Thursday, September 3, 2015

Guilt2- Media collaborates with guilt mongers - or how to play the white victim card

 Buzz from the shallow MTV "White people" documentary still continues to inflame an assortment of blogs and social media. Remember when the piece first ran, the folks at Limbaugh who weighed in to denounce the show even before it aired in boilerplate outrage: "MTV Documentary Shames White Youth." But this is just a typical propaganda blast by the usual suspects. If anything, the shallow documentary hardly begins to scratch the deep layers of hypocrisy, distortion and propaganda surrounding "white guilt" and "affirmative action" as already shown in detail on this blog, with much of said hypocrisy and distortion the stock in trade of Limbaugh and his ilk. Several of the young white participants in the series for example trot out or insinuate a number of bogus shaky tropes- that of "innocent" white people being "swamped" by the culluds, who ae "undeserving" compared to "good, hard-working white people" and so on.  One for example talks about their good grades in high school and lament that they have to go to a community college- because- wait for it - yes- "minorities" denied her a "rightful" spot due to "affirmative action quotas" or preferences. Really? So its all the fault of the culluds?

What about all the OTHER things black people are lectured on by whites- about the need to "move beyond" race and look at "objective factors"? Such things were curiously missing from the white student's lament. Is your complaint about not getting into the fancy upscale college you FELT you were entitled to? If so, why is your "feeling" more important than those other factors- like grades for example (see Fisher case below where Fisher's mediocre grades did not qualify her to enter the university she FELT she "deserved"). And why is it minorities who "blocked" you when there were numerous OTHER white candidates who had much better grades and extracurricular stats than you? Maybe your claimed good grades are not all they are made out to be, and your background and stats ain't that hot to begin with. Aren't these the "other factors" black folk are lectured that they should consider before "playing the race card"? But when are white people going to stop playing their own  "race card" and follow their own advice on such matters?

Not soon, if today's young white generation as shown on MTV is any example. In the documentary it is pointed out to the complaining white girl that white people garner the vast majority of scholarships, and a non-white participant next to her notes that they didn't receive any scholarships either. The white youth hems and haws and attempts to bluster through, mixing denial with "feeling" - a typical result among those who buy into the propaganda line.

The host could have pointed out to said student that according to a study by economists at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, (Jones and Schmitt, 2014. A College Degree is No Guarantee) in 2014, among recent graduates ages 22 to 27, the jobless rate for blacks last year was 12.4 percent versus 4.9 percent for whites. How are "minorities" thus hurting white people? And according to a number of studies labor market discrimination against blacks is still significant. One study (Bertrand and Mullainathan,2003, Are Emily and Greg more employable) for example reported employers discriminating on the basis of "black sounding" names. No problem for white females named after cities like "Paris" Hilton. Even more telling, labor market studies indicate that whites with CRIMINAL records get more invitations for  job interviews than equivalent black candidates WITHOUT criminal records. (Pager, Devah. 2003. “The Mark of a Criminal Record.” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 108, no. 5, pp. 937–75.)

Switch to a broader angle lens: What about all those blacks collecting "too much" welfare? Turns out that whites, who are much wealthier and receive much more income, collect HIGHER rates of welfare in places where whites are the majority, compared to blacks, where blacks are the majority- in short the system rewards wealthier whites more, but you would never know this from standard indignant white dudgeon about "those blacks." Well what about blacks hogging all the food stamps- we've all seen those negroes loading up on prime steak or shrimp while white people have to do with hamburger, eh? Turns out that most food stamp "hogs" are white in even greater proportions than blacks or Latinos. The Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (See USDA data links) provides food stamps for almost 47 million Americans. Of those 47 million people, 43 percent of them are white and 33 percent are black. Approximately 19 percent are Hispanic, 2 percent are Asian and the remainder are Native America. So how come whites who are so much wealthier, and earn so much more, are feeding so extensively from the trough, all the while condemning "those people"? And what about those blacks allegedly swamping the job market due to "quotas"? That bit of white propaganda turns out to be bogus too.

Well what about those black druggie criminals? This is a standard perception by whites, but turns out that whites actually have equal or higher rates of drug use than Blacks or Latinos. And yet police searches, arrests, prosecutions and imprisonments for drug activity falls mostly on blacks and Latinos who are less than 25% of all drug users (Wise 2008- Between Barack and a hard place) Sounds like a great deal for white people. And on some drug counts, whites receive LESSER sentences involving use of powdered cocaine than black crack users or dealers. In fact, overall, it turns out that as far as blacks are concerned, they receive LONGER sentences than whites for the same crimes, with jail time in some cases 60% longer (Racial Disparity in Federal Criminal Charging and Its Sentencing Consequences Rehavi and Starr, 2012). Again, sounds like a great deal for white people.

And the black criminals who roam the streets? Yes, noted elsewhere on this blog, they do statistically, in proportion to blacks in the population, victimize whites more than white STREET criminals victimize blacks. Few credible people "deny" this and "the media" isn't "covering it up" as breathlessly charged in right wing quarters. And yes, as they commit these crimes, more blacks are arrested. Most credible people know that police bias cannot explain the whole picture. But even aside from that, the primary victim of black criminals is other blacks. 
And are blacks really the most violent minority as far as murder? Statistically, and proportionately in SOME decades yes, but hard data actually shows black rates well below that posted by putative white "role models". It just depends on the era, and white group  studied. The white Irish for example are renowned for mayhem and murder in US history but one would barely know this from the black scapegoats race narrative.

But isn't "the media" really "covering up" black crime?  Hardly. First local media usually reports crimes and gives descriptions of suspects by race where warranted such as witness accounts and police pleas for help identifying suspects. It also shows pictures of arrests, trials and conviction. It is hard to see where mysterious "cover ups" are happening. Second and more generally, Federal and state government reports, academic studies, general press books, and media reports all tell the same tale of RELATIVELY high levels of black criminality in proportion to the black representation in the general population. No one is "hiding" such facts. As for the media as a whole, far from “favoring” blacks the  white media has often been slanted in its coverage to portray the most negative aspects involving blacks. In the US, the 1980s and 1990s for example saw a vast outpouring of books and articles against “political correctness” “liberals” and the pathologies afflicting blacks. Black crime, out of wedlock births, etc. etc. were, and have been well reported, and sneeringly commented on. None of it is “hidden” by “the media.”

In fact, credible scholars of “the media” have noted how it continually plays on white fears and double standards- showing whites engaged in similar activity as blacks in a more sympathetic or neutral light for example. Time and time again, white media have seized on the most sensationalist black imagery to reinforce the image of the feckless, threatening, primitive negro-- like the bogus, but suitably lurid “stories” of “baby rapes” during 2005’s Hurricane Katrina. Books like: Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy. 2007.  By Martin Gilens, and The Black Image in the White Mind: Media and Race in America, Robert M. Entman, Andrew Rojecki – 2010 expose much of this detail. Blacks have received little special treatment from “the media”- to the contrary. Academic studies show the same with stories about "black crime" rising significantly during certain eras such as the Reagan period. (David Wilson 2005. Inventing Black-on-Black Violence: Discourse, Space, And Representation) Indeed Wilson argues that white liberals have been complicit in pushing the negatives narrative of blacks, not as a racial "scare" mobilizer of the white base. but as a narrative in which they can offer "solutions" via more government program.

We are supposed to be living in a day when such data is readily available, and the hard data is easily available on the web, but notice how often young whites still parrot the standard propaganda tropes of their elders. This generation has learned well. Which makes it all the more laughable when the folks at right wing Breitbart news make propaganda pronouncement in apocalyptic terms: "You are Paying for an Illegal Alien's MTV White-Shaming Film." Great combination- white guilt, illegal aliens, hell, what else we missing- the standard bogeyman "black gangstas"?

A paragon of white virtue, compared with those dastardly, uh, well you know.. :)
But I wish Fisher luck in her future career.. no one I know grudges her that..

"The claim that race cost Fisher her spot at the University of Texas isn't really true. In the hundreds of pages of legal filings, Fisher's lawyers spend almost no time arguing that Fisher would have gotten into the university but for her race.." (Pro-Publica on the Fisher "affirmative action" case) .

The white innocence- victim card game: But let's move on. Now who could be a better poster child for the propaganda narrative above than innocent white female, unjustly "denied" her "rightful" place by "special treatment" for "the culluds"? And she plays her role to perfection - the innocent girl who played by the rules, who worked hard etc etc, but was cruelly cheated out of her dreams by the culluds and the liberals? Powerful stuff that mobilized the white faithful and garnered sympathy from even people apathetic or uninformed about the case. But is this narrative of white innocence all it seems? NO. In fact turns out that the white poster girl, Abigail Fisher, would not even have been admitted to the University of Texas on her own merits, with or without any alleged culluds "getting in the way." Her stats simply didn't make the cut, on their own merit. But she gets a new lease on life by adeptly playing the race card, white people using the old cullud scapeboats, as they have done ever since the days of the rancorous post-Civil War segregationist "Pitchfork" Ben Tillman, whose key final strategy that trumped all others was to "holla nig$#r.. ."

Even unqualified whites are playing race and "white victim" cards in the affirmative action propaganda game. There were more qualified minorities than Fisher frozen but they didn't get any sympathy from the guardians of "merit." Much has been writter about the symbolism of the case, and massive emotional firestorms have churned both paper and digital domains, but few in-depth analyses have been done on this aspect. One of the best is by ProPublica. It is worth quoting at length to demonstrate how the "white victim card" works..

"In 2013, ProPublica published what became one of the most provocative analyses of the Fisher case. It highlighted an overlooked, deeply ironic fact about the case: when one actually looked at Fisher’s arguments, she actually had not been denied admission because of her race, but rather because of her inadequate academic achievements.,,
The claim that race cost Fisher her spot at the University of Texas isn't really true. In the hundreds of pages of legal filings, Fisher's lawyers spend almost no time arguing that Fisher would have gotten into the university but for her race. ..
In 2008, the year Fisher sent in her application, competition to get into the crown jewel of the Texas university system was stiff. Students entering through the university's Top 10 program — a mechanism that granted automatic admission to any teen who graduated in the upper 10 percent of his or her high school class — claimed 92 percent of the in-state spots.
Fisher said in news reports that she hoped for the day  universities selected students "solely based on their merit and if they work hard for it." But Fisher failed to graduate in the top 10 percent of her class, meaning she had to compete for the limited number of spaces up for grabs.
She and other applicants who did not make the cut were evaluated based on two scores. One allotted points for grades and test scores. The other, called a personal achievement index, awarded points for two required essays, leadership, activities, service and "special circumstances." Those included socioeconomic status of the student or the student's school, coming from a home with a single parent or one where English wasn't spoken. And race. Those two scores, combined, determine admission.
Even among those students, Fisher did not particularly stand out. Court records show her grade point average (3.59) and SAT scores (1180 out of 1600) were good but not great for the highly selective flagship university. The school's rejection rate that year for the remaining 841 openings was higher than the turn-down rate for students trying to get into Harvard.
As a result, university officials claim in court filings that even if Fisher received points for her race and every other personal achievement factor, the letter she received in the mail still would have said no.
It's true that the university, for whatever reason, offered provisional admission to some students with lower test scores and grades than Fisher. Five of those students were black or Latino. Forty-two were white.
Neither Fisher nor Blum mentioned those 42 applicants in interviews. Nor did they acknowledge the 168 black and Latino students with grades as good as or better than Fisher's who were also denied entry into the university that year. Also left unsaid is the fact that Fisher turned down a standard UT offer under which she could have gone to the university her sophomore year if she earned a 3.2 GPA at another Texas university school in her freshman year.
In an interview last month, Blum agreed Fisher's credentials and circumstances make it difficult to argue — as he and his supporters have so ardently in public — that but for her race Fisher would have been a Longhorn." (ProPublica: A Colorblind Constitution: What Abigail Fisher’s Affirmative Action Case Is Really About) 

Get the picture? Let's recap:

1) The white poster girl would not even have made it to the university under her own merit, yet plays the "white victim" card. She failed to meet HER own "merit" standard.

2) Even more interesting, she COULD STILL have got in via the standard alternative pathway- as a sophomore after one year at another campus and satisfactory performance (a 3.2 GPA)

3) There were 47 students with lower stats who made it in ahead of Fisher. Five out of the 42 were minority- 2 black, 3 Hispanic. Forty-two (42) ahead of Fisher were white, or 90% of the total. But the media and the conservative propaganda machine primarily spotlighted the "minorities" while giving the whites a pass with relatively little comment.

4)  168 black and Latino students with grades as good as or better than Fisher's  were ALSO DENIED entry into the university that year. In short, many more "culluds" had HIGHER grades than the white poster girl but they were DENIED admission, a fact hardly getting much white press, relatively speaking, compared to the white victim narrative.

Asian exclusions... ?

The young whites in MTV's documentary seem to have bought into a number of propaganda themes, even as things are manipulated for their benefit, For example, so-called "quotas for blacks" are a smokescreen whites may be using to LIMIT ASIAN NUMBERS, via admission formulas that allow whites to gain slots on things other than strict test scores.

For example, lets say you get extra points for "community service"or "civic engagement." While all those Asian kids are grinding away and going to cram schools solely for the best test score number, the extra points given for "civic engagement" will favor whites, who typically, on the average, can show more of such extracurricular activity. These extra point can tip an admission slot towards a more "well rounded" white candidate, beating out the Asian with a higher number. "Community service" might be only one such "tipping" factor. There are other factors that weigh in college admissions- including Essay writing, Teacher recommendation, Counselor recommendation, Class rank, Portfolio, Extracurricular activities, Work and so on. These factors have helped SOME black candidates build up enough points for admission, but they ALSO work in favor of whites to cut back on Asian slots.

Think about it. Why would white people be so incredibly generous as to hurt their own via the reputed wave of "black quotas" alleged by assorted right wingers? They aren't- for 3 reasons:

1) The number of black students admitted under quotas is small and AA quotas have been carefully controlled and limited since the 1970s eg. Bakke. As noted in earlier posts, there is no vast horde of blacks on campus due to "quotas" and quotas are primarily operative on high-end campuses with very few minorities. (Gurin et al 2003. How does Racial/Ethnic Diversity Promote Education? WJBS. 27:1) found that affirmative action exists primarily in highly selective colleges that barely have more than 8-10% black students. Such campuses are not where the vast majority, the OTHER 90-92% of black students attend. The famous Hopwood decision of the late 1990s showed that in 1996-97- right before the AA ban by the court, Black enrollments weighed in at an allegedly "massive" 4.7%, of the total enrollment at the elite Texas Law school- hardly the huge wave "swamping white people" assorted propagandists would have us to believe.  And keep in mind that not all blacks admitted to these schools needed quotas. In short, as far as college educations, affirmative action is a minor player for blacks. As far as teachers, affirmative action has been a rather small player there too:

"The catastrophic scenarios conjured by the neo-conservatives and the [Jewish] agencies never came to pass. In fact between 1968 and 1973, blacks' share of total university faculty jobs grew from 2.2 to 2.9 percent; with historically black colleges and universities removed from the calculations, blacks made up only 0.9 percent of the professoriate. Over the next twenty years, black representation among full-time faculty members grew only .05 percent."
-- Nancy MacClean 2008. Freedom Is Not Enough: The Opening of the American Workplace. p. 218

2) Admission "point" systems allegedly "helping only" blacks are MORE helping whites, by enabling them to bypass and squeeze ahead of Asians who may post better raw numbers. Unz's analysis suggests that certain elite institutions can manipulate a variety of factors, not because of "guilt" or "self-hate" but to help whites edge out the Asian competition- you know- via that prototypical "well rounded" candidate. Translation: less "narrow" Asian grinders on campus. A similar pattern operated to screen out Jews in years past.

3) Blacks can be used as front-men and scapegoats for the above- taking the heat from assorted bigots, bashers and baiters. In the meantime, behind the scenes, the admission structures are manipulated to hinder or slow down the real competition- Asians. In fact this point is explicitly made by some scholars- QUOTE:

"Ironically, Theodore Cross and Robert Bruce Slater, among others, have contended that 'the tremendous success of Asian students on standardized tests may save affirmative action programs for blacks at the most selective institutions,' including Harvard, because 'a strict merit-based admissions system would pose a particularly serious threat to the sacrosanct system of legacy admissions.' According to a U.S. Office of Civil Rights Compliance Review, alumni/ae children admitted to Harvard scored 35 points below the mean for all freshmen.. The controversy over racial preferences involved only the most competitive 20 percent of colleges and universities, where the number of applicants far exceeded he number of available places, since the overwhelming majority of institutions are not selective. Most whites denied admissions were rejected in favor of other white applicants, not in favor of the comparatively small number of minorities admitted."
--- Marcia Graham Synnott. 2010. The half opened door: The Half-Opened Door: Discrimination at Harvard, Yale, Princeton.

4) Metrics of statistical representation have been recognized as a valid tool by courts in assessing levels of discrimination, along with other things. This has been denounced by right wingers as well as "color-blind" liberals. But prominent Jewish detractors, whether of neocon or liberal ilk, conveniently skip over the fact that Jews frequently used the same statistical underpresentation arguments in their fight against bias. Per one history:

"Since it is almost impossible to prove discriminatory INTENT on the part of employers, proof of discrimination turns on numbers indicating a gross under-representation of minorities relative to their numbers in the labor pool. Indeed this was precisely the strategy that Jewish defense organizations used in the 1950s to demonstrate their exclusion from hospitals and corporate boardrooms. Thus it was ludicrous when these same organizations portrayed affirmative action as a system of group representation."
--Mark Major 2010. Where Do We Go From here pg 172

Nor was the heated outcry from SOME Jews even remotely as bad as they claimed in various AA battles, both on campus or workplace. As another history notes:

"The catastrophic scenarios conjured by the neo-conservatives and the [Jewish] agencies never came to pass. In fact between 1968 and 1973, blacks' share of total university faculty jobs grew from 2.2 to 2.9 percent; with historically black colleges and universities removed from the calculations, blacks made up only 0.9 percent of the professoriate. Over the next twenty years, black representation among full-time faculty members grew only .05 percent...

The federal government has barked but never bitten in academe as in construction: by 1980, not a single college or university in the country had lost federal monies for failure to comply with anti-discrimination law. A few leaders later acknowledged that affirmative action had caused no discernible loss of jobs for Jews, and that, quite to the contrary, Jewish women had benefited. Surveying 'the impact of affirmative action on Jews' in 1976, an AJC leader concluded that it 'has not had catastrophic impact,' though particular individuals might have 'suffered mightily.' How many though, 'nobody seems to know,' and no one had bothered to collect data beyond the anecdotal. Nor had anyone adduced figures proving that Jewish students had lost out across the board in admission to law or medical school."

--Nancy MacLean 2008. Freedom Is Not Enough: The Opening of the American Workplace. p. 218

Finally the young whites exhibited a degree of denial of racial discrimination, and its continuing effects, except for a brief nod to the past, and also fail to notice that the same civil rights measures supposedly "helping only" blacks, have worked quite well for white women. QUOTE from One history:

"As recently as 1970, American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T) then the nation's largest employer, was an Orwellian patchwork of occupational caste. White men occupied virtually all managerial positions throughout the company. Women filled the ranks of operators and clerical workers, and even the managers of women's departments were male. Unionized craft jobs were exclusively white male. The only jobs open to blacks were as janitors or maintenance workers. As other avenues of employment began to open up for white women during the 1960s, more black women were hired as operators. All of this changed dramatically with the landmatk AT&;T Consent Decree in 1973, in which the Bell System agreed to change its employment practices and meet employment targets for women and minorities."
--Mark Major 2010. Where Do We Go From here, pg 178

So-called "quotas" not substantial in black progress, and AA was originally a creation of whites. And given the web of deceptive propaganda deployed by some whites on this issue, it is worth noting that as conservative Thomas Sowell has pointed out, not only does black progress NOT depend on "affirmative action" but said "affirmative action" was itself a creation of whites, generally in the "whites only" advantages locked in for decades, or more specifically the legal remedies given white union members discriminated against due to union membership. Court's realized that merely saying "please stop" to discriminators did little to deter them or help the white unionists.

 Sowell opposes headcount race quotas but candidly holds that affirmative outreach steps in recruitment, promotion etc are reasonable. A company that has long denied its qualified black employees promotion can take such steps as steadily moving up said employees over time without imposing mandatory race quotas where the unqualified move up simply because of their race. He also candidly notes that court remedies to protect or compensate those directly  damaged are something long enjoyed by white workers. There nothing new, but have been around since the 1930s for whites.

"The general principle behind "affirmative action" is that a court order to "cease and desist" from some discriminatory practice may not be sufficient to undo the harm already done, or even to prevent additional harm as the result of a pattern of events set in motion by the prior illegal activity. This general principle goes back much further than the civil-rights legislation of the 1960's, and extends well beyond questions involving ethnic minorities or women. In 1935, the Wagner Act prescribed "affirmative action" as well as "cease and desist" remedies against employers whose anti-union activities had violated the law. Thus, in the landmark Jones and Laughlin Steel case which established the constitutionality of the Act, the National Labor Relations Board ordered the company not only to stop discriminating against those of its employees who were union members, but also to post notices to that effect in conspicuous places and to reinstate unlawfully discharged workers, with back pay. Had the company merely been ordered to "cease and desist" from economic (and physical) retaliation against union members,the future effect of its past intimidation would have continued to inhibit the free-choice elections guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act.

Racial discrimination is another obvious area where merely to "cease and desist" is not enough. If a firm has engaged in racial discrimination for years, and has an all-white work force as a result, then simply to stop explicit discrimination will mean little as long as the firm continues to hire by word-of-mouth referrals to its current employees' friends and relatives. (Many firms hire in just this way, regardless of their racial policies.) Clearly, the area of racial discrimination is one in which positive or affirmative steps of some kind seem reasonable-which is not to say that the particular policies actually followed make sense."

--Sowell, Thomas (1975) Affirmative Action Reconsidered. The Public Interest 3, pg 48-65

Playing the victim also serves to disguise the deeply embedded networks of white cronyism, favoritism and privilege-networks further screened by the victim card and "guilt" theme barrage. Three tactics are used: (a) the "neutral" measure, (b) the hidden white quota and (c) the redirection/diversion tactic used to recenter the conversation on whites and white concerns during conversations discussions on race.

The "race neutral" measure on the surface applies without race but is rigged in such a way that whies are the primary beneficiaries. The "under the table quota" involves mechanisms to privilege or favor whites in a process- such as legacy admissions. The diversionary redirect shifts conversations about racial discrimination to white concerns, often individualized, sidetracking any deeper examination of racial issues, and/or making them invisible. This diversion can occur with white feminist for example. Quote:

The "race neutral" measure
One analysis by two law professors (Greenberg and Ward 1997) on whites wanting to close a road, for example, shows how seemingly "race neutral" measures actually serve to enhance and lock in white benefit. The ostensible reason was traffic safety but the road closure would happen right at the point where the black and white areas joined, conveniently blocking off the "cullud" zone.

"Armstrong's discussion of City of Memphis v. Green shows hw the system can be used to support racial/economic housing patterns. White residents of the Hein park area of Memphis wanted the city to sell them a small strip of land across a major artery that led from a neighboring black area into their part of town. The sale of this small parcel of land to white landowners would result in the closure of the street, blocking its use as a thoroughfare for black drivers trying to get across Hein Park to other areas of Memphis. The white residents claimed that closing the through -road would reduce traffic and increase neighborhood safety. The closure would occur exactly at the point at which the black and white neighborhoods met and would limit contact between them. The Supreme Court upheld the sale saying, "the city has conferred a benefit on certain white property owners but there is no reason to believe that it would refuse to confer a comparable benefit on black property owners. While the closure was ostensibly based on the neutral principle of safety, Armstrong points out that it is unlikely that black owners would request such a closure.. [being more] likely to appreciate the economic resources that might flow from white drivers passing through."

The diversionary re-centering on white concerns

Wildman and Grillo show how analogies between one's own subordinate status, whatever it may be, and the position of people of color work to marginalize issues of race, recentering the claims on white people. For example, at one Association of American Law Schools (AALS) meeting, the plenary session was to focus on issues of racism, sexism and homophobia. The authors recount how during the question and answer period, a white woman rose to the microphone and said she did not want to change the subject, but she wanted to discuss another form of oppression- law professors in less elite law schools... the result of such a comment is to turn the focus of of the meeting from the issues of racism, sexism and homophobia, to the concerns of many of the whites in the audience... Once one is successful in refocusing attention on one's own problem, neither the actor nor the others in the group are required to pay any further attention to the problem of race. Grillo recounts her experience in a woman's group in law school in which all the (white) women argued that sexism was "worse" that racism. 'The women thought they understood racism by virtue of their experiences with sexism..' Again, the process of analogizing, the absence of any intent to injure on the part of the actors, and the lack of an adequate vocabulary, work together to make it difficult to focus attention on whites' racist conduct."

The "hidden" or "informal" white quota

"Another way in which our unspoken rules privilege whiteness is through the policies that admit children of alumni to institutions of higher education as legacies. A recent article in the Boston Globe [Nick Thompson, Sly Legacy of Prejudice at Colleges, Boston Globe, Oct 19, 1996- C1] indicated that if you were not a legacy, you had only a nineteen percent chance of being admitted to Stanford University as an undergraduate. A legacy has a forty percent chance. More that seventy-five percent of Stanford's legacies are white One could think of this whole program as an affirmative action program for white students. And, at least for one group of white students,, that would be an accurate way to portray it. But it is unlikely Stanford describes the program this way. Instead it is undoubtedly described as a means of increasing alumni commitment to school. It would be improper to claim this program was created with the intent of discriminating against African Americans, yet, it is also impossible to deny one effect of the program has been to increase the privileges of whites."

(--Judith Greenberg and Robert Ward, [Professors Of Law- New England School of Law], Book Review: Review of Privilege Revealed, by Stephanie M. Wildman with Contributions by Margalynne Armstrong, Adrienne D. Davis and Trina Grillo, 45 Clev. St. L. Rev. 251 (1997))

A "guilty" pleasure? :)

Note this post is not meant as any brief for flawed "AA quotas" but rather tackles the dubious white guilt/white victim narrative that has such a strong foothold among many whites, and not merely those on the right, as can be seen in the MTV documentary. Contrary to the white victim propaganda narrative however, whites are heavily involved in:
(a) playing the white victim card,
(b) manipulating the same "affirmative action" for the benefit of whites, such as white women,
(c) dismissing or denying numerous aspects of the history (such as Jews'  use of statistical representation, or "make whole" remedies given to white union members, even as they themselves benefit from and manipulate what they dismiss, or condemn.

Assorted hereditarians continually express amazement and puzzlement at why whites are allegedly "hurting themselves" with so-called "giveways to blacks." It makes for a great propaganda narrative- an enemy "Other "to focus anger on- red meat for "the faithful" to fulminate against "the liberals" and "self-hate." But that narrative is for the gullible. Behind the head fakes and propaganda, the game is still being rigged. It is like the massive amounts of new government spending that went to schools during the desegregation era. Most of it was pocketed by white school regimes who quickly fired hundreds of black teachers and tore down numerous once thriving black schools - end result: more cash, more facilities and more jobs for mostly white people as the federal largesse flowed.  When the full picture is examined, and the easy propaganda narratives broken down, are white people really "hurting" themselves or rather HELPING themselves to the benefits of a rigged game?

Guilt2- Media collaborates with guilt mongers - or how to play the white victim card

How Obama plays on white guilt- Hilary capitalizes

Hands off the Confederate flag

Despite much more wealth than blacks, whites collect about the same rate of welfare and are treated more generously

African "boat people" ushering in European demographic decline

The forgotten Holocaust- King Leopold's "Congo Free State" - 10 million victims

Are violent minorities taking over California and the West?

Presidential hopeful Ben Carson meets and Greeks

Contra "ISIS" partisans, there have been some beneficial effects of Christianity

The social construction of race, compared to biology- Graves

 Why HBD or hereditarianism lacks credibility

Leading Scientists criticize hereditarian claims

Thai me down - Thais fall behind genetically related southern Chinese, Tibetans below genetically related East Asians like Koreans and other Chinese

Time for liberals to respect "the south" ... in a way of speaking.. the south of Egypt that is..

Irony 2: touted High IQ "G-men" cannot reproduce themselves

Unz and Sowell: Unz debunking Lynn's IQ and Wealth of Nations. Sowell debunking the Bell Curve

Irony 1: touted High IQ types are more homosexual, more atheist, and more liberal (HAL)

Elite white universities discriminate against Asians using reverse "affirmative action"

Deteriorating state of white America

Racial Cartels (The Affirmative Action Propaganda machine- part 2

Hereditarian's/HBD's "Great Black Hope"

Exploding nonsense: the 10,000 Year Explosion

We need "rational racism"? Proponent Dinesh D;Souza becomes his own test case

The Affirmative Action Propaganda Machine- part 1

Two rules for being "really" black- no white wimmen, no Republican

The Axial age reconsidered - or latitude not attitide

Cannibal seasonings: dark meat on white

"Affirmative Action" in the form of court remedies has been around a long time- since the 1930s- benefiting white union workers against discrimination by employers

Mugged by reality 1: White quotas, special preferences and government jobs

Lightweight enforcement of EEO laws contradicts claims of "flood" of minorities "taking jobs"

Railroaded 3: white violence and intimidation imposed quotas

Railroaded 2: how white quotas and special preferences blockade black progress...

Railroaded 1: How white affirmative action and white special preferences destroyed black railroad employment...

Affirmative action: primary beneficiaries are white women...

7 reasons certain libertarians and right-wingers are wrong about the Civil Right Act

Social philosophy of Thomas Sowell

Bogus "biodiversity" theories of Kanazawa, Ruston, Lynn debunked

JP Rushton, Michael Levin, Richard Lynn debunked. Weaknesses of Jared Diamond's approach.

In the Blood- debunking "HBD" and Neo-Nazi appropriation of ancient Egypt

early Europeans and middle Easterners looked like Africans. Peoples returning or "backflowing" to Africa would already be looking like Africans

 Ancient Egypt: one of the world's most advanced civilizations- created by tropical peoples

Playing the "Greek defence" -debunking claims of Greeks as paragons of virtue or exemplars of goodness

Quotations from mainstream academic research on the Nile Valley peoples

Assorted data debunking

Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples ... - Jelte Wicherts 2010

Why national IQs do not support evolutionary theories of intelligence - WIcherts, Borsboom and Dolan 2010
Personality and Individual Differences 48 (2010) 91-96
----------------------------- -------------

Are intelligence tests measurement invariant over time? by JM Wicherts - ?2004
 --Dolan, Wicherts et al 2004. Investigating the nature of the Flynn effect. Intelligence 32 (2004) 509-537

---------------- -------


Race and other misadventures: essays in honor of Ashley Montagu... By Larry T. Reynolds, Leonard Lieberman

Race and intelligence: separating science from myth. By Jefferson M. Fish. Routledge 2002. See Templeton's detailed article referenced above also inside the book
---------------- -------

Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press
For summary see:
---------------- -------


--S OY Keita, R A Kittles, et al. "Conceptualizing human variation," Nature Genetics 36, S17 - S20 (2004)

--S.O.Y. Keita and Rick Kittles. (1997) *The Persistence ofRacial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence. AJPA, 99:3
---------------- -------

Alan Templeton. "The Genetic and Evolutionary significnce oF Human Races." pp 31-56. IN: J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating scinnce from myth.

 J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating science from myth.


-------------------------------- ---------------------

Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press

Krimsky, S, Sloan.K (2011) Race and the Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth, and Culture

Wicherts and Johnson, 2009. Group differences in the heritability of items and test scores

--Joseph Graves, 2006. What We Know and What We Don’t Know: Human Genetic Variation and the Social Construction of Race

J. Kahn (2013) How a Drug Becomes "Ethnic" - Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law and Ethics, v4:1

------------------------------------ -----------------

No comments: