime.”)

Third — ah, this is quite clever of them. Flash mobs are overwhelmingly non-violent and often involve dancing. But the campaign isn’t complaining that those flash mobs get “sensationalized media coverage,” which in turn gives “[b]lack and brown youth in Philadelphia… an especially bad [rap].” Between “public dancing” and “widely reported as being violent,” the subject changes from flash mobs in general (public dancing) to black flash mobs (vandalism, robbery and assault).

Colorlines is lying to you.

4. Crackdown

And they’re going to keep lying to you.

Lawmakers in the city have since cracked down on the city’s youngest and most vulnerable residents, imposing city-wide curfews that, if broken, can lead to [hefty] fines.

So now that they’ve tricked you into thinking the black kids were just dancing, which confused those lame white people so much they called the police, Colorlines brings city-wide curfews and hefty fines into the narrative. I thought Footloose was better. Oh, this was supposed to be non-fiction, wasn’t it?

The curfew was already in place well before the riots. The police just announced that they were going “step up enforcement,” and “tighten it if there is another incident” (The New York Times). Now why would they do that? Maybe it had something to do with the violent flash mobs, which tend to happen at night, and are mostly made up of teenagers.

Technically, the city’s youngest and most vulnerable residents are infants, toddlers, and the like, who are unlikely to be affected by a nighttime curfew. The residents in question are teenagers — all teenagers, regardless of race. See, the blacks started a bunch of riots, so white kids have to go home early. Thus, “vulnerable” acts as a code word for “criminal, but black, so it must be society’s fault somehow.”

5. Okay, here’s the plan

Philly-based Media Mobilizing Project has helped counter the negative attention. They’ve documented how young people and students with the Campaign for Non-Violent Schools is calling for non-violence, more jobs, and better access to quality education.

That’s a good plan, you young people and students. First, shout out “don’t be violent!” Wait, I thought the mobs were just dancing, and the violence was a lie told by the media to make us hate black people. Why do we need to call for non-violence? Or does this have nothing to do with the flash mobs?

Next, demand that the government create more jobs out of thin air. More jobs will certainly keep these teenagers off the streets at night… somehow. Except we already decided the teenagers weren’t the problem. How are new jobs going to reduce media bias? I’m starting to think this Campaign for Non-Violent Schools isn’t addressing the problem of flash mobs at all. Why are they in the Colorlines article?

Finally, call for better access to quality education, the idea being that white society will not permit ghetto black teenagers to get a quality education. The sad truth is that a lot of them — specifically, the kind of blacks, and the kind of teenagers, who like to form violent flash mobs — will not permit anyone to give them a quality education (source). They don’t seem to want more jobs, either. And they certainly don’t seem susceptible to the “please mister, don’t rob, rape and/or murder anyone” approach to crime prevention. If I had to give a parsimonious explanation for the behavior of this subset of ghetto black teenagers, I would suggest that they do what they do because they want to do it. They want to do drugs, sleep around, collect welfare checks, and riot in the streets. Call it a “lifestyle choice,” if you like.

If someone has another theory, I’d love to hear it.

Read Full Post »

Our ongoing series “Blacks Mobs and the Second Law of Race and Crime” (part 1, part 2) documents the uniquely African-American phenomenon of flash mob violence, where hundreds or even thousands of “teens” or “youths” (code for “black felons”), coordinated by social media, assemble without warning in a public place to riot, loot, assault random bystanders, and generally trash as much of the city as possible.

“Come to South Street,” they say. “Bring baseball bats,” they Tweet. “Black boys” and “burn the city,” they chant. They also really seem to enjoy beating up white people. Never heard of them? You just proved the Second Law of Race and Crime: the news media are biased in favor of black people.

1. Introducing Unamusement Park’s patented Dominant Race Reversal Ray (DRRR) (patent pending)

If you don’t believe me, imagine this story with the races reversed. Go on, indulge me with a Thoughtful Analysis of Racial Discombobulation — a TARDis, if you will. (It’s blacker on the inside.) After all, this is what “anti-racists” keep telling me I should do: imagine what discrimination feels like from a different perspective; put myself in a black person’s shoes, and try to — hey, these are my shoes.

Anyway, we don’t need to imagine it, because we have the DRRR. Fire away!

Yes, of course I put the DRRR in space. Duh.

Okay, what did we get?

  1. Hundreds of white teenagers, organizing themselves on the Internet, assemble in the commercial district of a major American city. They promptly start a riot — running through traffic, vandalizing and robbing stores, knocking down bystanders… all that stuff.
  2. This mob seems to target black people for brutal beatings. They might even openly declare this “Beat a Nigger Night.” There are reliable reports that white teens beat a black bicyclist until he had a seizure, then laughed at him; or that they ambushed a young black woman and, still laughing, punched her face apart.
  3. Events like these occur four times in two months in one city.
  4. Everyone agrees: this has nothing to do with race. These white kids just need more extracurricular activities to keep them occupied.
  5. The news media are not particularly interested in covering the story, and they consistently omit the races of the rioters and their victims (as in not one mention).
  6. When The New York Times puts a picture of actual white rioters next to a story about the latest, biggest, and most violent white riot, it is seen as a sign of racial stereotyping.

Is this black-white reversal plausible? Sure… in the magical fantasy world of the race denialists, where a vast anti-black conspiracy permeates every level of society, from the common man — which is to say the right-wing white-trash black-hating redneck (sometimes called “the taxpayer,” but only by the kind of racist scum who oppose the free money for all black people forever model of the welfare state) — all the way to the highest levels of government.

Presumably this does not include the President. Or any state government with a (witness-tampering, perjuring) black governor. Or any city government with a (criminally insane or grossly incompetent and corrupt) black mayor.

2. April 2010

By April, someone in Philadelphia was finally willing to report what we all know to be true. Someone was finally willing to describe this photograph:

These teens certainly defy description.

And he got away with it, because he’s black. Hey, I’m not complaining. Sidney Harris Jr.’s article “Who’s to blame for bad flash-mob apples?” (April 2; philly.com) truly is the best five paragraphs of mainstream media race reporting you’ll read all year.

WHEN YOU look at the flash mob, you realize it’s the black teens doing all of this. (I’m a black person myself.) The white kids aren’t doing this, they’re busy playing sports, or after-school activities. It’s terrible how our community has to always have bad apples, rotten to the core.

But I don’t think police and the city should hold parents accountable for what these kids do. These kids are hardheaded, rude and ignorant. If you lock up the parents, how are they going to pay their bills?

Outstanding. All that’s missing is a scientific (HBD) explanation of why their community has to always have bad apples — but now I’m just being greedy.

Everybody is sick of the mobs, and what happens if this activity goes to other cities in New York and New Jersey? You could have copycats.

Unfortunately, we already had them. We just didn’t know it yet.

3. The April 10 Kansas City Plaza flash mob

I’m sure by now you’re bored with black riots in Philadelphia. Well, you’re in luck, because by April they had spread to other cities! (Did I say “you’re in luck”? I meant “you’re totally fucked.”)

The scene of the crime: the Country Club Plaza in Kansas City.

“What’s going on at the Country Club Plaza?” Asked Kansas City Business Journal on the Monday after the riot. Excellent question.

The Kansas City Police Department said that between 750 and 1,000 youngsters [sic] descended on Kansas City’s heralded and austere shopping and entertainment district on Saturday night.

By the end of the night, police were using pepper spray to diffuse various problems being caused on the Plaza.

Among those:

  • One guy was punched in the face hard enough to break his jaw.
  • A woman on a prom date was shoved into a fountain.
  • There was a report of a strong-arm robbery.
  • There were reports of property damage and some businesses closing down early because of the problems.

… [I]t’s perhaps not surprising that some are calling it nothing less than a riot. … It certainly wasn’t a surprise to me.

It’s become an increasingly common sight on the Plaza to see groups of youngsters [sic] who clearly are not old enough to be frequenting the nightlife establishments.

The article denies this was a flash mob, citing Captain Rich Lockhart of the KCPD, but that story didn’t last. (Aside: I wish my name were Captain Rich Lockhart.) According to The Kansas City Star (“KCPD: Plaza crowds were planned”):

The gathering of rowdy teens [sic] on the Country Club Plaza Saturday evening was planned and not a random event, Kansas City police said this morning.

Students [sic] from different high schools throughout the area had been using Twitter and Facebook to plan an “unruly gathering” last week, said Officer Darin Snapp, a police spokesman.

4. “Youths”

Let’s play a game. Watch this April 10 KMBC report on the Plaza mob (“Plaza Brawls Caught On Camera: Witnesses Describe Hundreds Of Teens Involved In Unrest”), and count the number of times they mention race. At the same time, count the number of non-black people who appear in the amateur video footage of the riot.

If you can’t count higher than zero, that’s okay. You won’t have to.

KMBC, in “Flash-Mob Event May Have Led To Plaza Melee: Police Estimated 700 To 900 Youths On Plaza Saturday Night” (April 2), also managed to find two new victims, while missing all the other ones.

Kansas City Police Chief Jim Corwin said Saturday’s gathering was posted on Facebook. Police estimate that between 700 and 900 youths [sic], some as young as 11, were involved in the Plaza disturbance.

… Two people were attacked — a man and woman. The woman said her purse was taken and someone tried to pull a ring right off her finger.

The accompanying video footage of flash mobs (also available on YouTube) is interesting. Four are shown:

  1. a peaceful, virtually all-white flash mob in Seattle; they performed songs from the TV show Glee
  2. a peaceful, apparently all-white flash mob in Washington, DC; they had a snowball fight, until a black cop freaked out and started waving his gun around
  3. the violent, all-black flash mob from the Country Club Plaza; they rioted
  4. a peaceful, apparently all-white flash mob; they… did something weird

Of course, the reporters didn’t make the unmentionable connection here either. I’m starting to think the liberal fantasy of a metaphorically color-blind society isn’t a fantasy or a metaphor. They simply do not see race when it fails to support their politics; that is, when it fails to flatter minorities.

5. You know that thing you’re ignoring? Stop ignoring it.

This time, it fell to the intrepid Yael T. Abouhalkah to state the obvious. (Despite the name, he has no protective coloring.) In “Don’t Ignore Racial Aspect of Plaza Mobs” (April 13; Kansas City Star, via American Renaissance), he wrote:

The out-of-control teens who terrorized parts of the Country Club Plaza Saturday night were mostly black youths.

Stating it that factually disturbs some people, who would rather use euphemisms such as “urban” youth or some such words. [No kidding.] …

The kids who showed up Saturday night came from schools that included — but were not limited to — Raytown and Westport highs, according to police. Both schools have high populations of black students. …

Why are the black kids going to the Plaza?

I certainly don’t have all the answers, but one obvious reason: That’s where the crowd of mostly white adults hangs out.

And the youth know their presence will be disturbing to people who aren’t used to seeing so many black kids in one place.

How refreshing. All that’s missing is the unmentionable reason why many black kids in one place would be disturbing (not merely surprising) to white adults: because they have experience with black kids.

6. Wherefore Plaza riots?

This was not the first disturbance in the Plaza, according to Tony’s Kansas City. The problem started at least a week earlier. And it was still going on in September of that year.

But why should anyone care? It’s probably just white racists… somehow. In his September post “ONE LAST COUNTRY CLUB PLAZA FLASH MOB OR JUST SCARED WHITE PEOPLE?!?!,” Tony theorizes that “[w]hite people panic whenever minority youth congregate.” He knows what’s been going on in the Plaza since at least early April, but he can’t believe it doesn’t somehow involve white racists.

Race realist commenters debunk his knee-jerk anti-white sentiment, and are promptly dismissed as white supremacists by right-thinking left-wing drones. So it goes.

A post at BlogKC — “Teens [sic] migrate from Westport [which is 31 percent black] to the Country Club Plaza” — is amusing because it offers an almost unbelievably simplistic race-denying explanation for the continuing problem of black dysfunction: “[a] lack of options for teens to safely hang out and socialize leads to them congregating unsupervised.”

It is promptly torn apart by the commenters. “Are you really that stupid?” Asks “Tupac.” (Short and to the point.)

I picked up a couple of remarks on Unamusement Park’s “chimp-out” tracker, as well: “We have the right to peacefully enjoy our evening without threats and interference from these animals,” suggests “ProfessorZ” (no relation). “Kevin” agrees: “You’re just a big bunch of ANIMALS now!”

But even the most pathetic race-denying explanation for black dysfunction is better than denying the dysfunction exists at all. “To me it seems like the only thing these kids did wrong was to be young and African American on the Plaza,” writes commenter “Julia.”

The worst race denialists are truly beyond parody.

Read Full Post »

On February 16, 2010, a violent flash mob of about 150 teenagers descended on the Center City commercial area of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. They robbed stores, vandalized property, fought amongst themselves, and attacked bystanders at random. According to the available evidence, the mob was 100 percent African-American.

Try finding that in a newspaper, though.

No, the racial makeup of this small-scale riot wasn’t worth reporting — or rather, it was well worth not reporting. Even the handful of online news outlets that mentioned race at all would only admit that most of the teenagers were black, and that was only so they could excuse them of their criminal misbehavior, citing racist store owners and police. (White, of course.)

Ten teenagers have since been convicted of rioting, a felony. An article at philly.com, “Flash mob teens face the music at Family Court” (March 23), also makes no mention of race, but between this picture of a rioting suspect’s parents…

The parents of a suspected February rioter.

… and the reference on page 2 to a 15-year-old Simon Gratz High School student with a 2-month-old son, I think we can safely say these aren’t Asian kids.

I suppose we’re lucky to even hear about this. Similar attacks in May, June, and December of 2009 got even less coverage. What little information is available about the May and June flash mobs (including this video) suggests they were 100 percent African-American, too. (The strongest evidence of all is the fact that no one will report the race of the rioters.)

By the end of March, though, not even* the mainstream media would be able to ignore the reality of black flash mob violence in Philadelphia.

*I’m disgusted I had to write that: the problem was so bad, not even the mainstream media — y’know, the people who are supposed to keep us informed? — not even they could pretend it doesn’t exist.

1. The March 3 Center City flash mob

From ABC Action News: “16 charged in violent Center City flash mob” (March 4, 2010). The article not only omit the races (or rather race) of the perpetrators, it also blurs their faces in the video.

The blurs are black.

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s office announced Thursday that 16 people will be charged with felony rioting after a violent flash mob incident in Center City on Wednesday. …

Police say, at around 4:30 p.m., a mob of about 50 to 100 people suddenly converged in the 1400 block of Chestnut Street when a fistfight broke out, and then the crowd began running towards 11th and Market and the Gallery.

… Police say the group was on a rampage, dodging in and out of traffic and causing all sorts of havoc. Fortunately, city and SEPTA transit police have had a beefed up presence in the area since last month’s flash mob incident and were able to move in quickly before the teens could move into the Gallery where they were believed to be headed.

Second verse, same as the first: big black mob, no mention of race. I include this example of lower-class black dysfunction for the sake of completeness, and as a prelude to the main event. See below.

2. The March 20 South Street flash mob

From The New York Times (March 24, 2010): “Mobs Are Born as Word Grows by Text Message.”

It started innocently enough seven years ago as an act of performance art… [But] these so-called flash mobs have taken a more aggressive and raucous turn here [in Philadelphia] as hundreds of teenagers [sic] have been converging downtown for a ritual that is part bullying, part running of the bulls: sprinting down the block, the teenagers sometimes pause to brawl with one another, assault pedestrians or vandalize property.

The police responded immediately, cracking down on violent flash mobs by — um, announcing plans to “step up enforcement of a curfew already on the books, and to tighten it if there is another incident.” Another incident? You mean a fifth black riot in two months?

In the past year, at least four of the flash mobs have broken out in the city, including one on Saturday [March 20] in which roving teenagers broke into fights, several onlookers were injured and at least three people were arrested.

Here’s a picture of the Saturday night riot.

Fill in the blank: "thousands of _____ teenagers."

“It was like a tsunami of kids,” said Seth Kaufman, 20, a pizza deliveryman at Olympia II Pizza & Restaurant on South Street. He lifted his shirt to show gashes along his back and arm. He also had bruises on his forehead he said were from kicks and punches he suffered while trying to keep a rowdy crowd from entering the shop, where a fight was already under way.

“By the time you could hear them yelling, they were flooding the streets and the stores and the sidewalks,” Mr. Kaufman said.

The flash mobs have raised questions about race and class.

What questions would those be? “Why do poor black people insist on ruining America in every conceivable way?” Or perhaps: “If all the white people moved out of Philadelphia, which they probably should, how long until the city succumbs to barbarism, like our very own backyard Liberia?”

The next three sentences deserve a Pulitzer Prize. No, really. That’s how bad race reporting is, these days.

Most of the teenagers who have taken part in them are black and from poor neighborhoods. Most of the areas hit have been predominantly white business districts.

In the flash mob on Saturday, groups of teenagers were chanting “black boys” and “burn the city,” bystanders said.

Not to worry, though. Race is definitely not a factor:

Mayor Nutter, who is black, rejected the notion that race or the city cut in services was a factor.

“I don’t think people should be finding excuses for inappropriate behavior,” Mr. Nutter said. “There is no racial component to stupid behavior…”

Unfortunately, there are racial components to both stupidity and criminality. That’s why Unamusement Park will never feature a series about violent white flash mobs: because they don’t exist.

3. Why do we even have newspapers anymore?

If you want the truth about black flash mobs, you need to turn to the Internet. No, I don’t mean me, although when I finish this series, it should serve as a guide to black flash mob violence in 2010.

As early as March 21 (the day after the South Street riot), A Race Against Time had the real story, complete with links, photos (of black people, obviously), and even — gasp — races.

Thousands of black teenagers swarmed a South Philadelphia neighborhood Saturday night… Several white workers were attacked…

A similar “flash mob” took place on the same street last May, in which black teenagers looted a convenience store, carjacked and crashed a taxi cab, and pulled white motorists from their vehicles and assaulted them. In addition to the two South Philly incidents, mobs of black teenagers have attacked pedestrians in the Center City neighborhood three times in the last three months.

Police say the black teenagers are using social networking sites to coordinate their mayhem. The flash mob last May was organized via the website OurSpace, which is “an online social location that provides African Americans a superior way to connect with others whom share similar experiences and perspectives.”

Hey, where's the fire? Oh, I see. You just started it.

In the comments: “These thugs are like a bunch of out of control animals, and many whites turn on their own race to stand up for them.” Sounds like a fair comparison to me.

BucksRight has honest coverage, too. You can tell just from the title: “Racist, Violent Flash Mobs Paralyze Philadelphia.”

On the other hand, here are some more mainstream news outlets that decided the race angle wasn’t worth reporting.

  1. From philly.com: “Police struggle with ‘flash mob’ on South Street” (March 21).

    Philadelphia police said a “flash mob” with thousands of teenagers and young adults [sic] swarmed South Street last night causing businesses to close early and bringing law enforcement from across the city to control the crowd.

    Thousands of people, apparently all (or nearly all) the same race, yet no mention of that race in the article. I think it’s fair to say this qualifies as a cover-up.

  2. From AOL News: “Texting Spurs Sometimes Violent Flash Mobs” (March 25).

    Last week, the fourth mob of the year broke out in Philadelphia, with unruly teenagers [sic] fighting and injuring several onlookers while chanting “burn the city.”

    “Burn the city,” and? Something about “black boys,” right?

  3. From Mashable: “Violent Flash Mobs Becoming a Problem in Philly” (March 28).

    Flash mobs are usually associated with randomized fun (or pantlessness), but in Philly, they’re basically akin to randomized violence.

    Because they’re made up of what kind of people?

4. The face of white victimhood

The very best you’ll find in the mainstream media is “Another Flash Mob Rocks South Street” (March 22) from the Philadelphia Daily News, which features a timeline of the riot, as well as a full account of Seth Kaufman’s beating. (He’s the pizza deliveryman from section 2.) The article is no longer available online, but American Renaissance has a copy.

Inspired by Twitter messages to “come to South Street,” police say hundreds — business owners say thousands — of young teens [sic] stampeded down South Street in waves, jumping on top of cars, knocking over pedestrians and fighting and cursing.

… Saturday’s was the sixth flash mob to hit the city since last May: three on South Street; two in the Gallery, including one that spread to Macy’s; and one along Market Street East that spread to the area near City Hall.

… One youth [sic] was overheard on his cell phone saying: “Bring baseball bats to South Street.”

There is also a list of people injured. (More victims, including a police officer, surfaced later.) One of them in particular stands out.

About 11 p.m. a 27-year-old woman was walking on South near 15th when a large group of male and female juveniles [sic] ganged up on her, kicking and punching her until she fell to the ground, where they continued to kick her in the face and head. [Sound familiar?] She was taken to Hahnemann University Hospital, where she was treated for bruises, abrasions and a large laceration on her upper lip. She has since been released. No arrests were made.

The 27-year-old woman is Anna Taylor — photo here.

Anna Taylor: white. Gee, who could have guessed?

The Philadelphia Inquirer has the whole story, in their article “Flash Mob Victim’s Untold Story” (via American Renaissance). Here is the worst of it:

Taylor’s mother, Peggy, a Germantown social worker, said her daughter needed so many stitches inside and outside her mouth at Hahnemann University Hospital after the assault that “we just couldn’t count them.”

Just kidding. Here is the worst of it:

The blow that Taylor absorbed was so powerful that she lost a front tooth and its root, and the roots of nearby teeth still may die, her dentist told her. The punch also split her upper lip so severely that much of it was hanging from her face and she was unable to speak, Taylor said.

Kidding again!

[T]he young man [sic] who hit Taylor was laughing as he punched her and said, “Bam, there’s another one,” according to Taylor. “It was frightening.”

Question: what kind of “young man” would laugh and taunt his (white, female) victim while bashing her face in with his fist?

Taylor’s attacker was described by Philadelphia Police Lt. Frank Vanore as an 18-year-old black male.

As the French say, quelle surprise*.

This leads to my next question: how many times do ghetto black people have to do exactly this sort of thing, and much worse, before we’re allowed to say “hey, this is what ghetto black people do. It’s what they always do, whenever large numbers of them are allowed to congregate without strict supervision. They will never stop doing these things. They will not learn, and they cannot be tamed. We should really just stay the hell away from them. Give them a little corner of the country to fuck up with their crime and violence and illegitimate kids and low IQs — our very own backyard Liberia — and let the rest of America try to repair the damage they’ve already done.”

*They also occasionally say: look out, minorities are burning down our city — except, y’know, in French.

5. The face of black fake victimhood

Raina Kelley is a fanatical black activist who plays the race card at every available opportunity and consigns anyone not sufficiently pro-black to the “lunatic fringe.” If it were up to me, I would ignore Ms. Kelley’s ruminations on race, for the same reason I would ignore a profoundly retarded woman’s ruminations on the smell of her own bowel movements. Sadly, I do not have that luxury.

The enemy.

Ms. Kelley decided to weigh in (not a fat joke) on the matter of violent black flash mobs, in a Newsweek article entitled “Did Black Kids Ruin Flash Mobs?” (why yes, yes they did) and subtitled “Hardly. How the media got the story wrong” (well, fuck).

(Similar stupidity may be found in a March 28 article at philly.com, “What’s behind ‘flash mobs’?” However, I refuse to subject myself to critiquing more than one black crime apologia.)

Let’s hear her out.

Is it just me or are flash mobs more dangerous when it’s black teenagers doing the mobbing?

It’s not you. Blacks are inherently more violent than whites, so white flash mobs (dancing, having pillow fights, pretending to be zombies) are less dangerous than black flash mobs (robbing, looting, viciously assaulting).

News of violent flash mobs in Philadelphia has now hit the front page of The New York Times, complete with a photo (on the second page of the Times story) of a group of black male teenagers ostensibly [sic] en route to run amok.

So, to recap:

  1. black male teenagers demonstrably run amok in a violent flash mob in Philadelphia, because that’s what black male teenagers like to do in their free time
  2. The New York Times reports this
  3. RAAAACISM!

The problem here, according to Ms. Kelley, is that the cover-up of black flash mob violence was incomplete. 90 percent suppression of the unflattering realities of black crime wasn’t enough. Only 100 percent suppression will do.

Here we go again. Just like freeway-shooting and looting, violent flash mobs will soon enter the modus operandi of scary young black men.

This is the point in the article where you’re supposed to share a hearty chuckle with Ms. Kelley over these “scary young black men.” Ho ho, scary young black men indeed. Why, only a Republican would think such a thing! That is why I wanted you to read about Anna Taylor first: so that you may now recall how the black man who punched her face apart was laughing as he did so.

Think of “Bam, there’s another one” as the punchline to Ms. Kelley’s hilarious joke.

I’m not looking to excuse their behavior, only to explain how ingrained racial stereotypes kick in to criminalize behavior by black youths that is tolerated in more diverse crowds.

Please remember what behavior we’re talking about here:

The blow that Taylor absorbed was so powerful that she lost a front tooth and its root, and the roots of nearby teeth still may die, her dentist told her. The punch also split her upper lip so severely that much of it was hanging from her face and she was unable to speak, Taylor said.

Of course Raina Kelley is looking to excuse their behavior. That’s the purpose of her article: to remind us that it’s not their fault — it’s never their fault. They’re just poor black teenagers! In fact, they’re the real victims here — victims of horrible white people! You’re just picking on them because they’re black!

Meanwhile, Anna Taylor’s face was so full of stitches, inside and outside, that her mother couldn’t count them all.

Time and time again, crimes committed by African-Americans have been presented as the first of a wave of race crimes, only for the phenomenon disappear without a trace.

Again, this was the sixth violent black flash mob in Philadelphia since May 2009 — and don’t worry, we’ll see plenty more before this series is through.

Or maybe that should read “start worrying.”

And where is the concerned hand-wringing over the future of flash mobs after tea-party protesters shouted racial epithets at congressmen?

Hoax. And not a flash mob. And non-violent. And probably not even against the law. Oh, but it was the Tea Party, and they’re racist, and boo hoo I’m another whiny black.

When a 2009 Valentine’s Day pillow-fight flash mob in San Francisco caused flooding of nearby businesses, wasted tens of thousands of gallons of water and cost the city nearly $20,000 to clean up, no one brought in the FBI to monitor social media and certainly no one thought to institute a curfew, as they are in Philly.

Where, indeed, is the uproar over a Valentine’s Day pillow-fight, that wasted tens of thousands of gallons of water? Let’s talk about that, and get over all this anti-black propaganda about how, at about 11 PM on March 20, Anna Taylor was walking on South Street when “a large group of [black people] ganged up on her, kicking and punching her until she fell to the ground, where they continued to kick her in the face and head” until… well, you can imagine the rest.

In fact, I recommend you do.

It is a wonder any of us get through our teen years without a stint in jail [says the black woman]. So it really isn’t shocking that flash mobs would appeal to these poor African-American teenagers in Philly — their neighborhoods are extremely violent, their schools are bad, and the Great Recession has cut what few after-school and employment programs they had by 93 percent.

No, it really isn’t shocking that poor, probably low-IQ blacks would participate in this kind of behavior. What kind of behavior, again? Ask the pizza deliveryman:

He lifted his shirt to show gashes along his back and arm. He also had bruises on his forehead he said were from kicks and punches he suffered while trying to keep a rowdy crowd from entering the shop, where a fight was already under way.

This is all rather tedious, I know, but Ms. Kelley isn’t done excusing black criminals yet.

The cycle is always “here’s the last brand of urban warfare,” and when that brand turns out not to exist, it’s only quietly noted while the impression that urban youths often attack white people without provocation remains.

Technically, the impression that remains, after reality intrudes on a white liberal’s fantasy world, is that the “niggers” you’ve heard so much about often attack white people without provocation.

In a column last year about a study confirming that 70 percent of people of all races harbored an unconscious preference for white people over black people

Good for them. Personally, my preference for white people over black people is fully conscious — and perfectly rational, too.

… I wrote: “We are a nation of people deeply influenced by the stereotypes endlessly perpetuated in our culture. …

Does she perhaps mean “perpetuated by black people, who just can’t seem stop themselves from behaving like animals“?

… So it is not difficult to believe that we have automated this stereotyping to the point where it happens not in our conscious mind but in its operating system.” The continued use of the “flash mobs used to be great until black kids ruined them with violence” narrative [read: observation] relies on those same automatic assumptions about young black people and will only further perpetuate the popular, but unfair [sic], racial stereotype of black men as sociopathic thugs. We’re here, we have no fear, get used to it.

You heard the woman. Sociopathic black thugs are here, they have no fear, and we’d better find a way to deal with them.

Quickly and permanently.

Read Full Post »

Ignorance and misinformation about race and crime run deep in our society. People who have never read an article on the subject will declare, with a conviction normally reserved for religious fundamentalists, that blacks are not more criminal than whites; that this is an illusion created by racially biased news media; and that any evidence to the contrary is a product of police or jury discrimination.

Over the next few days [I guess “weeks” would have been more accurate], I will debunk these myths in the form of three laws of race and crime.

Last month, Unamusement Park established the First Law of Race and Crime: there is no bias against blacks in the justice system. Over the next few days (I mean it, this time), we will look at violent black mobs in light of the Second Law: the news media are biased in favor of blacks.

1. 2010: Just another year in black-run America

From NBC Philadelphia (February 17, 2010): “Teen Mob Attack in Center City.”

One teen is hospitalized and more than a dozen others are in jail after a flash mob turned violent in Center City.

As many as 100 teens from three area high schools descended upon The Gallery at Market East Tuesday afternoon, police say. … Groups made their way up Market Street towards City Hall — some starting a large snowball fight on the building’s grounds while others began fighting on street corners, police said.

Along the way, the teens darted through traffic and knocked strangers to the ground, police said. One witness said the teens were randomly attacking people.

Teens who made their way into Macy’s at 13th and Market, damaged parts of the store and stole clothing, eyewitnesses said. …

Some of the teens attend Simon Gratz High School in North Philadelphia, authorities say. They are working to figure out the other schools involved.

One teen was kicked in the head during one of the brawls and taken to Jefferson University Hospital with head injuries.

… This is not the city’s first interaction with teen flash mobs. Thousands of teens descended on South Street in June 2009 — vandalizing property, beating pedestrians and even stealing a cab. [But good luck finding coverage.]

And that’s the whole story… or is it? I can’t shake this feeling that we’re missing something. Maybe it’s because of that picture at the top of the article.

Just another teen. No other adjectives occur to me.

Then there’s the video accompanying the article, which shows several other teens being arrested. All of them have something in common with the teen pictured above. Can you guess what it is?

Now what was that high school again? Right, Simon Gratz. Do we have a picture of the teens at Simon Gratz High School? Can we bring that up, please?

Some of the teens from Simon Gratz High School.

So… these 100 or so teens. (150, according to a later report). Were they all black? There’s no evidence to the contrary — no pictures of white teens being led away in handcuffs, no security camera footage of Asian high school students fighting on street corners or darting through traffic, no mention of mixed race teens or the mob’s diversity.

If they were all black, why didn’t that merit a line or two? Maybe right at the bottom.

2. “Race” is not in their vocabulary

Let’s look at how other news outlets handled the same story. The Daily News article “100 teens turn snowball fight into violent flash mob outside Philadelphia Macy’s store” doesn’t mention race at all.

Neither does ABC News, in “Police promise crackdown on violent ‘flash mobs’,” although that story features quotes from local high school students named “Shanay Harrell” and “Tearah Yuille.”

“Similar to the flash mobs near South Street last summer”, says an Eyewitness News reporter, over security camera footage of dozens of black teens looting and vandalizing a store — but again, no mention of race. Remember those mysterious teens from June 2009? Well, here they are.

Nope, no race angle here either.

3. Black people are involved? They must be the victims.

Someone else must have noticed this. Oh, here we go: the Digital Journal indulges me in “4th violent flash mob in Philadelphia provokes crackdown.” We’ll get to race in a moment.

There are two videos associated with the story. The first was removed by YouTube for violating its “policy prohibiting hate speech.” The second features race-baiting demagogue Jesse Jackson deflecting attention from black dysfunction, and clamoring for more reparations — I mean, uh, more art and music and “play acting” and tennis teams (well, obviously) in inner city high schools. Right. I’m sure that will work. Oh, and he wants to crack down on poverty and unemployment, not crime. (I’m not sure he knows what a crackdown is.)

The article itself raises some questions.

Maybe there is something in Philadelphia’s water, but teens [WHICH EFFING TEENS?] in the American city have been participating in random acts of rampage since last year. … Random rampages have spontaneously sprung up in Philadelphia in May, June and December 2009. [SO WHY ISN’T THIS HUGE NEWS?] Some of the rampages have been violent, with teens attacking both people and property. Back in June, the police connected the teen rampages to one particular high school, however police say students from three different high schools had been identified in this week’s mob event. [WOULD THESE PERCHANCE BE PREDOMINANTLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN HIGH SCHOOLS?]

Again, good luck finding media coverage of those random violent rampages in 2009. We already caught a glimpse of June’s black teen riot. I also managed to find out what happened in May. From philly.com: during a flash mob “convened by teens and young adults” (race unspecified) “through texting and online social messaging sites,” Thomas Fitzgerald, a 53-year-old bicyclist, “was set upon by eight young males, beaten, and left unconscious and in the middle of a violent seizure.”

At least they caught one of them:

[black, 21-year-old Stephen Lyde], of West Philadelphia, was the first of three people arrested in what police say was a rampage by more than 100 who blocked traffic, pounded on cars, stole merchandise, and assaulted several people.

… Erin Houdeshell said Lyde was one of five to seven men who stood around Fitzgerald while he had a seizure on the hood of a car.

“He said, ‘Yo, look at his head,'” Houdeshell testified, referring to Lyde watching Fitzgerald’s head twitch and bounce on the car’s hood. “He seemed kind of entertained by the situation.”

Sharon Frohlick testified that she saw a man grab the strap of Fitzgerald’s backpack and yank him from his bike.

Frohlick said the assailant threw Fitzgerald on the hood of a parked car and punched him in the face. Seven or eight others joined in, punching and kicking him as he slid to the ground while other spectators cheered.

Hurray! He’s having a seizure! Sound familiar? More coverage may be found at philly.com.

Returning to the Digital Journal article, here is the only mention of race.

One opinion piece attributes the rampages to economic and social discrimination, saying that most of the kids who participate in these rampages are African American students who believe they have been racially targeted by store owners and police in Center City.

Wait, what? Are they really taking that angle? Sure, they’re all black — but that’s only because they’re fighting back against white racist store owners and police. Who comes up with this stuff? Seriously. Find me that opinion piece — aha.

4. Progressive, tough, liberal, and retarded

From OpEdNews.com (“Progressive — Tough — Liberal”): “Philly Rampage Shows Social Media’s Potential: Youthful Rage, Instead of Ineffectual, Could be Potent.”

My expectations couldn’t be lower.

The author, Dave Lindorff, begins his piece with some very creative imagery: city leaders and businessmen “wringing their hands ” and calling for “tough action” (scare quotes his) against… why, just a bunch of “kids” — mere victims of the city’s “decrepit and failing” high schools!

“I’m not going to diminish the seriousness of the incident,” he writes, then proceeds to do just that. His main points are as follows:

  1. the Center City commercial area is so full of white racists that the mob attack was justified: “African-American kids feel blatant prejudice [by shop owners] downtown, which does much to explain the hostility that was apparent in the recent rampage”
  2. the police response was also racist: “[t]his is not, I suspect, how such things are handled by police in the suburbs, where parents of arrested minors, especially white minors, tend to get called immediately by police”
  3. these “kids” should use social media to organize marches, protests, and boycotts against the aforementioned racism
  4. they should also teach us old folks how to organize protests against the War in Afghanistan and in favor of Obamacare

Yes, that’s right. He takes the race angle so that he can warn America about the dangers of — no, not violent mobs of black teenagers assaulting random people in the streets of Philadelphia. Don’t be silly! About the dangers of racist store clerks at Macy’s, and the need for a police crackdown on suburban white minors shoplifting and driving drunk.

Fight the real enemy: shoplifting white kids!

“Willfully stupid” doesn’t even begin to cover it.

Do kids in the suburbs get expelled from school if they get convicted [of] shoplifting, or if they get busted for drunk driving on the weekend? No. Of course not.

Do kids in the suburbs — no, scratch that, I’m not going to beat around the racial bush. Do white people form violent mobs, robbing stores and assaulting random people? No. Of course not.

5. Was it good for you?

The end of Mr. Lindorff’s article can best be described as radical erotica:

Imagine if these kids used the new media to bring a thousand teenagers to the Gallery to march on the sidewalks with signs demanding an end to racism in these stores. Imagine if they used social media to organize mass boycotts of stores known to target black students for harassment. Imagine if they used social media to organize protests against police bias and police brutality.

Imagine all the people, sharing all the world… These are the wet dreams of Dave Lindorff, author of such bilious books as “Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal” (the convicted Black Panther cop-killer) and “The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office.”

Seriously? We haven't killed this piece of shit yet?

Safe in his Philly suburb, far away from the Magical Negroes he fetishizes, and their totally justifiable random acts of violence, Mr. Lindorff fantasizes about radicalizing a horde of angry African-American adolescents and harnessing their black rage — with this newfangled “Facebook” thing — to wipe out the hated CONservatives once and for all, so that the right-thinking anti-racists of the world can finally live together in perfect multicultural harmony (with only occasional epidemics of interracial rape, which of course can be attributed to the ongoing legacy of slavery).

Well, Mr. Lindorff, don’t forget to roll up your car windows when you roll through the “bad” part of town — you wouldn’t want to get carjacked by one of those lovable kids. And next time you indulge in one of your teenage black fantasies, remember to wipe up after you blow your load of white guilt all over the keyboard.

Read Full Post »

I have noticed a tendency among race denialists to oversimplify — drastically oversimplify — outrageously oversimplify the science of human biodiversity (HBD). This is an effective strategy: their target audience is ignorant of the research, intellectually and emotionally ill-equipped to handle it, and has already decided who’s right and who’s racist. They just need someone to confirm their beliefs.

I have also noticed their tendency to shoot themselves in the foot. “African blacks don’t have an average IQ of 70,” they crow. “It’s actually 81! That’s only nineteen points (1.3 standard deviations) below the white mean!” Then just throw in a spurious reference to the Flynn Effect, and you’re done! (Though what you’ve done is not entirely clear.)

Someone needs to correct them. Someone needs to spell out, in mind-numbing detail, why they are wrong. Any volunteers?

Goddamn it. Fine.

I’ll do it, but I’m not happy about it

Today we consider the sad case of Zek J Evets (“Dropping Knowledge Bombs Since 1992”), who describes himself as an anthropologist and “saboteur academic,” and often wonders

WHY people NEED other races to be smarter, dumber, less attractive, less masculine, better at sports, better at math, This, and That, and everything else that has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with Feel-Good prejudicial ignorance.

Actually, I’d very much like it if all people were created equal (that is, identical). Of course, they are not equal — not as individuals, not as groups.

Some group differences are not controversial. For example, men are taller on average than women. Some group differences are extremely controversial. For example, white people are more intelligent on average than black people. The difference between me and Zek is that I am willing and able to reason dispassionately about all kinds of group differences, and he is not. Neither are many other people — hence the controversy.

It's shaped like a bell, so it must be racist.

Since the facts are on my side, people like Zek must resort to (1) amateur psychoanalysis, i.e., wondering why I believe the things I do, without ever examining the evidence that compels belief, and (2) insults, like referring to an understanding of race differences in intelligence as “prejudicial ignorance.”

In light of my recent attempt to debate race denialists, two of Zek’s posts seem particularly relevant: 21st Century Scientific Racism (March 9 2011) and Deconstructing Scientific Racism in the 21st Century (March 29 2011). I will examine the first today and the second tomorrow.

21st Century Scientific Racism

Speaking of prejudicial ignorance…

ZEK: The contention on the HBD-side is that race is genetic. You are Black because of your genes. You are White because of your genes. Race is, first and foremost, biologically predetermined.

Good grief, race is biological? That can’t possibly be true! If it were, then black people would always have black babies, Asian people would always have Asian babies, and white people would always — oh.

Race: clearly not a hereditary trait.

ZEK: And the further argument is that this impacts your intelligence. The racial hierarchy among [Human Bio-Diversity] racists race realists [U: I see what you did there.] goes Asians, Whites, Hispanics/Mixed, and then Blacks at the bottom.

Genes impact your intelligence? Scandalous! Well, it was scandalous fifty years ago. Today, it is generally agreed, even among impeccably liberal social scientists, that intelligence (general cognitive ability, IQ, g) is about 50 to 70 percent heritable, and its heritability increases to 70 to 80 percent as we age. (Smart parents have smart kids — who could have possibly guessed?) Go ahead and type “intelligence, heritable” into your favorite search engine. I’ll wait.

And yes, if you list those races by IQ, you get Asians > whites > Hispanics > blacks. Race realists accept this finding because it is scientifically valid, even though most of them are white, and Asians (and Jews) are at the top of the hierarchy. We just don’t assign that much importance to race. We certainly aren’t obsessed with race loyalty. Race denialists like Zek, on the other hand, reject this finding precisely because the hierarchy places blacks below whites. They are, in a word, prejudiced. If you don’t believe me yet, read on.

The substance of Zek’s post on the evils of race realism comprises four “Very Important mistakes” we race realists make. The first is entitled — as if we needed to be reminded —

1. “Correlation does not equal causation”

ZEK: Just because you notice a trend toward Black people in America being convicted for more crimes, does not mean that Black people are inherently more criminal. Just because you see Black people not doing as good in school as other groups, does not mean that Black people are inherently stupid.

First, black people in America are convicted of more crimes because they commit more crimes. Jared Taylor is happy to explain it to you; see this video, for instance. There is no police bias against blacks; that’s just racial paranoia coupled with confirmation bias (see section 2). Victims report the same proportions of black criminals as are arrested by the police and convicted by the courts. That proves the police are arresting the people who commit the crimes, and the courts are duly convicting them —

— except, of course, when all-black juries refuse to convict obviously guilty blacks out of misguided “racial solidarity,” a phrase which means “racism, but it’s by black people, so it’s okay.”

Interracial crime, including so-called hate crime, is predominantly black-on-white, and represents a real threat to American whites, as I’ve noted before.

The diversity of crime is truly remarkable.

Anyway, this all proves that black people are more criminal on average than white people. I don’t know (or care) what Zek means by “inherently” more criminal — something to do with genes, I suppose — but something is making them more criminal. You can try to excuse their behavior by blaming their environment, but then you’re treating black people like children who can’t control themselves.

Seems almost… racist.

Second, black people underperform in school compared to whites. And Asians. And Hispanics. It’s called the achievement gap, and no one has ever managed to shrink it. They also underperform on intelligence tests. It’s called the IQ gap, and no one has ever managed to shrink it. (The differences don’t disappear in college, as many race denialists incorrectly claim.) You can read more at American Renaissance or in this Steve Sailer article.

Anyway, this all proves that black people are less intelligent on average than white people. If by “inherently stupid” Zek means “less intelligent on average, mostly because of genes,” then that’s true too — although I don’t call black people “stupid,” because I’m not a jerk. I’m a scientist. My race denialist opponents, on the other hand, have no problem painting all race realists as fanatical, psychotic, mentally retarded Nazi Klansmen bigots. They are not scientists. They really are jerks.

Remind me: who’s on what side of the War on Hate?

ZEK: These fuckwits actually believe that the playing-field in America is equal, and that the proof of other Races inferiority is evident in how badly they perform compared to Whites!

Oh ye of such ignorance! They must think racism ended when slavery did! And that Obama is proof of there being no more racism in America. But, of course, they also think Obama is only president because he’s part-White, and so not as stupid as other Black people… Except other Black people in America are partly-White too.

The idiocy. It hurts.

And funny enough, these same racist douchebags probably ignore all of the White people killing, committing crimes, and generally doing Bad Things, often at a far more devastating level due to the power White people hold in the world.

Bringing out the “R” word so soon? Someone should explain to the anthropologist that name-calling is not a counterargument.

In the above passage, Zek does not provide any evidence, such as the links I use to corroborate my claims. This is another effective strategy on his part, because he does not have any evidence, and furthermore he does not have any claims. He merely declares that his opponents believe something, calls their beliefs stupid and racist, and leaves it to the sympathetic reader to fill in the blanks. Let’s try to decipher his argument ourselves.

The inferior intellectual performance of blacks is not proof of their inferior intelligence. If there is no piece of evidence, hypothetical or actual, which would convince you that you are wrong, then your beliefs are not scientific. They are religious. Zek’s brand of race denialism is based on faith.

The playing field in America isn’t equal, and racism did not end when slavery did. Racism did, indeed, not end when slavery did. However, racism is currently dead in America, contrary to the Big Lie that it isn’t, and still the IQ gap persists.

With all the racism in America, it's no wonder black people can't get elected to — oh.

Zek’s larger claim is that racism, not genes, is making blacks score lower on IQ tests and generally having a negative effect on their success in American society. But we know that effects of genes on intelligence are much greater than the effects of shared environment, which would include this alleged systemic racism (as I explained in detail when I refuted a race denialist essay on the subject). That alone makes Zek’s claim dubious. What makes it outrageous is research like this: black author and political commentator Thomas Sowell has found that

in 1969, while American-born blacks were making only 62 percent of the average income for all Americans, blacks from the West Indies made 94 percent. Second-generation immigrants from the West Indies made 15 percent more than the average American. Although they are only 10 percent of the city’s black population, foreign-born blacks — mostly from the West Indies — own half of the black-owned businesses in New York City. Their unemployment rate is lower than the national average, and many times lower than that of American-born blacks. West Indian blacks look no different from American blacks; white racists are not likely suddenly to set aside their prejudices when they meet one [emphasis mine]. (Jared Taylor, Paved With Good Intentions, p. 25)

They’re not just blacks, they’re immigrant blacks — yet racism doesn’t seem to affect them! How curious.

The truth is, you can’t scare black people into failing tests, and the racism that exists in America today is designed to artificially raise black performance, not lower it.

The rest of his implicit argument: Obama is not proof that racism is dead, or dying, in America. That is irrelevant to race differences in intelligence. Obama is either not the President only because he’s part white, or not intelligent only because he’s part white. That is also irrelevant to race differences in intelligence. Other black Americans are part white. That is not a complete thought.

White people commit crimes, kill other people, and do “Bad Things.” This is extra bad because white people are more powerful than black people. I’m aware that white people are not a race of angels. That’s why I never claim they are, and neither do any other race realists; and that’s why Zek is arguing with a straw man. But whites do not commit as much crime or kill as many other people as blacks, so if Zek is giving white people a hard time, what must he think of black people? Furthermore, whatever bad things white people might be doing, it is important to keep in mind that they are generally smart, responsible, polite, peaceful, and law abiding, beautiful, inventive, artistic, and nice to all the other races.

Why not be nice back?

2. “Confirmation Bias”

Confirmation bias is “a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.” For example, if you’re a black person who has a preconceived notion that whites are racist, then you’re going to remember every event in your life that could possibly be interpreted as discriminatory, and forget the millions of non-discriminatory events.

The waiter screws up your order? Racism. You didn’t get into Yale? Racism. A cop pulls you over? Racism. He’s got his hand on his gun? Super racism! Never mind that blacks are more likely to be criminals than whites, so racial profiling is quite appropriate. Never mind that drivers of all races get pulled over for routine stops, which can be extremely dangerous. That’s how confirmation bias twists reality into fantasy.

Speaking of twisting reality into fantasy…

ZEK: HBDers are incapable of thinking outside the dogmatic little box they’ve dug their ostrich-like heads into. Because if they could, they’d notice they ignore evidence of exceptions to their rules as disproving their rules!

I’m sorry, but in SCIENCE, if you have an “exception” to the “rule”, then you’ve basically just disproved yourself. There’s a reason the theory of gravity is still around — because no one’s had an instance where it didn’t work.

Hoo boy.

Literally this entire section of his post is 100% irrelevant to race realism. Zek, you’re embarrassing yourself, especially as someone who claims to be a scientist (i.e., someone who works in the aforementioned field of “SCIENCE”).

The race realist claim is not that every single black person in the history of the world is unintelligent, or less intelligent than the average white person, or less intelligent than every single white person in the history of the world. His “rule” is a straw man. It’s like claiming that Newton’s law of universal gravitation states that everything falls toward the Earth, and that the existence of the Moon disproves it. The actual race realist claim that’s relevant here is that in America, the average black IQ (i.e., intelligence) is about one standard deviation lower than the average white IQ. This claim happens to be supported by overwhelming scientific evidence. I suggest you look some up. (Searching for “IQ gap” should do the trick.)

"Hi there, I'm a counterexample to a claim you never made!"

How stupid are you, Zek? I’m not trying to insult you, I’m just proving a point. I can name a dozen black professors at my university who are all evidently more intelligent than Zek, who is both white and Jewish. Somehow I am able to reconcile this fact with race differences in intelligence. In fact, the infamous bell curves require that there be plenty of black people smarter than the average white, and plenty of white people dumber than the average black.

ZEK: Stupid, athletic White people exist. Smart Black people who can’t dance exist. And not all Jews are rich.

That might mean something if race realists were the ridiculous racist caricatures Zek would like you to believe they are. Since we are not, Zek is simply full of shit.

We’re not saying all white people are anything. We’re not saying all black people are anything. We’re talking about statistical differences, like race differences in average IQ, or in the probability of committing a crime.

ZEK: (Yes, HBDers like to stereotype Jews, and shove us into their fuckwit-based IQ-based racial hierarchy — somewhere around East Asians — and we’re supposedly rich to boot, but the fact is: they’re engaging in confirmation-bias again.)

Yes, yes, we’re all Nazis. Someone should really warn the Jewish half of my family tree.

ZEK: By hyperfocusing on examples which reinforce their ignorant pseudo-science, HBDers miss so much diversity that when they go out into the world, they’re rather like the poor English scientists who realized that, by gosh by golly by gee! [Black Swans do exist!]

By “hyperfocusing on examples,” he means looking at data and studies and other studies and more studies. Also note what Zek considers citing sources; it isn’t going to get better than black swans from here.

3. “Lack of Expertise”

ZEK: So many “race realists” on the interwebs — from Half Sigma to Obsidian [???] to Uncle Milton — are, in fact, laymen in the fields they’ve chosen to impose their own racist agenda. They’re not geneticists, biologists, anthropologists, or any kind of scientist. They’re fucking Regular Joe Shmoe, attempting to debate issues which are so complicated that most people need a PhD to understand them.

And the only credentials these guys have is some bullshit diploma-factory degree in Armchair Academics.

So race realists make a “Very Important mistake” when they talk about genetics, biology, anthropology, or science in general, without having a doctoral degree in that subject. It’s as if he thinks you need to be a Ph.D. anthropologist to read and understand a paper on race differences in intelligence.

You don’t.

It should go without saying that he has no examples of mistakes made by race realists because of their “lack of expertise” (lack of credentials, really), or indeed examples of any mistakes made by race realists at all.

ZEK: Many of the most prevalent HBD & race realist personas in the public sphere are:

Steve Sailer. Journalist/computer salesman.
J. Philippe Rushton. Psychologist.
Francis Fukuyama. Political Economist.
Steve Hsu. Astrophysicist.
Richard Herrnstein. Psychologist.
Charles Murray. Political Scientist.
Arthur Jensen. Psychology Professor.

My emphasis. Notice anything in common? All of these guys are pretty smart cookies. The three psychologists, at least, are eminently qualified to discuss race differences in intelligence. Don’t you agree, Zek?

Oh, you don’t.

ZEK: Notice anything in common? NONE OF THESE GUYS HAS ANY EXPERTISE IN THE FIELD! [???] Not a single one of them is a biologist, geneticist, or forensic anthropologist. Only one is even in a “hard science” field, and it’s not even remotely related! Basically, they’re all a bunch of bullshitters.

"I, as a psychology professor, cannot understand this graph due to my lack of expertise. I'd better just assume all black people are stupid."

Well, we agree on one thing: something around here smells a lot like BS…

ZEK: The Holy Bible of this neo-scientific racism is: The Bell Curve.

They quote it like holy scripture, reciting it like Westboro Baptists recite homophobic slurs at military funerals.

Unfortunately for them, The Bell Curve has been disproven so many times, [I can hardly stand to list them all]. (Check the bottom of the article for all the sources.) And yet, they keep trying to shove it down our throats… Oy vey.

I, for one, have never cited The Bell Curve (1994). I prefer Richard Lynn’s Race Differences in Intelligence, and specific journal articles on the subject. Why do people like Zek (and Obsidian before him) keep bringing it up? It’s old. He singles out this one book published in 1994, ignoring the last seventeen years of intelligence research. Did he succeed in fooling you into thinking The Bell Curve has the only evidence showing a significant IQ gap between black people and white people?

I’ve rebutted “rebuttals” of the Bell Curve before. There I mentioned a substantial 2003 study by Flowers and Pascarella, “Cognitive effects of college: Differences between African American and Caucasian students.”

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.

Clearly this study is a product of VICIOUS RACISM, by the… uh… black co-author. Hmm.

Behold the face of racism!

Not to worry, I’m sure Zek’s got some research of his own to refer to.

ZEK: My personal recommendations when dealing with these special brand of racists are:

Guns, Germs, and Steel. Jared Diamond.
The Mismeasure of Man. Stephen Jay Gould.
Genes, Peoples, and Languages. Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza.
Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Human Race. Ashley Montagu.

Those books above are rather helpful to overcome the dogmatic indoctrination found among HBDers, race realists, and even everyday folks. Trust me, and my professional opinion: they have good answers to hard questions.

It’s not that I don’t trust the “professional opinion” of a self-proclaimed anthropologist who also offers the services of “ghostwriting, computer repair, fashion advice, handyman, music lessons, self-defense training, and baby-sitting,” and who refers to his opponents in scientific debates as “pig-fuckers” (among many other nasty things). It’s just that he never mentions how these books address the issue of race differences in intelligence.

I do know that the late Dr. Gould was quite wrong about human nature and about IQ. I also know that Ashley Montagu himself wrote the following.

In biological usage a race is conceived to be a subdivision of a species which inherits the physical characteristics [U: which include brain characteristics, which include intelligence] serving to distinguish it from other populations of the species. In the genetic sense a race may be defined as a population which differs in the incidence of certain genes from other populations, with one or more of which it is capable of exchanging genes across whatever boundaries (usually geographic) may separate them. If we are asked whether in this sense there exist a fair number of races in the human species, the answer is that there do [emphasis mine]. (Montague, Man’s Most Dangerous Myth, p. 6)

I’ve previously noted that race is biological; see here and here and here and here and here and this book and this one too. I have also noted that if someone tells you race is only skin deep (like here or here), they are lying, ignorant, or biased. Go ahead and look up pictures of black albinos. It’s not an oxymoron. See this article if you want to know why the myth of the myth of race and the postmodern notion that race is a social construct are not only wrong, but quite literally hurting black people, or at least their cardiovascular systems. In short, “race doesn’t exist” is one of those Big Lies that race denialists like to tell. Number one, in fact.

There’s just one more thing I need to get off my chest before we move on to his final “point.”

ZEK: But in the meantime, Steve Sailer needs to sit his racist ass down, and let the Grown-Ups talk. Just because you were once a movie critic for The American Conservative does not make you an expert in bio-genetics. Please, go find someone to sell a computer, since that’s what you actually do for a living. …

As for Steve Hsu… Oy vey. That guy, you can tell REALLY wants to be White. But listen here Stevie…

YOU’RE NOT WHITE. Stop trying to be. And stop being a racist douchebag. Seriously. You’re doing it wrong anyways.

Zek, you’re almost unbelievably vile and obnoxious. Doesn’t that make you a colossal hypocrite, and a pretty poor excuse for a scientist? Furthermore, why don’t you fuck off and take your ignorant, hateful, anti-scientific garbage with you, you drooling idiot?

Now we can move on.

4. “Conspiracy Theories”

ZE: The problem with many HBDers and race realists is that they like to go on and on (and on) about that it’s only because of PC Leftists and Liberals having a stranglehold on America that HBD and race-realism isn’t openly acknowledged.

Yet in the same breath they list supposedly vast groups of people who believe this asinine bullshit. They say this “science” is widely accepted among scientists in the field, and is such a simple fact, but that only because of political correctness and a liberal media shame-machine that people can’t talk about it.

The hypocrisy is staggeringly blinding.

Actually, that’s not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is when a fuckwit calls his opponents “fuckwits,” when a douchebag calls his opponents “douchebags,” when someone “incapable of thinking outside the dogmatic little box they’ve dug their ostrich-like heads into” calls his opponents — well, you get the idea. What Zek is describing is how race realists like to point out that race differences in intelligence (among other race-realist-type things) are uncontroversial scientifically, but very controversial politically.

The truth about black people is out there.

By the way, you can tell a lot about a person by the way they use big words. Someone who describes hypocrisy as “staggeringly blinding” isn’t paying much attention to what those words mean. He just likes the way they sound. (Obsidian is prone to this as well. For instance, he recently described my reactionary musical as an “incohate [sic] screed.” Unfortunately, he does not know what “inchoate” or “screed” means. Neither applies.)

Conclusion

ZEK: And those are the key, fundamental flaws in the race realist, HBD world.

I couldn’t help noticing, Zek, that you haven’t cited any specific claim by a race realist, then rebutted it with evidence. Oh well. Maybe tomorrow.

ZEK: As an anthropologist (y’know, someone who actually studies this stuff) I can tell ya that they’re so full of racist shit, it’s hard to separate the hater from the hatred.

Well, he certainly comes across as a dispassionate scientist — a consummate professional, really — when he states that his race realist opponents are not “regular folks” but rather “racists” who are “ALL FULL OF SHIT” (emphasis in original); they are “fuckwits” and “racist douchebags” whose views are “ignorance” and “idiocy”; they are “incapable of thinking outside the dogmatic little box they’ve dug their ostrich-like heads into”; they hate Jews; they are engaged in “ignorant pseudo-science”; they’re “fucking Regular Joe Shmoe” (“fucking” is an adjective here, not a verb) with “some bullshit diploma-factory degree in Armchair Academics,” and therefore incapable of participating in the debate; they’re “all a bunch of bullshitters” studying “neo-scientific racism” and citing sources “like Westboro Baptists recite homophobic slurs at military funerals”; they’re a “special brand of racists” prone to “dogmatic indoctrination”; they should sit down and “let the Grown-Ups talk”; they are “racists in-denial”; any Asian among them just “REALLY wants to be White” and should “stop being a racist douchebag”; their “hypocrisy is staggeringly blinding”; they are always “yelling and raving” like “Creationists”; they “talk of conspiracy theories like a crazy person… some ancient McCarthyite resurrected from the depths of the 50’s Red Scare… [l]ike a zombie, moaning for… BRAAAAAAAAAAIIIINNNSSSS!”; again, “they’re so full of racist shit, it’s hard to separate the hater from the hatred” — which makes no sense, since the “hater” is the person speaking and the “hatred” is what’s being said, and the two could never not be separated; and finally, they’re “pig-fuckers.”

Class act.

ZEK: But in all seriousness, there is no connection between race, IQ, and genetics. Being whatever race does not in any way, shape, or form predispose you to a certain level of IQ.

The words “citation needed” spring to mind.

You see, putting the words “in all seriousness” at the end of a hateful and ignorant screed (yes, screed) doesn’t magically alleviate one’s responsibility to support one’s absurd and bigoted claims with evidence. Evidence Zek doesn’t have.

In all seriousness, your genes determine your race. They also mostly determine your intelligence, relative to other people.

ZEK: How smart you are is dependent on where you’re born, when you were born, a smidgen of your parents genes, and the rest… well, the rest depends on you. [Even a dumbass can become president], so keep that in mind.

Actually, as I mentioned earlier, intelligence is highly heritable — 70 to 80% in adulthood. Zek, as an anthropologist (you know, someone who claims to actually study this stuff), should really be aware of this fact. Shared environment, on the other hand, has not been shown to play a significant role. Zek, as an anthropologist (you know, the kind of person who uses science rather than merely screeching about racist conspiracies), should really be aware of the three laws of behavior genetics.

Not an anthropologist, I have been informed. Pretty handy with a whip, though.

He should also keep in mind that George W. Bush was probably more intelligent than John Kerry, contrary to the old hoax for which Zek seems to have fallen. (It’s also not true that smart states vote Democrat and dumb states vote Republican.)

Until next time

I shall close on a personal note. Zek J Evets, you are a truly nasty person, a colossal hypocrite, and a flagrant bigot. You are incapable of reasoned debate. If you really are an anthropologist, you are an incompetent one. Your opinions on race differences in intelligence are ignorant, and based not on science, but solely on the assumptions that (1) because a scientific theory agrees with a racial stereotype, it must be racist, and (2) everything which is “racist” (i.e., unflattering of black people) is also false.

Tune in later this week for a rebuttal of his second, equally stupid post on the subject. Or don’t. I wouldn’t blame you. It’s uniformly dreary stuff.

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 »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: