Back in the early 1970's, I worked for a major anti-discrimination organization in Los Angeles. I avoid using the name since the story is over 50 years old, and if I use the name, I know people's minds will apply it to that organization today. In fact, the organization itself did not adopt the belief which I encountered. There had been some incident of a teacher in South Central saying racists things to her classroom of Black students. One of our white supporters who lived in Beverly Hills remarked that incident showed why Blacks students could not learn. The racism, she asserted, was debilitating. I asked if her son had faced anti-Semitism in school, if it would be OK for him not to do his homework. She looked at me as if I were insane. "Of course not," she retorted. She got my point.
Even back in the 1960's and the 1970's, the Philosophy of Victimization had become so strong that it had become PC -- Blacks were permanent victims. The Dems have promoted the concept that Blacks are victims, and hence, need Dems to de-racialize society for them. The Blacks' role was to always vote Dem. Today, the same concept is found in Identity Politics and Wokeism.
On the decent side, the Dems did allow Blacks to participate and it does not take that long working with individuals to see who is competent, who is decent, and who is not. As I've said about LA City Council, "It does not discriminate against anyone of any race, ethnicity, color or gender preference provided they're crooked."
Yup, democrats allow black people to participate as long as those black people are willing to promote racial ideologies that are fundamentally harmful to the greater success of most black people. The black people who the ideologies of democrats primarily help are the black political class -- politicians, bureaucrats, and activists. And we see in places like Chicago, the teaching profession has basically been transformed into a bureaucratic position.
Unfortunately, the political domination of the Democratic Party over black people has not changed in around 200 years; it has just changed tactics.
All those black democrats do this do they? Most democrats are anti woke. Most democrats are the reason black people have made so much progress since the 50s, and black peoples work of course. While I agree the Dems are just as elitist as the GOP, at least they do something. I mean, are you arguing the GOP has ever done anything to alleviate past racism and present issues? Its not about the Democrats. Its about the far left undoing progress, and the far right remaining as racist as most whites were 50 yrs ago.
The progress many black people have made since the 50s has been despite the major, exclusive activities of the Democratic Party and not because of them. Public housing, affirmative action, welfare systems, and the drug war(which was not exclusive but still major) have been detrimental overall. And much of regression of many black communities has been substantially exacerbated by the Democratic Party—again, Chicago being a prime example.
There is no such thing as the “far left” or the “far right”. These are very simplistic political categories that lack any significant logical coherency and serve mostly to numb the minds of the electorate to keep them in a polarized duality, struggling over relatively less important issues, while the most powerful political factions rule in both parties—the war and corporate monopoly factions.
And the Democratic Party is overall more racist than the Republican Party, and always has been. The notion that the Republican Party is more racist today than the Democratic Party is just propagandistic gaslighting that disregards any racism from political factions in the parties that isn’t of the white nationalist variety.
Today, the racial bigotry from some people in minority racial groups is as insidious to the republic as racial bigotry from some white people. And the racism, and policies that are supported, that white “woke” “liberals” promote found primarily in the ruling caste of the Democratic Party — extreme racial moral collectivism — is more dangerous than what is promoted by the largely impotent remnant of white nationalists who can be found in the Republican Party. The idea that most Democrats are most anti-woke is just foolish. Every presidential candidate in the past election was woke. Biden is woke. And I don’t know of any Democratic congress person who has condemned BLM for being a Marxist race cult, or suggested that trans women are in fact men. You are welcome to collect the majority you think there is, and list them.
Well I think its both because and in spite of. Take away any Dem policy since the 50s and you think we're living in equal, utopian racial heaven? No. Millions of black people, through their own abilities, but also policy, from the Left, are now middle class. The detriment is a side effect of any policy. Have you tried planning a family vacation? Imagine policymaking, in this country!
I find the far comment intriguing. But it baffles me. MAGA people are far right. SJW are far left. Without categories, blurry as they may be, how do we even communicate?
Dems seem racist to poc today sure. But then so does everything. Very few people are racist by any logical standard any more. But you think the GOP cares about inner cities, low school scores, or recent historical inequity? Please. I admire the GOPS balls out dont give a shit keep winning elections, but they don't care about anybody but the upper classes, who are still, somewhat, mostly white.
I agree with the last parag. Except Biden is infuriating the woke by playing centrist. He's doing an amazing job in this country of policymaking for all. Trump cared only about the far right.
Dude, neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party cares about “inner cities, low school scores, or recent historical inequity”. They care about power. Everything else is just Machiavellian means of gathering votes so that their power lust can be gratified. If we counted the billionaires who vote Democratic and those who vote Republican, we would find no meaningful difference in quantity. They are both parties of the upper classes. Both try to create propaganda that they are not. Apparently you have swallowed the DNCs.
It doesn’t matter if the Democratic Party sells itself on caring about the inner city. It is currently the greatest obstacle to its actual improvement.
If we took away Dem policy since the 70s (dunno why you go back to the 50s; the Democratic Party was still making it illegal for black people to sit at the front of the bus back then) there would be less black children murdered every year and less black children being born into fractured families. Would things be utopia? Absolutely not. And in no way am I advocating for the Republican Party, it’s garbage too. But its policies would have been less harmful overall. It doesn’t matter what the proclaimed intentions or motivations for the policies were or are. “Good” intentions don’t always make good outcomes.
“I find the far comment intriguing. But it baffles me. MAGA people are far right. SJW are far left. Without categories, blurry as they may be, how do we even communicate? “
How about you just talk about MAGA people and SJWs? Why do you need to classify them into a binary political spectrum that actually doesn’t logically fit much of the time? I have no problem understanding who you are referring to when you refer to MAGA people and SJWs. Do you thinking astrology is a better way of talking about the stars than talking about the stars without categories too?
“Except Biden is infuriating the woke by playing centrist. He's doing an amazing job in this country of policymaking for all. Trump cared only about the far right.”
That is absolute bonkers statement. Biden is doing an absolute shit job as a policy maker for me, which means he certainly isn’t doing it for all. The fact that you said that just makes me think you are a silly cheerleader. It’s obviously false. And the idea that he is “infuriating the woke” is nonsense; Trump infuriated the woke. Biden is simply disappointing them because there is no way not to disappoint wannabe tyrants in a republic. But he is feeding them as much as he needs for their support so that he can give billions to warmongers and other wealthy and powerful Democratic Party allies.
If you want to communicate better try not using sentences like “Trump cared only about the far right”, which imploy worthless categories like the far right.
Yeah. Angry and meaningless. This is now a wasteful internet rant. Dude.
Subjectivity a word you have learned about? This is the epitome of a subjective, biased rant.
To your what Libertarian/Utopian points: what would you put in place of political parties employing power? They are, compared to most nations on earth today, and compared to essentially all political elites in history, doing about what you'd expect.
If you're angling for a 3rd party, sure. Would be nice. Wouldn't necessarily help the country.
Criticizing the normative is easy. Offering alternatives isn't.
Seems the Dems have been responsible for every action in any city black people live since the 70s. No agency? No choices? Just poor me. Its absurd.
I don't think you have compared our system to that of other countries. What you want is unicorns and ice cream and perfection.
I suggest you look at other nations since this period. You're lucky to be here. Dude.
I am teaching a college course Contemporary Issues in Economics. Given the scarce resources devoted to enforcing DEI and its impact on the labor market, I decided I would have one class day devoted to the topic of DEI. I already had three essays related to the topic but will include this essay as well.
No doubt, some students and faculty will object . History as my guide, some people will, rather than accept my offer to publicly discuss the issue, instead accuse me of racism. Some might even call for me to be fired. This is a sad commentary on the state of affairs on so many college campuses.
Colleges should not be where viewpoint diversity goes to die. Too often that is the case.
I thank the author for this excellent, important essay.
Apr 12, 2023·edited Apr 12, 2023Liked by Free Black Thought
I check out stuff in Project Gutenberg fairly regularly. Most stuff ain't that great. This was a surprise. It is like a history of technology with business, not the usual politics and war as history.
I am prejudiced and think Black Americans place to much emphasis on race over technology rather than what technology somebody had to take advantage of whoever didn't.
I use a text to speech app, AIReader, so I have read everything but the questions and bibliography at the end of each chapter. It is written like a textbook so that could be a good thing.
I just ordered a copy of A History of Commerce. Thank you. For the Contemporary Issues in Economics course, I read, but did not assign, a book with all of the columns Henry Hazlitt wrote for Newsweek. It fascinates me that policy makers continue to enact already tried-and-failed policies.
I looked at the topics, decided it looked interesting given the publication date, and bought it.
As for planned obsolescence, I remember being exposed to that concept in a marketing course I took in which we read The Wastemakers by Vance Packard. I asked the professor "but wouldn't some supplier have an incentive to buck the trend and make things that lasted longer?"
I agree with this entire post except the author’s statement that she understands why white people are behind this sort of teaching:
“It’s not your kids being told that they can’t succeed and you get to shed some of your white guilt in the process.”
No and no.
White kids are told they can never succeed at:
*Escaping the legacy of what earlier generations of people did;
*NOT being racist;
*NOT being history’s greatest oppressors and villains (in some fantasy scenario where all the world’s people lived in peace and harmony with the Earth before bad white people came along and ruined everything.
You don’t see, for example, Navajo (Dine) kids being shamed because their ancestors conquered various Pueblo people and stole their lands. In this style of teaching, it’s only bad white people who bear that stigma of conqueror and oppressor of indigenous American people -- or any people.
And when you teach people to divide themselves by “race” and you teach white people how bad they are, they don’t shed any white guilt. You instill more and more white guilt.
My kids routinely came home from public school with messages that white people were the worst people in the history of the world, when in fact, literally every “race” of people has routinely for thousands of years conquered other groups, taken their land, enslaved or exploited their people, taken their resources -- you name it, people of every ethnicity have done it to people of every other.
It’s wrong to teach white children they’re uniquely racist and bad, just as it’s wrong to teach children of other ethnic backgrounds that they can’t succeed on their own merits unless standards are lowered, or they won’t live to old age because police are gunning for them.
Agreed. I thought about that when writing it. But I was referring to the white authors of the bill. I do think white kids are made to feel guilty about what their ancestors may or may not have done. They are told they are racist based on their skin and their character and actions don’t matter.
Marxists are doing a very good job of spreading their ideology through the educational system.
Unless there is some alternative ideology that is supported by the same level of organization and zeal as them, I suspect they will continue to make gradual gains in control. Even if they don’t establish complete domination, they act like termites that undermine the foundation of a political society -- California is a great contemporary example. So much wealth. So much potential. And it is being squandered by racial tribalism, corruption, and stupidity.
These economic ideologies are kind of funny in that none of them advocate mandatory accounting/finance in the schools. Double-entry accounting was invented in Italy 700 years ago.
Search Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations for "and account" and you will find multiple instances of "read, write and account". He used the word 'education' Eighty Times. The "Invisible Hand" only once.
I’m curious—do you have an example of a book, or books, that you would recommend for children / teenagers to read / study in school that teach what you think would be good regarding accounting / finance?
Most accounting books seem to be written as though the reader's objective is to earn a living as an accountant rather than run his/her own economic life.
Karl Marx mentioned depreciation far more than Adam Smith. But in the days of Smith and Marx consumers didn't buy cars and televisions and microwave ovens. Every household is a business with depreciation. The issue is Net Worth in addition to profit.
“There are no marxists left”. For a “leftist professor” to say that is like a Proud Boy saying there are “no white supremacists left”.
One of the primary leaders of BLM, Patrice Cullors, literally said she is a “trained Marxist.” The most politically glorified organization by Democrats, and one of the most well funded, in decades is run by people who are sympathetic to Marxist ideology.
There is nothing “apoplectic” about pointing out the risk the ideology poses to our country. Ignoring it won’t make it go away. Certainly “leftist professors” who aren’t actually Marxists themselves denying the obvious like you just did will not help things. The ideology of the “woke” and sjws derives substantially from Marxism. They are like an unholy union between post modernism and Marxism.
Motivated reasoning fallacy. Ad hominem as a habit. Anecdotal evidence.
One of the Proud Boys leader, indeed the leader is a man of color. So that must mean all men of color are, well, its just not true right.
Cullors is a Marxist, yep. As I've mentioned, they are pushing us back 30 yrs in race relations.
But you think there are any actual Marxist professors??? :-) Who think we will win through class struggle, revolution, dictatorship of the proletariat and communism will replace the now over 100 year old very well functioning two party system you loathe so much?
So if a prof thinks Marx had some points (he did) or has students read the quite fascinating Comm Manifesto, he she they are Marxists?
You have slammed the Dems for being racist, elitist and classist. Now they are Marxist. The Dems are everything it seems. I'm curious why you don't talk much about the veering far right GOP. The Dems are the least of our problems, though they never get anywhere.
I totally agree about ideology. I'm literally 30 yrs in a teaching career of swaying extremists toward a respect for the center and common shared values.
And I agree with you on the sjw/woke derivation. Its Marxist (well its not, its post 19070s Cultural Marxism in fact) and yes Mr Peterson has rightly pointed out its mixed with anti-western civ, anti white Postmodern swish.
I should be more succinct, but I write quickly as I work 50 hrs a week and all that...there are very few real Marxist profs left, and those that still walk around bearded, are running jokes even among progressives.
Students aren't that gullible. And if just hearing about Marx turns us Marxist, well then maybe there is something to his ideas.
Changed your anonymous name? Didn’t like the last one?
If a professor is at a particular degree of sympathy with the moral outlook of Marx, and the ideology the professor holds is sufficiently derived or inspired or similar to that which was presented by Marx, I think it is perfectly legitimate to call the professor Marxist. For the sake of philosophical precision one could come up with something more distinct than Marxism, but it wouldn’t be wrong either morally or rationally to label the professor Marxist. It’s like distinguishing between various cults of Jehovah. Are Jehovah Witnesses “Christians”? The fact that it irritates Marxists when someone who isn’t Marxist gets the name of their particular cult of Marxism wrong in their view doesn’t really bother me and it shouldn’t bother anyone who isn’t a Marxist.
I’m glad you are starting to like me. You would probably like me more if you tried harder to read what I actually write and not project whatever prejudices you hold into it. And I haven’t engaged in ad hominem arguments or other logical fallacies. An ad hominem argument essentially uses something like an insult as a premise. I have not done that. Insults, alone, are not necessarily premises. They can be conclusions.
As for your alleged 30 years of trying to manipulate the minds of students who you think are “extremists” toward what you think is the center with “shared values”--what the “center” is depends on what is measured to be the poles of something. The poles of political ideology as determined by people who now consider themselves “liberal” or “left” have become radically distorted from what was considered those poles by the same identity group decades ago. As Yeats said, the center cannot hold. I suspect you think you are in the “center” though--just like the Pope did when he was condemning Galileo. And no, that was not an ad hominem. Please study your logical fallacies. You are seeing them where they do not exist.
When there is infinite space, there is no center. And besides, if there were, there is no apriori reason why we should choose it rather than some other spot. An “extremist” could be right.
As a mother in the Twin Cities, I applaud this woman. I hope our representatives listen to her. They won't listen to me but I will share this with them anyway. It's bad enough that liberal legislators are handing out scarlet letters to young adults- now they want to give them to kids! This is why I left the Democratic party and why I fear that I may eventually need to leave Minnesota. This stuff is toxic - regardless of race. Why can't we just teach history honestly without making any prescriptions?
Welcome to our Minnesota! Skepticism, heterodox views, and meritocracy are unicorns here. I’ve never heard of her. I’m so glad Ms. Montzka spoke out, and you feature her in this space. Thank you for doing so. It’s going to take a lot of Ms. Montzkas to protest victimhood, because only victims are listened to here. Of course, with our level of carjacking and murders, we have plenty of real victims. We saw Adam B. Coleman speak here recently, addressing fatherlessness and violence. Loury and McWhorter have both been here, both protested by college students, McWhorter’s appearance causing the firing of a St. Olaf philosophy professor, the college that just made the news again over a student’s cache of automatic weapons in his dorm room. Minneapolis continues a commitment to victim culture, to the infantilization of black children, to gender affirming chemical neutering and castration, to providing safe spaces to do drugs, to liberate criminals A.S.A.P., and climate anti-racism, whatever that is. But again, thank you!!! Theo Olson, St. Paul.
How cool! I’m glad to know you -- at least in this extended way. Please keep it up! I’ve subscribed to Loury McWhorter for a few years, and spoke with Loury in 2017 at St. Olaf. I was relieved of my teaching career in St. Paul Schools by Black Lives Matter in 2016. It’s on my substack. Thanks, Theo
Thank you, Kofi Montzka! What happens under the banner of CRT is disempowering to the point that it's hard to believe that it is anything but a sinister plan to divide and conquer, and sacrifice those purportedly benefits in the process. We need so many more voices of reason and insight like yours!
I have increasingly become uncomfortable with the term “minority.” Frankly, I find the notion offensive. Minority this and minority that. Enough is enough. The word minority, when applied to people, somehow translates to mean something less than equal. This term is all well and good for political parties but for a people (Hispanics, African Americans and Native Americans in particular) it is translated to mean inferior. How did this tainting of the definition come to be? I don’t know, and frankly, at this point, I don’t care. What I do care about is the fact that this label is not an ego builder, but an ego destroyer. Minority status is a potential limiter rather than a potential maximizer. Would you go to a “minority day parade” or a Mexican-American fiesta? Would you get up in front of a group of people and introduce yourself as a “minority?”
I didn’t take minority courses in law school (although some lazy person might argue that a course in Equal Protection Law is a course for “minorities”.) There are no special exams reserved for “minorities.” The 2 bar exams I took and passed were not “minority” bar exams. There are no “minority” court rooms. Yet by some people I was perceived, because of the color of my skin, to be a minority attorney. Why do people and institutions persist in using the “minority” label? Only one reason — laziness. I want no part of that formulation. You want no part of it either.
I cannot help but wonder how much time these courses take up and the relevance and quality of the "Real" educational courses.
I considered comparing Romeo and Juliet to West Side Story in English literature to be a total waste of time. I got B's in English literature, but it was useless.
So you did not find value in learning the origin of the language we are using now? Of exploring themes such as love, ambition, power, betrayal, identity, and morality? No need to look for a deeper understanding of the complexities of human nature, emotions, and relationships.
No learning is useless. Even accounting, or econ, courses. They don't make good people, but they aren't useless.
Educated Harvard graduates could not explain the seasons.
I laughed my ass off when I first saw that in the early 90s. I could have explained that in 8th grade. But then I thought about why I knew, because it was never discussed in any class I ever took.
Science Fiction
I researched words and concepts that I encountered in real sci-fi, not drivel like Star Wars.
I don't follow links by internet people. I follow the thousand book library I own, and the 40 professional led college courses I took, and then the 70 I've taught, based on peer reviewed work. I was reading Clarke in 1980. Thanks though. I love science fiction. You think you'd have that without Shakespeare and the classics?
If your point, and lordy knows I'm struggling, is that elites aren't all elites, I agree. From Bushes to sociopaths like Zuckerberg and Musk, for sure.
However, having spent half my life in poverty and half exposed to Ivy league elites, I'm afraid that the vast majority of elites are in fact smarter, quicker, and even kinder than the average person. Its not all injustice. There is ability. Sorry to report.
You're suggesting those graduates represent all educated elites? I mean, the story is a story because its so ridiculous and rare. There are certainly lots of legacy elite losers, but you know anybody who grew up in real poor neighborhoods knows that there are far more among the uneducated.
"You think you'd have that without Shakespeare and the classics?"
Of course! Though Hyperion would undoubtedly be different without Chaucer.
That is one of the funny things about science fiction. If you seriously accept the possibility of technologically advanced aliens elsewhere in the galaxy then you must accept that they figured out the same physics without Newton and Einstein and Shakespeare. Physics does not care about culture, but if you don't get the physics right then the technology doesn't work.
Pseudo-intellectual BS compared to mathematics and physics. And what I call science fiction was more informative. Along with stumbling across books on my own.
Why don't we have a KURRL?
K-12 Unschooling Recommend Reading List
Tyranny of Words by Stuart Chase
The Screwing of the Average Man by David Hapgood
George Orwell mentioned Chase in a political essay. Chase was a member of FDR's brain trust and wrote the book A New Deal. One of those historical people that we normally never hear about.
As perhaps the ugliest of all human frailties (as per "the crooked timber of humanity") racism is an eternal and universal expression of stupidity.
It remains a special malaise in US society, due largely to a far-too-long period of slavery followed by various despicable practices.
But this is 2023. When the question is posed: "In which country such large and diverse mass of non-majority-ethnie population treated better than in the US?" it is difficult to deny the progress we have made and are continually making.
For illustration, live, look and listen. To everything.
If we don’t have a race-based system, how does the author account for the demographic statistics in every facet of American life that suggest otherwise?
The reality is, this IS a race based shitstem. One can try to deny it. One can mitigate against it. One can even transcend it. But to teach children otherwise is to leave them unlovingly vulnerable to be blindsided by the reality of America.
Teaching hopelessness is indeed a tool of genteel white supremacy (i.e. white liberals) used to condition the oppressed unto their oppression. But teaching “hope” is NOT the same as inculcating oblivion. Teaching hope, acknowledges the reality of racial caste in America & inculcating a belief that Beloved Community MUST exist, elsewhere.
Apr 12, 2023·edited Apr 12, 2023Liked by Free Black Thought
The demographic statistics? You mean like the fact that Indians are the highest earning racial group in America? You are totally right, they must have brought their Brahminical caste system to America!
Jokes aside:
The *reality* is that America today is one of the most, and arguably *the* most, glorious places of opportunity for “people of color” on the planet in all of human history, especially people of near-African descent. It certainly could be even more glorious, and there is plenty that still merits great complaint, but to teach black children that their ability to achieve their goals will not only possibly be affected by their race, but that it will likely be, is a poisonous falsehood.
Tragically, a black child may face more danger and obstacles if they are raised in an average predominantly “black community” than if they are raised in an average predominately “white community” (or for that matter, “Asian community”) due to self destructive toxic subcultures that exist in most predominantly black communities. Those toxic subcultures may stem significantly from “race based systems” of the past. But those race based systems don’t exist any longer, except for as nightmares in some activists and as fictions that race hustlers peddle for self-gain.
I don’t talk about “people of color.” It’s a term given by whites so they don’t have to deal with the multiple & varied complaints about white dealings with all other people of the world.
I talk about Black people. Now, reconfigure your quip about statistics focused on Black people in America. Then name a positive quality of life dynamic where Black people are not at the bottom. Then name a negative dynamic where Black people are not at the top.
But let me stop talking bad about the oppressor & oppressive shitstem for which so many of you give thanks. I realize most “POC” have bought into the idea that the best thing that happened to them, was to be oppressed by the white man & forced to believe in his ideas & ideals.
Apr 12, 2023·edited Apr 12, 2023Liked by Free Black Thought
What is a positive quality of life dynamic? I don’t know what you are talking about. You mean like being disproportionately successful at athletics and music? But what does that have to do with current racial dynamics? Or for that matter the negative quality life dynamics you are referencing?
Unless you can show how any particular individual would have had a significantly different outcome even though they took the same actions, and lived the same habits, simply because of their race, racial discrimination is not a reasonable explanation of causation--likewise, and unless laws or customs based on race can explain that outcome, a “race system” does not exist.
I am not “oppressed by the white man”. It is irrational for any black person in America today to believe that they are "oppressed by the white man".
I must admit that being born of a white woman, particularly and specifically my mother, was one of the greatest things that happened to me. But the gratitude doesn’t derive from her being white, but her being her. One thing she never did was disparage or doubt my ability to succeed because I shared equally a race with my dad that I did with her. And also what she did not do was suggest that any ideas that were true or ideals that are worthy were the property of any race of people.
I suggest you reconsider your adherence to the notion that ideas or ideals are “white” or any other race. That is certainly an oppressive notion to hold. I can only imagine that would weaken anyone who believed it. It is false, so there isn’t any good reason to believe it. Racial hatred certainly isn’t a good reason. When the “white man” landed on the shores of America, it would have been foolish for the natives to reject gun powder because the white man brought it--and not just because gun powder was first invented in China.
Thomas Sowell has answered your question in many of his books. I strongly suspect he will continue to do so in his (hopefully) soon-to-be-released book Social Justice Fallacies.
Men go to prison at nine times the rate of women. Maybe this is partially explained by systemic misandry in our criminal justice system but I think the much better explanation is unequal rates of committing crimes.
Thomas Sowell? I have his Basic Economics 4th and 5th editions on my smartphone.
"After the war was over, there was a tremendous increase in the production of cars, refrigerators, housing, and other parts of the nation’s accumulated stock of wealth which had been allowed to wear down or wear out while production was being devoted to urgent wartime purposes. The durable equipment of consumers declined in real value between 1944 and 1945, the last year of the war and then more than doubled in real value over the next five years, as the nation's stock of durable assets that had been depleted during the war was replenished. This was an unprecedented rate of growth." |
That paragraph is identical in the 4th and 5th editions of Sowell's Basic Economics. He admits to the occurance of 'depreciation' in consumer durables but never uses the word. The Great Depression followed by WWII followed by the Great Acceleration has given us today's world. But the depreciation of all of the consumer junk produced since WWII is being ignored. Notice he called them "durable assets". The C02 from producing all of the junk is still in the atmosphere.
Euro-American economic theory has ignored demand side depreciation since WWII. NDP does not get much mention.
Love it! Black criminality is the problem. Yea...exactly why the KKK was instituted to protect white people & white society from the hyper-criminal darkies.
If a wizard magically removed all the racial prejudice in every white person's brain today, the statistics for crime based on race would not significantly change. That doesnt mean that "black criminality is the problem". It means that some black people would continue to make the choices they do. White people don't make black people rob or shoot other black people. If we just take those black people committing crimes against other black people as our statistic of question, that would be enough to make the statistics for black people in general disproportionate. Do you blame white people when any black person robs another black person? Do you blame white people when any black person joins a gang? The moral responsibility for any particular person's actions lies primarily at the feet of that person -- and only sometimes does it make sense to assign moral blame to those who were most influential in their social development, possibly family, friends, and their larger community. And it makes no sense to blame ghostly abstractions like "the white man."
Another example: if we magically removed the prejudice from white peoples' brains today, some black teens in Chicago would still join gangs, and at a rate much higher than asian teens or white teens in Chicago, and this holds regardless of income levels. If the communities that those black teens develop continue to assign blame to outside forces for crimes that more often than not are committed *within the communities of those black teens* , the cultural forces that contribute to the decisions of those teens will not change.
Again: love it! It’s the same reason why the Rust Belt, Bible Belt & Appalachia are so void of capital investment. No one wants to be mugged by reality in those crime infested white areas either.
Unfortunately, no one cares to mention the plight of white people in those communities.
I care to mention the plight of poor people, regardless on their color, in many communities in the U.S. and in other countries. It isn't racism that explains why South Korea is so prosperous and North Korea a nightmare.
It was in 1776 that Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations. He didn't point to race as the explanatory variable for why some countries were poorer than others.
The best predictor of child poverty in the U.S. is not race, but instead family structure. It should surprise no one that a child raised in a single-parent home is more likely to grow up in poverty than a child raised where both parents are present. The reality is that the rate of children growing up in single-parent households has increased for blacks, Hispanics, and whites. The rate for blacks 72%, is higher than that of Hispanics at about 53%, which is higher than that for whites at 29%, which is higher than that of Asian-Americans at 17%.
As for the allusion to the Rust Belt, Bible Belt & Appalachia, crime is obviously not the only, or even primary, reason for lack of capital investment. Corporations didn't relocate in droves to Ireland because of the low crime rate but because of the low corporate tax rate. They don't relocate from one state in the U.S. to another primarily because of crime.
While being raised in a single-family home is a good predictor of child poverty, I do not think it is good to suggest that biological parents should always stay together or that the best thing for a child is if they are raised by both biological parents [you are not necessarily saying this]. I so often read people who support the nuclear family give out these correlations and who don't accept the possibility that the correlation is not a causation. Children can be raised in families that don't fit the nuclear family model and turn out to be relatively financially successful and not prone to violence. I think culture certainly affects poverty and crime, but nuclear families are not the only medium that can develop good culture.
Frankly, some women, and men, who choose not to raise children with their other biological parent are doing the children a favor. Some people should not be anywhere near children.
I do not doubt that there are children who are better off not having a father around. However, in too many cases, the father is never positively involved in his child's life. Admittedly, it would be optimal for women to avoid have sex with such men, but the unpleasant reality is some do not AND our government has made it easier for women to get by without a loving father in the home. (I support government more aggressively going after men who create children but never act like loving fathers.) Net for society and children in general, the trend has been detrimental. There are some important things children learn just by watching a father get up every morning and go to work. They should learn by observation that hitting a spouse isn't acceptable behavior and that parents can argue but reconcile.
There is something sick about a culture when a company is planning to have a show titled "All My Babies' Mamas" in which we're supposed to be entertained by a rapper who has 11 children by 10 different women. It shouldn't be canceled (as it was) but never been filmed in the first place.
They don’t police Appalachia, the Bible Belt or Rust Belt with the same intentionality. If your wizard performed that trick, or if Society repented of the white supremacy that designed the house, then policing in those poor communities across color lines would be done with similar vigor. So, I’d imagine (since people are people) you’d find that crime statistics would move toward each other, whether that’s better for one or worse for the other. (That would only reveal if indeed policing is a problem)
I'm a little confused. Are you suggesting that if policing increased in "Appalachia", "the bible belt" or the "rust belt", where there are more white people I think you presume, we would find more violent crime? And could you be more careful about replying to the correct comments? You actually think that policing is causing some black people to commit violence against other black people? Or do you think policing is causing there to be a report of more violent crime in particular areas? You think that the reason there is more violent crime reported between black people in St. Louis Missouri than say asian people in Irvine CA, is somehow because of policing?
Yes. You seem to be. But that is a choice. And I don’t need to fight you in holding up your choice. I pray you are happy with that choice & that it brings you ultimate peace.
No, its not really a choice. My confusion is a direct result from you expressing something unclear. It is your choice, though, not to answer my questions to clarify what you wrote that was unclear. There is nothing you must "fight" with me about.
Committing crimes does have a serious negative consequence for those convicted of crimes. The current efforts to achieve "equity" by attributing the unequal outcomes to something other than systemic discrimination is having serious negative consequences, particularly for law-abiding people in crime-infested areas.
I think it is Whole Foods that just closed its store in San Francisco because of crime and theft. I think it is Walmart that just closed four stores in Chicago for similar reasons. If these closures are irrational, someone who believes as such should profit by opening up stores in these areas. When they do, they too, will likely get mugged by reality.
Back in the early 1970's, I worked for a major anti-discrimination organization in Los Angeles. I avoid using the name since the story is over 50 years old, and if I use the name, I know people's minds will apply it to that organization today. In fact, the organization itself did not adopt the belief which I encountered. There had been some incident of a teacher in South Central saying racists things to her classroom of Black students. One of our white supporters who lived in Beverly Hills remarked that incident showed why Blacks students could not learn. The racism, she asserted, was debilitating. I asked if her son had faced anti-Semitism in school, if it would be OK for him not to do his homework. She looked at me as if I were insane. "Of course not," she retorted. She got my point.
Even back in the 1960's and the 1970's, the Philosophy of Victimization had become so strong that it had become PC -- Blacks were permanent victims. The Dems have promoted the concept that Blacks are victims, and hence, need Dems to de-racialize society for them. The Blacks' role was to always vote Dem. Today, the same concept is found in Identity Politics and Wokeism.
On the decent side, the Dems did allow Blacks to participate and it does not take that long working with individuals to see who is competent, who is decent, and who is not. As I've said about LA City Council, "It does not discriminate against anyone of any race, ethnicity, color or gender preference provided they're crooked."
Yup, democrats allow black people to participate as long as those black people are willing to promote racial ideologies that are fundamentally harmful to the greater success of most black people. The black people who the ideologies of democrats primarily help are the black political class -- politicians, bureaucrats, and activists. And we see in places like Chicago, the teaching profession has basically been transformed into a bureaucratic position.
Unfortunately, the political domination of the Democratic Party over black people has not changed in around 200 years; it has just changed tactics.
All those black democrats do this do they? Most democrats are anti woke. Most democrats are the reason black people have made so much progress since the 50s, and black peoples work of course. While I agree the Dems are just as elitist as the GOP, at least they do something. I mean, are you arguing the GOP has ever done anything to alleviate past racism and present issues? Its not about the Democrats. Its about the far left undoing progress, and the far right remaining as racist as most whites were 50 yrs ago.
The progress many black people have made since the 50s has been despite the major, exclusive activities of the Democratic Party and not because of them. Public housing, affirmative action, welfare systems, and the drug war(which was not exclusive but still major) have been detrimental overall. And much of regression of many black communities has been substantially exacerbated by the Democratic Party—again, Chicago being a prime example.
There is no such thing as the “far left” or the “far right”. These are very simplistic political categories that lack any significant logical coherency and serve mostly to numb the minds of the electorate to keep them in a polarized duality, struggling over relatively less important issues, while the most powerful political factions rule in both parties—the war and corporate monopoly factions.
And the Democratic Party is overall more racist than the Republican Party, and always has been. The notion that the Republican Party is more racist today than the Democratic Party is just propagandistic gaslighting that disregards any racism from political factions in the parties that isn’t of the white nationalist variety.
Today, the racial bigotry from some people in minority racial groups is as insidious to the republic as racial bigotry from some white people. And the racism, and policies that are supported, that white “woke” “liberals” promote found primarily in the ruling caste of the Democratic Party — extreme racial moral collectivism — is more dangerous than what is promoted by the largely impotent remnant of white nationalists who can be found in the Republican Party. The idea that most Democrats are most anti-woke is just foolish. Every presidential candidate in the past election was woke. Biden is woke. And I don’t know of any Democratic congress person who has condemned BLM for being a Marxist race cult, or suggested that trans women are in fact men. You are welcome to collect the majority you think there is, and list them.
Well I think its both because and in spite of. Take away any Dem policy since the 50s and you think we're living in equal, utopian racial heaven? No. Millions of black people, through their own abilities, but also policy, from the Left, are now middle class. The detriment is a side effect of any policy. Have you tried planning a family vacation? Imagine policymaking, in this country!
I find the far comment intriguing. But it baffles me. MAGA people are far right. SJW are far left. Without categories, blurry as they may be, how do we even communicate?
Dems seem racist to poc today sure. But then so does everything. Very few people are racist by any logical standard any more. But you think the GOP cares about inner cities, low school scores, or recent historical inequity? Please. I admire the GOPS balls out dont give a shit keep winning elections, but they don't care about anybody but the upper classes, who are still, somewhat, mostly white.
I agree with the last parag. Except Biden is infuriating the woke by playing centrist. He's doing an amazing job in this country of policymaking for all. Trump cared only about the far right.
Dude, neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party cares about “inner cities, low school scores, or recent historical inequity”. They care about power. Everything else is just Machiavellian means of gathering votes so that their power lust can be gratified. If we counted the billionaires who vote Democratic and those who vote Republican, we would find no meaningful difference in quantity. They are both parties of the upper classes. Both try to create propaganda that they are not. Apparently you have swallowed the DNCs.
It doesn’t matter if the Democratic Party sells itself on caring about the inner city. It is currently the greatest obstacle to its actual improvement.
If we took away Dem policy since the 70s (dunno why you go back to the 50s; the Democratic Party was still making it illegal for black people to sit at the front of the bus back then) there would be less black children murdered every year and less black children being born into fractured families. Would things be utopia? Absolutely not. And in no way am I advocating for the Republican Party, it’s garbage too. But its policies would have been less harmful overall. It doesn’t matter what the proclaimed intentions or motivations for the policies were or are. “Good” intentions don’t always make good outcomes.
“I find the far comment intriguing. But it baffles me. MAGA people are far right. SJW are far left. Without categories, blurry as they may be, how do we even communicate? “
How about you just talk about MAGA people and SJWs? Why do you need to classify them into a binary political spectrum that actually doesn’t logically fit much of the time? I have no problem understanding who you are referring to when you refer to MAGA people and SJWs. Do you thinking astrology is a better way of talking about the stars than talking about the stars without categories too?
“Except Biden is infuriating the woke by playing centrist. He's doing an amazing job in this country of policymaking for all. Trump cared only about the far right.”
That is absolute bonkers statement. Biden is doing an absolute shit job as a policy maker for me, which means he certainly isn’t doing it for all. The fact that you said that just makes me think you are a silly cheerleader. It’s obviously false. And the idea that he is “infuriating the woke” is nonsense; Trump infuriated the woke. Biden is simply disappointing them because there is no way not to disappoint wannabe tyrants in a republic. But he is feeding them as much as he needs for their support so that he can give billions to warmongers and other wealthy and powerful Democratic Party allies.
If you want to communicate better try not using sentences like “Trump cared only about the far right”, which imploy worthless categories like the far right.
Yeah. Angry and meaningless. This is now a wasteful internet rant. Dude.
Subjectivity a word you have learned about? This is the epitome of a subjective, biased rant.
To your what Libertarian/Utopian points: what would you put in place of political parties employing power? They are, compared to most nations on earth today, and compared to essentially all political elites in history, doing about what you'd expect.
If you're angling for a 3rd party, sure. Would be nice. Wouldn't necessarily help the country.
Criticizing the normative is easy. Offering alternatives isn't.
Seems the Dems have been responsible for every action in any city black people live since the 70s. No agency? No choices? Just poor me. Its absurd.
I don't think you have compared our system to that of other countries. What you want is unicorns and ice cream and perfection.
I suggest you look at other nations since this period. You're lucky to be here. Dude.
I am teaching a college course Contemporary Issues in Economics. Given the scarce resources devoted to enforcing DEI and its impact on the labor market, I decided I would have one class day devoted to the topic of DEI. I already had three essays related to the topic but will include this essay as well.
No doubt, some students and faculty will object . History as my guide, some people will, rather than accept my offer to publicly discuss the issue, instead accuse me of racism. Some might even call for me to be fired. This is a sad commentary on the state of affairs on so many college campuses.
Colleges should not be where viewpoint diversity goes to die. Too often that is the case.
I thank the author for this excellent, important essay.
Why not mandatory accounting/finance?
A HISTORY OF COMMERCE, (1925)
by CLIVE DAY, Ph.D.
PROFESSOR OF POLI-ECON AT YALE
https://gutenberg.org/files/70410/70410-h/70410-h.htm
Accounting Theory and Practice, (1922)
by Roy B. Kester
https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/70367
I appreciate the allusion to "A HISTORY OF COMMERCE" and look forward to reading it.
I check out stuff in Project Gutenberg fairly regularly. Most stuff ain't that great. This was a surprise. It is like a history of technology with business, not the usual politics and war as history.
I am prejudiced and think Black Americans place to much emphasis on race over technology rather than what technology somebody had to take advantage of whoever didn't.
I use a text to speech app, AIReader, so I have read everything but the questions and bibliography at the end of each chapter. It is written like a textbook so that could be a good thing.
I just ordered a copy of A History of Commerce. Thank you. For the Contemporary Issues in Economics course, I read, but did not assign, a book with all of the columns Henry Hazlitt wrote for Newsweek. It fascinates me that policy makers continue to enact already tried-and-failed policies.
I presume that you looked over the book in PG rather than just take my word.
Is planned obsolescence a contemporary issue? It had not become an issue in 1922. Radio advertising had barely started.
Where is the data on the annual depreciation of automobiles? What consumers have lost on useless variations in under engineered junk since Sputnik?
I looked at the topics, decided it looked interesting given the publication date, and bought it.
As for planned obsolescence, I remember being exposed to that concept in a marketing course I took in which we read The Wastemakers by Vance Packard. I asked the professor "but wouldn't some supplier have an incentive to buck the trend and make things that lasted longer?"
I admit being of no help on your questions.
I agree with this entire post except the author’s statement that she understands why white people are behind this sort of teaching:
“It’s not your kids being told that they can’t succeed and you get to shed some of your white guilt in the process.”
No and no.
White kids are told they can never succeed at:
*Escaping the legacy of what earlier generations of people did;
*NOT being racist;
*NOT being history’s greatest oppressors and villains (in some fantasy scenario where all the world’s people lived in peace and harmony with the Earth before bad white people came along and ruined everything.
You don’t see, for example, Navajo (Dine) kids being shamed because their ancestors conquered various Pueblo people and stole their lands. In this style of teaching, it’s only bad white people who bear that stigma of conqueror and oppressor of indigenous American people -- or any people.
And when you teach people to divide themselves by “race” and you teach white people how bad they are, they don’t shed any white guilt. You instill more and more white guilt.
My kids routinely came home from public school with messages that white people were the worst people in the history of the world, when in fact, literally every “race” of people has routinely for thousands of years conquered other groups, taken their land, enslaved or exploited their people, taken their resources -- you name it, people of every ethnicity have done it to people of every other.
It’s wrong to teach white children they’re uniquely racist and bad, just as it’s wrong to teach children of other ethnic backgrounds that they can’t succeed on their own merits unless standards are lowered, or they won’t live to old age because police are gunning for them.
Yup, the ideology is all around toxic. When it comes to equity, its very good at being just about equally racist toward people of any race.
Agreed. I thought about that when writing it. But I was referring to the white authors of the bill. I do think white kids are made to feel guilty about what their ancestors may or may not have done. They are told they are racist based on their skin and their character and actions don’t matter.
Marxists are doing a very good job of spreading their ideology through the educational system.
Unless there is some alternative ideology that is supported by the same level of organization and zeal as them, I suspect they will continue to make gradual gains in control. Even if they don’t establish complete domination, they act like termites that undermine the foundation of a political society -- California is a great contemporary example. So much wealth. So much potential. And it is being squandered by racial tribalism, corruption, and stupidity.
These economic ideologies are kind of funny in that none of them advocate mandatory accounting/finance in the schools. Double-entry accounting was invented in Italy 700 years ago.
Search Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations for "and account" and you will find multiple instances of "read, write and account". He used the word 'education' Eighty Times. The "Invisible Hand" only once.
I’m curious—do you have an example of a book, or books, that you would recommend for children / teenagers to read / study in school that teach what you think would be good regarding accounting / finance?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oNw4guzrzG4
Most accounting books seem to be written as though the reader's objective is to earn a living as an accountant rather than run his/her own economic life.
Karl Marx mentioned depreciation far more than Adam Smith. But in the days of Smith and Marx consumers didn't buy cars and televisions and microwave ovens. Every household is a business with depreciation. The issue is Net Worth in addition to profit.
You might find this interesting:
A 2003 article said that 5th graders could learn accounting as well as college students.
https://www.newswise.com/articles/fifth-graders-learn-accounting-as-well-as-collegians
https://www.upi.com/Accounting-collegians-vs-5th-graders/82121056408042/
Accounting Theory and Practice, (1922) by Roy B. Kester https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/70367
Ask any leftie professor. I'm one. 'They say on Fox we're turning the kids into Marxists, yet we can't get them to actually read anything.'
I agree the school system is way too left/woke, but Marxist? That is a joke. There are no Marxists left.
I live in Cal and I agree with those sentiments to some degree.
However, the apocalyptic, apoplectic tone of your comments is just not accurate.
MAGA aren't bringing down the democracy; SJW aren't Marxists.
Have some faith.
“There are no marxists left”. For a “leftist professor” to say that is like a Proud Boy saying there are “no white supremacists left”.
One of the primary leaders of BLM, Patrice Cullors, literally said she is a “trained Marxist.” The most politically glorified organization by Democrats, and one of the most well funded, in decades is run by people who are sympathetic to Marxist ideology.
There is nothing “apoplectic” about pointing out the risk the ideology poses to our country. Ignoring it won’t make it go away. Certainly “leftist professors” who aren’t actually Marxists themselves denying the obvious like you just did will not help things. The ideology of the “woke” and sjws derives substantially from Marxism. They are like an unholy union between post modernism and Marxism.
I'm starting to like you Jeffrey.
Motivated reasoning fallacy. Ad hominem as a habit. Anecdotal evidence.
One of the Proud Boys leader, indeed the leader is a man of color. So that must mean all men of color are, well, its just not true right.
Cullors is a Marxist, yep. As I've mentioned, they are pushing us back 30 yrs in race relations.
But you think there are any actual Marxist professors??? :-) Who think we will win through class struggle, revolution, dictatorship of the proletariat and communism will replace the now over 100 year old very well functioning two party system you loathe so much?
So if a prof thinks Marx had some points (he did) or has students read the quite fascinating Comm Manifesto, he she they are Marxists?
You have slammed the Dems for being racist, elitist and classist. Now they are Marxist. The Dems are everything it seems. I'm curious why you don't talk much about the veering far right GOP. The Dems are the least of our problems, though they never get anywhere.
I totally agree about ideology. I'm literally 30 yrs in a teaching career of swaying extremists toward a respect for the center and common shared values.
And I agree with you on the sjw/woke derivation. Its Marxist (well its not, its post 19070s Cultural Marxism in fact) and yes Mr Peterson has rightly pointed out its mixed with anti-western civ, anti white Postmodern swish.
I should be more succinct, but I write quickly as I work 50 hrs a week and all that...there are very few real Marxist profs left, and those that still walk around bearded, are running jokes even among progressives.
Students aren't that gullible. And if just hearing about Marx turns us Marxist, well then maybe there is something to his ideas.
Changed your anonymous name? Didn’t like the last one?
If a professor is at a particular degree of sympathy with the moral outlook of Marx, and the ideology the professor holds is sufficiently derived or inspired or similar to that which was presented by Marx, I think it is perfectly legitimate to call the professor Marxist. For the sake of philosophical precision one could come up with something more distinct than Marxism, but it wouldn’t be wrong either morally or rationally to label the professor Marxist. It’s like distinguishing between various cults of Jehovah. Are Jehovah Witnesses “Christians”? The fact that it irritates Marxists when someone who isn’t Marxist gets the name of their particular cult of Marxism wrong in their view doesn’t really bother me and it shouldn’t bother anyone who isn’t a Marxist.
I’m glad you are starting to like me. You would probably like me more if you tried harder to read what I actually write and not project whatever prejudices you hold into it. And I haven’t engaged in ad hominem arguments or other logical fallacies. An ad hominem argument essentially uses something like an insult as a premise. I have not done that. Insults, alone, are not necessarily premises. They can be conclusions.
As for your alleged 30 years of trying to manipulate the minds of students who you think are “extremists” toward what you think is the center with “shared values”--what the “center” is depends on what is measured to be the poles of something. The poles of political ideology as determined by people who now consider themselves “liberal” or “left” have become radically distorted from what was considered those poles by the same identity group decades ago. As Yeats said, the center cannot hold. I suspect you think you are in the “center” though--just like the Pope did when he was condemning Galileo. And no, that was not an ad hominem. Please study your logical fallacies. You are seeing them where they do not exist.
When there is infinite space, there is no center. And besides, if there were, there is no apriori reason why we should choose it rather than some other spot. An “extremist” could be right.
👏 thank you so much for sharing this. I hope it makes a difference
As a mother in the Twin Cities, I applaud this woman. I hope our representatives listen to her. They won't listen to me but I will share this with them anyway. It's bad enough that liberal legislators are handing out scarlet letters to young adults- now they want to give them to kids! This is why I left the Democratic party and why I fear that I may eventually need to leave Minnesota. This stuff is toxic - regardless of race. Why can't we just teach history honestly without making any prescriptions?
Welcome to our Minnesota! Skepticism, heterodox views, and meritocracy are unicorns here. I’ve never heard of her. I’m so glad Ms. Montzka spoke out, and you feature her in this space. Thank you for doing so. It’s going to take a lot of Ms. Montzkas to protest victimhood, because only victims are listened to here. Of course, with our level of carjacking and murders, we have plenty of real victims. We saw Adam B. Coleman speak here recently, addressing fatherlessness and violence. Loury and McWhorter have both been here, both protested by college students, McWhorter’s appearance causing the firing of a St. Olaf philosophy professor, the college that just made the news again over a student’s cache of automatic weapons in his dorm room. Minneapolis continues a commitment to victim culture, to the infantilization of black children, to gender affirming chemical neutering and castration, to providing safe spaces to do drugs, to liberate criminals A.S.A.P., and climate anti-racism, whatever that is. But again, thank you!!! Theo Olson, St. Paul.
Thank you! I think I was at the same Adam B Coleman event! I’ve been listening to McWhorter and Glenn Lowery a lot lately.
How cool! I’m glad to know you -- at least in this extended way. Please keep it up! I’ve subscribed to Loury McWhorter for a few years, and spoke with Loury in 2017 at St. Olaf. I was relieved of my teaching career in St. Paul Schools by Black Lives Matter in 2016. It’s on my substack. Thanks, Theo
Thank you for using your wisdom and courage constructively. Long may you run.
Thank you, Kofi Montzka! What happens under the banner of CRT is disempowering to the point that it's hard to believe that it is anything but a sinister plan to divide and conquer, and sacrifice those purportedly benefits in the process. We need so many more voices of reason and insight like yours!
I have increasingly become uncomfortable with the term “minority.” Frankly, I find the notion offensive. Minority this and minority that. Enough is enough. The word minority, when applied to people, somehow translates to mean something less than equal. This term is all well and good for political parties but for a people (Hispanics, African Americans and Native Americans in particular) it is translated to mean inferior. How did this tainting of the definition come to be? I don’t know, and frankly, at this point, I don’t care. What I do care about is the fact that this label is not an ego builder, but an ego destroyer. Minority status is a potential limiter rather than a potential maximizer. Would you go to a “minority day parade” or a Mexican-American fiesta? Would you get up in front of a group of people and introduce yourself as a “minority?”
I didn’t take minority courses in law school (although some lazy person might argue that a course in Equal Protection Law is a course for “minorities”.) There are no special exams reserved for “minorities.” The 2 bar exams I took and passed were not “minority” bar exams. There are no “minority” court rooms. Yet by some people I was perceived, because of the color of my skin, to be a minority attorney. Why do people and institutions persist in using the “minority” label? Only one reason — laziness. I want no part of that formulation. You want no part of it either.
Wow! Spot on! I intend to comment more extensively later today. God bless you!
Amen! Thank you.
I cannot help but wonder how much time these courses take up and the relevance and quality of the "Real" educational courses.
I considered comparing Romeo and Juliet to West Side Story in English literature to be a total waste of time. I got B's in English literature, but it was useless.
Like counting spreadsheets?
So you did not find value in learning the origin of the language we are using now? Of exploring themes such as love, ambition, power, betrayal, identity, and morality? No need to look for a deeper understanding of the complexities of human nature, emotions, and relationships.
No learning is useless. Even accounting, or econ, courses. They don't make good people, but they aren't useless.
Private Universe fragments
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A4ZDyzPqnT4
Educated Harvard graduates could not explain the seasons.
I laughed my ass off when I first saw that in the early 90s. I could have explained that in 8th grade. But then I thought about why I knew, because it was never discussed in any class I ever took.
Science Fiction
I researched words and concepts that I encountered in real sci-fi, not drivel like Star Wars.
Try:
A Fall of Moondust by Arthur C Clarke
I don't follow links by internet people. I follow the thousand book library I own, and the 40 professional led college courses I took, and then the 70 I've taught, based on peer reviewed work. I was reading Clarke in 1980. Thanks though. I love science fiction. You think you'd have that without Shakespeare and the classics?
If your point, and lordy knows I'm struggling, is that elites aren't all elites, I agree. From Bushes to sociopaths like Zuckerberg and Musk, for sure.
However, having spent half my life in poverty and half exposed to Ivy league elites, I'm afraid that the vast majority of elites are in fact smarter, quicker, and even kinder than the average person. Its not all injustice. There is ability. Sorry to report.
You're suggesting those graduates represent all educated elites? I mean, the story is a story because its so ridiculous and rare. There are certainly lots of legacy elite losers, but you know anybody who grew up in real poor neighborhoods knows that there are far more among the uneducated.
"You think you'd have that without Shakespeare and the classics?"
Of course! Though Hyperion would undoubtedly be different without Chaucer.
That is one of the funny things about science fiction. If you seriously accept the possibility of technologically advanced aliens elsewhere in the galaxy then you must accept that they figured out the same physics without Newton and Einstein and Shakespeare. Physics does not care about culture, but if you don't get the physics right then the technology doesn't work.
Pseudo-intellectual BS compared to mathematics and physics. And what I call science fiction was more informative. Along with stumbling across books on my own.
Why don't we have a KURRL?
K-12 Unschooling Recommend Reading List
Tyranny of Words by Stuart Chase
The Screwing of the Average Man by David Hapgood
George Orwell mentioned Chase in a political essay. Chase was a member of FDR's brain trust and wrote the book A New Deal. One of those historical people that we normally never hear about.
Amen.
As perhaps the ugliest of all human frailties (as per "the crooked timber of humanity") racism is an eternal and universal expression of stupidity.
It remains a special malaise in US society, due largely to a far-too-long period of slavery followed by various despicable practices.
But this is 2023. When the question is posed: "In which country such large and diverse mass of non-majority-ethnie population treated better than in the US?" it is difficult to deny the progress we have made and are continually making.
For illustration, live, look and listen. To everything.
If we don’t have a race-based system, how does the author account for the demographic statistics in every facet of American life that suggest otherwise?
The reality is, this IS a race based shitstem. One can try to deny it. One can mitigate against it. One can even transcend it. But to teach children otherwise is to leave them unlovingly vulnerable to be blindsided by the reality of America.
Teaching hopelessness is indeed a tool of genteel white supremacy (i.e. white liberals) used to condition the oppressed unto their oppression. But teaching “hope” is NOT the same as inculcating oblivion. Teaching hope, acknowledges the reality of racial caste in America & inculcating a belief that Beloved Community MUST exist, elsewhere.
The demographic statistics? You mean like the fact that Indians are the highest earning racial group in America? You are totally right, they must have brought their Brahminical caste system to America!
Jokes aside:
The *reality* is that America today is one of the most, and arguably *the* most, glorious places of opportunity for “people of color” on the planet in all of human history, especially people of near-African descent. It certainly could be even more glorious, and there is plenty that still merits great complaint, but to teach black children that their ability to achieve their goals will not only possibly be affected by their race, but that it will likely be, is a poisonous falsehood.
Tragically, a black child may face more danger and obstacles if they are raised in an average predominantly “black community” than if they are raised in an average predominately “white community” (or for that matter, “Asian community”) due to self destructive toxic subcultures that exist in most predominantly black communities. Those toxic subcultures may stem significantly from “race based systems” of the past. But those race based systems don’t exist any longer, except for as nightmares in some activists and as fictions that race hustlers peddle for self-gain.
I don’t talk about “people of color.” It’s a term given by whites so they don’t have to deal with the multiple & varied complaints about white dealings with all other people of the world.
I talk about Black people. Now, reconfigure your quip about statistics focused on Black people in America. Then name a positive quality of life dynamic where Black people are not at the bottom. Then name a negative dynamic where Black people are not at the top.
But let me stop talking bad about the oppressor & oppressive shitstem for which so many of you give thanks. I realize most “POC” have bought into the idea that the best thing that happened to them, was to be oppressed by the white man & forced to believe in his ideas & ideals.
What is a positive quality of life dynamic? I don’t know what you are talking about. You mean like being disproportionately successful at athletics and music? But what does that have to do with current racial dynamics? Or for that matter the negative quality life dynamics you are referencing?
Unless you can show how any particular individual would have had a significantly different outcome even though they took the same actions, and lived the same habits, simply because of their race, racial discrimination is not a reasonable explanation of causation--likewise, and unless laws or customs based on race can explain that outcome, a “race system” does not exist.
I am not “oppressed by the white man”. It is irrational for any black person in America today to believe that they are "oppressed by the white man".
I must admit that being born of a white woman, particularly and specifically my mother, was one of the greatest things that happened to me. But the gratitude doesn’t derive from her being white, but her being her. One thing she never did was disparage or doubt my ability to succeed because I shared equally a race with my dad that I did with her. And also what she did not do was suggest that any ideas that were true or ideals that are worthy were the property of any race of people.
I suggest you reconsider your adherence to the notion that ideas or ideals are “white” or any other race. That is certainly an oppressive notion to hold. I can only imagine that would weaken anyone who believed it. It is false, so there isn’t any good reason to believe it. Racial hatred certainly isn’t a good reason. When the “white man” landed on the shores of America, it would have been foolish for the natives to reject gun powder because the white man brought it--and not just because gun powder was first invented in China.
No...not at all. quality of life (i.e. avg. lifespan, wealth acquired & passed on, health outcomes, access to capital, etc).
Michelle Alexander’s “New Jim Crow” is full of data where all was equal, except race. Have you read that yet?
Did you intend this as a reply to yourself?
Thomas Sowell has answered your question in many of his books. I strongly suspect he will continue to do so in his (hopefully) soon-to-be-released book Social Justice Fallacies.
Men go to prison at nine times the rate of women. Maybe this is partially explained by systemic misandry in our criminal justice system but I think the much better explanation is unequal rates of committing crimes.
Thomas Sowell? I have his Basic Economics 4th and 5th editions on my smartphone.
"After the war was over, there was a tremendous increase in the production of cars, refrigerators, housing, and other parts of the nation’s accumulated stock of wealth which had been allowed to wear down or wear out while production was being devoted to urgent wartime purposes. The durable equipment of consumers declined in real value between 1944 and 1945, the last year of the war and then more than doubled in real value over the next five years, as the nation's stock of durable assets that had been depleted during the war was replenished. This was an unprecedented rate of growth." |
That paragraph is identical in the 4th and 5th editions of Sowell's Basic Economics. He admits to the occurance of 'depreciation' in consumer durables but never uses the word. The Great Depression followed by WWII followed by the Great Acceleration has given us today's world. But the depreciation of all of the consumer junk produced since WWII is being ignored. Notice he called them "durable assets". The C02 from producing all of the junk is still in the atmosphere.
Euro-American economic theory has ignored demand side depreciation since WWII. NDP does not get much mention.
Love it! Black criminality is the problem. Yea...exactly why the KKK was instituted to protect white people & white society from the hyper-criminal darkies.
If a wizard magically removed all the racial prejudice in every white person's brain today, the statistics for crime based on race would not significantly change. That doesnt mean that "black criminality is the problem". It means that some black people would continue to make the choices they do. White people don't make black people rob or shoot other black people. If we just take those black people committing crimes against other black people as our statistic of question, that would be enough to make the statistics for black people in general disproportionate. Do you blame white people when any black person robs another black person? Do you blame white people when any black person joins a gang? The moral responsibility for any particular person's actions lies primarily at the feet of that person -- and only sometimes does it make sense to assign moral blame to those who were most influential in their social development, possibly family, friends, and their larger community. And it makes no sense to blame ghostly abstractions like "the white man."
Another example: if we magically removed the prejudice from white peoples' brains today, some black teens in Chicago would still join gangs, and at a rate much higher than asian teens or white teens in Chicago, and this holds regardless of income levels. If the communities that those black teens develop continue to assign blame to outside forces for crimes that more often than not are committed *within the communities of those black teens* , the cultural forces that contribute to the decisions of those teens will not change.
Wow! Perfectly stated!
Again: love it! It’s the same reason why the Rust Belt, Bible Belt & Appalachia are so void of capital investment. No one wants to be mugged by reality in those crime infested white areas either.
Unfortunately, no one cares to mention the plight of white people in those communities.
I care to mention the plight of poor people, regardless on their color, in many communities in the U.S. and in other countries. It isn't racism that explains why South Korea is so prosperous and North Korea a nightmare.
It was in 1776 that Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations. He didn't point to race as the explanatory variable for why some countries were poorer than others.
The best predictor of child poverty in the U.S. is not race, but instead family structure. It should surprise no one that a child raised in a single-parent home is more likely to grow up in poverty than a child raised where both parents are present. The reality is that the rate of children growing up in single-parent households has increased for blacks, Hispanics, and whites. The rate for blacks 72%, is higher than that of Hispanics at about 53%, which is higher than that for whites at 29%, which is higher than that of Asian-Americans at 17%.
As for the allusion to the Rust Belt, Bible Belt & Appalachia, crime is obviously not the only, or even primary, reason for lack of capital investment. Corporations didn't relocate in droves to Ireland because of the low crime rate but because of the low corporate tax rate. They don't relocate from one state in the U.S. to another primarily because of crime.
While being raised in a single-family home is a good predictor of child poverty, I do not think it is good to suggest that biological parents should always stay together or that the best thing for a child is if they are raised by both biological parents [you are not necessarily saying this]. I so often read people who support the nuclear family give out these correlations and who don't accept the possibility that the correlation is not a causation. Children can be raised in families that don't fit the nuclear family model and turn out to be relatively financially successful and not prone to violence. I think culture certainly affects poverty and crime, but nuclear families are not the only medium that can develop good culture.
Frankly, some women, and men, who choose not to raise children with their other biological parent are doing the children a favor. Some people should not be anywhere near children.
I do not doubt that there are children who are better off not having a father around. However, in too many cases, the father is never positively involved in his child's life. Admittedly, it would be optimal for women to avoid have sex with such men, but the unpleasant reality is some do not AND our government has made it easier for women to get by without a loving father in the home. (I support government more aggressively going after men who create children but never act like loving fathers.) Net for society and children in general, the trend has been detrimental. There are some important things children learn just by watching a father get up every morning and go to work. They should learn by observation that hitting a spouse isn't acceptable behavior and that parents can argue but reconcile.
There is something sick about a culture when a company is planning to have a show titled "All My Babies' Mamas" in which we're supposed to be entertained by a rapper who has 11 children by 10 different women. It shouldn't be canceled (as it was) but never been filmed in the first place.
Obama?
They don’t police Appalachia, the Bible Belt or Rust Belt with the same intentionality. If your wizard performed that trick, or if Society repented of the white supremacy that designed the house, then policing in those poor communities across color lines would be done with similar vigor. So, I’d imagine (since people are people) you’d find that crime statistics would move toward each other, whether that’s better for one or worse for the other. (That would only reveal if indeed policing is a problem)
I'm a little confused. Are you suggesting that if policing increased in "Appalachia", "the bible belt" or the "rust belt", where there are more white people I think you presume, we would find more violent crime? And could you be more careful about replying to the correct comments? You actually think that policing is causing some black people to commit violence against other black people? Or do you think policing is causing there to be a report of more violent crime in particular areas? You think that the reason there is more violent crime reported between black people in St. Louis Missouri than say asian people in Irvine CA, is somehow because of policing?
Yes. You seem to be. But that is a choice. And I don’t need to fight you in holding up your choice. I pray you are happy with that choice & that it brings you ultimate peace.
No, its not really a choice. My confusion is a direct result from you expressing something unclear. It is your choice, though, not to answer my questions to clarify what you wrote that was unclear. There is nothing you must "fight" with me about.
Committing crimes does have a serious negative consequence for those convicted of crimes. The current efforts to achieve "equity" by attributing the unequal outcomes to something other than systemic discrimination is having serious negative consequences, particularly for law-abiding people in crime-infested areas.
I think it is Whole Foods that just closed its store in San Francisco because of crime and theft. I think it is Walmart that just closed four stores in Chicago for similar reasons. If these closures are irrational, someone who believes as such should profit by opening up stores in these areas. When they do, they too, will likely get mugged by reality.