Thanks, Chris. A lot of articles today are long on complaining, but short on solutions. It's nice to hear an actual vision statement with a concrete, actionable agenda.
Your solutions make obvious sense. But the DEI profession is so vast and entrenched throughout our society, and the ideology is so essential to the political power of the Democrat party, that they will say and do anything to preserve it. I was so discouraged to hear the new head coach of the New England Patriots, who is Black and a former star linebacker, proclaim at his inaugural press conference that he “does see race,” and believes people must see it in order to recognize and prevent racism. In other words, the opposite of a colorblind society, which we were well on our way to becoming prior to the disastrous summer of 2020.
The DEI ideology promotes the notion that to state one is “colorblind” is to be racist in that colorblindness dismisses the value and pride another might take in his or her cultural heritage associated with their race. However, this notion simplifies and insults the better sense of humanity in those of us who prefer colorblindness to the divisive and preposterous aspiration to place others into racial categories, especially as a growing majority of people are multiracial. (See Eli Steele’s documentary, “How Jack Became Black.”) I can respect the influence of race or ethnicity on one’s person and still strive not to make blanket assumptions about that person based upon their race or ethnicity. Striving to not make assumptions based upon these categories invites me into the multiple layers of identity that bind us one to the other in our shared experience of humanity.
Sadly, "Jack became black" when the "One-Drop Rule" was a legal principle of racial classification that was prominent in the 20th-century United States. It asserted that any person with even one ancestor of black ancestry ("one drop" of "black blood")[1][2] is considered black (Negro or colored in historical terms). It is an example of hypodescent, the automatic assignment of children of a mixed union between different socioeconomic or ethnic groups to the group with the lower status, regardless of proportion of ancestry in different groups.[3]
This concept became codified into the law of some U.S. states in the early 20th century.[4] It was associated with the principle of "invisible blackness"[5] that developed after the long history of racial interaction in the South, which had included the hardening of slavery as a racial caste system and later segregation.
Before the rule was outlawed by the Supreme Court in the Loving v. Virginia decision of 1967, it was used to prevent interracial marriages and in general to deny rights and equal opportunities and uphold white supremacy. Racial segregation was adopted legally by southern states of the former Confederacy in the late 19th century, legislators resisted defining race by law as part of preventing interracial marriages. In 1895, in South Carolina in comments made by George Tillman.
The one-drop rule was not formally codified as law until the 20th century, from 1910 in Tennessee to 1930 as one of Virginia's "racial integrity laws", with similar laws in several other states in between. It is a sad commentary of our racial history that is thankfully in our past, but has recently reared its head again as pointed out in When Jack Became Black.
Indeed, the law of 1/32nd black, as I learned it, also served to enslave the bi-racial or interracial children that resulted from the slave master’s exploitation and rape of black enslaved women, thus increasing the pool of free labor and minimizing shame for the wives of these men. We have come along way! My hope is that American society continues to evolve away from these reductive and limiting mentalities about race, while acknowledging these aspects of our history.
Because certain racist laws in the South and elsewehere were still on the books as law, doesnt mean people abided by them or were even aware they were laws. The South held onto racial divison long after the rest of the country moved on, and I have a suspicion that it had to do more with a Hatfield/McCoy sort of feud, deep seated distrust on both sides. Let's admit that people are often crap which is what makes our Constitution and the rule of the law so very important.
Maybe (maybe not) many did not abided by them, but they were on the books and those bad actors (however many there were) had the law on their side when they wanted to make life miserable for blacks.
Perhaps the best example is the Anti-miscegenation laws (ban on inter-racial relationships & marriage). The 1st Anti-miscegenation law was passed in Maryland in 1691 and existed 29 states in 1924. There are reports of it being enforced in the late 1950s.
Finally, in 1967 the law banning interracial marriage was ruled unconstitutional (via the 14th Amendment adopted in 1868) by the U.S. Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia.[3]
Yeah, but only because the phrase has been bad-mouthed by the pro-DEI types and the like of Ibram X. Kendi and company. I feel like changing the phrasing lets them win on souring what the term is supposed to mean. Instead, I think we need to retake the term and show people what it really means. We can be aware of racial disparities of the past, and be sensitive to those issues, while at the same time, move forward with color blindness in the sense that we judge people by the content of their character, regardless of what color their skin is. Take it back to what MLK Jr.’s vision was.
I completely share this concern about the entrenched establishment of wokeness in our culture. However, our illustrious host has (even very recently) shown that it's still possible for victories, even if mostly symbolic (c.f. Harvard and Penn).
And, while I'm at it...This made me laugh 😂
"...like most libertarian proposals, is unfeasible..."
Excellent work. The key to success in politics is simple; make people physically safe and economically secure. Some people need to go look back at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. It’s an old idea that needs to be refreshed in new light.
Eloquently stated and equally enlightening & refreshing writing, Chris. These concepts should be enshrined into the Republican and Libertarian platforms.
Common sense is brilliant and its virtuous application is the glue that holds together the tenets of our Constitution.
If conservatives would make colorblindness, a priority issue in their platform, and talk about it often, it would put the left in a precarious position. They would have to either admit they’re against colorblindness, or lie, and pretend they’re for colorblindness.
DEI is discrimination. Discrimination is illegal. We have seen the Supreme Court strike down affirmative action. Why are lawsuits not being filed against every corporation and institutions practicing DEI?
“Embracing the philosophy of the American Founding—with its emphasis on natural rights and liberties—will suffice.” Yes, and many libertarians agree. So are we cool?
I’m happy that public education can be resurrected in your view. I went to public school in Florida in the 80s and early 90s. Then became a charter Montessori teacher in Arizona in the 2000s. Where do we go from here?
"If a re-invigorated GOP ever did really get its act together about re-invigorating America's traditional values (and the votes to back it), it would need both an unashamedly sledgehammer legislative approach plus a Machiavellian administrative sleight of hand. To the DEI abolition/Colour Blindness measures in Chris's excellent proposal it might seek to:
- end the decades-long absurdity of academic 'woke studies'-type courses and other left wing proselytising NGOs being actually funded by the taxpayer.
- some mechanism to fire academics who have cravenly caved in to spoilt-brat ‘radicalism’.
- a complete overhaul of teacher training that has long been allowed to become a training ground in progressive ideology.
- an end to all public sector security-of-tenure unrelated to performance."
The root of this problem, which has proliferated like noxious weeds of colorful thistles in practically every field of American life, is that ‘an enemy has done this.’ It’s not accidental, or a fluke of nature, it’s enemy strategy. Strategery for mass psychosis. St Johnswort, Musk thistle, Canada thistle, Scotch broom -- CT/CRT; DEI; M1 Howard what’s his name.
The key is short-stopping these invasive species at opportune moments; otherwise, the seeds can be 20M or more from each pod. It’s like an object lesson straight from Jesus. So that is also a key to understanding the vicious hatred these lpd’s (little progressive despots) have for their opposition, since we have identified them as enemies of unmolested nature, derailing the productive potential of life.
This is a no brainer for people who know there are principles of life higher than coveting someone else’s life, then violating their rights to live unmolested.
Excellent action steps about all of the bureaucracies that need to be abolished. Thomas Sowell has clearly shown that disparate impacts are completely normal and do not provide any evidence, by themselves, of discrimination. I suggest reading "Discrimination & Disparities" by Thomas Sowell.
Chris -- I agree with 95% of what you're saying, and I agree that disparate impact does NOT necessarily imply actionable race discrimination. But you're kind of overlooking the holding of Griggs, which was that the disputed job requirements (aptitude tests) were not "shown to bear a demonstrable relationship to successful performance of the jobs for which it was used". You can argue with the court's logic on these facts (and it seems wrong to me) but you can't deny that SOME facially equal job requirements could be a pretext for race discrimination. Suppose an employer located in an all or nearly all white neighborhood said it would only hire employees who live within 5 miles of its location. Mightn't that be actionable race discrimination, since that job requirement isn't related to job performance?
The implication was banning IQ tests, which do, in fact, have bearing on job performance, especially for complex positions. The military administers something similar with the ASVAB. These tests are not discriminatory or biased. Disparate outcomes by group are just what they appear: disparate outcomes by groups, which shouldn't matter, because the tests measure individuals.
This is just my experience and I know this is anecdotal and may have nothing to do with the article. I live in north Alabama... I was born and raised here. Black and white people have interacted together since I can remember....I didn't know any different. From elementary to high school, we(black and white people)were friends. I only remember us interacting together...the girls were cheerleaders together, on the dance team together, guys in sports together. Yes, in Alabama. Currently, I live in a planned community and there are people from all over the world that live here. We all get along and have each other's back. A few years ago, we had a neighbor who was very sick with cancer. One evening, many of us gathered outside her home to pray for her...black and white people. Maybe much of this racial animus and division occurs in the mainstream, leftist media and doesn't represent many of the people? Maybe I'm wrong but this has been my experience. I bet many of you have not heard of the movie Woodlawn. It's based on a true story about a football team at a high school in Birmingham in the early 70's. Look it up because it showed how one man had a profound impact on the players(black and white) and bridged the racial divide. I guess I wanted to share all of this to show that it is possible to have racial harmony and that it probably happens more often that we think 😊
I realized that I didn’t comment on your article and I don’t know if you’ll read this. It was excellent and your ideas are excellent. I have to believe the majority of Americans would agree with your ideas especially regarding affirmative action. I do believe most Americans treat others and they want to be treated...much of our mainstream media are the ones that sow the seeds of discord. Much of the time only half the story is told which is unfair and evil. It has led to people being cancelled, doxxed, etc. Thanks be to God for people like you!
I can second this. Born and raised up north, but moved south many years ago. If you live up north and all you read or watch is the mainstream media, you still think it's 1955 down here. It isn't. People get along. They respect each other. Are there still a handful of morons? Yep. They have been part of humanity since the start, and I'm afraid are not going anywhere. There will always be resentful, angry people who will find a reason to dislike the "other". They're just much harder to find here, and I suspect pretty much everywhere, than we are being sold.
I love the idea of colorblindness. I've been following Coleman Hughes and find myself agreeing with him and as we've discussed, MLK never wanted race to be a proxy for class. Things like the census need reform. Race is a social construct because obviously there is only one race, human. Same with public schools that break down achievement by ethnicity and skin color. That is for sure using race as a proxy for class. The terms BIPOC, people of color, brown people, etc. are repulsive in that way, too. Half of my family are Mexican immigrants and not once have I ever heard them refer to themselves as brown people. Yikes. Worse yet, Latinx. Ugh. I've been thinking of starting to testify at Seattle City Council, King County Council, and WA state legislature about the problematic nature of their use of these racist proxies for class. Here in the Washington State the highest incomes are the Asians including East Indian immigrants and others. That's what makes it convenient to consider Asians white-adjacent in woke terminology. I always ask: which people are you talking about? If it's BLM, I ask which ones matter because I can easily name black lives that do not matter to me. Could say the same about "white" people. Which ones? I can easily name white lives that do not matter to me. Not all BIPOC people are poor or disadvantaged. Not all white people are advantaged. It's all so stupid. I really look forward to the DEI bureaucracies going away. Could not come soon enough for me.
Yes Kate. I am ethnically jewish and never thought about the color of my skin much, or my ethnicity. Hey, when I was a kid, "ethnic" was the term for jews, Italians, and Irish. That is, until I was race-baited by "white racialist conservatives" who insisted I was not white -- whatever. Personally, using race and ethnicity as a building block for opinions is IMHO quite stupid. And extremely rude. Buying into race, like the oppressor/oppressed model of the left or the racialist people on the right -- is disrespectful. Race has no place in serious discussion. Any not just because it's disrespectful but because people are individually more different than they are the same, even when grouped by race and ethnicity. Also, my family and fellow staff are Korean, Black, Vietnamese, European, Hispanic, and multi-race. Using simple one-dimensional terms like nerd, perky, super smart, level headed, stoic, fearful, etc, even have greater meaning.
Absolutely. But correlation is not causation. More of a cultural issue which also correlates with race but is a cause, not an affect. Note: Blacks as a group had marriage rates in the 1950s far greater than whites today. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4850739/figure/F1/
Even if race and genetics is a factor and even if controlling for culture there is still a difference, that does not raise the bar to race-based legislation. Regarding "Also 60 years of attempts at cultural intervention have failed to move the needle," Agreed. The left has intervened for 60 years and things are getting worse. Being colorblind is about not intervening. Which I agree with.
Simple version of our situation: The left says that failure to achieve equal outcomes justifies racism. Thus, if blacks are deficient in some area (education, income, etcetera), the whites must be punished until the outcome is equal. The basic solution to much of it is to fix our education system, not easy, but possible. When major school districts have dropout rates near 50%, the system is seriously flawed and throwing money at it is not the fix.
Unfortunately, the legal system has been created to protect this reverse Robinhood, reverse racism method because the practitioners make a lot of noise and get wealthy.
As Chris says, the real solution is a colorblind system.
Thanks, Chris. A lot of articles today are long on complaining, but short on solutions. It's nice to hear an actual vision statement with a concrete, actionable agenda.
I suggest reading "Unwoke: How to Defeat Cultural Marxism in America" by Ted Cruz. He has lots of ideas and suggestions.
I just started reading Unwoke. It’s been quite enlightening so far.
I think "Unwoke" lays out the issues very well. His introductory chapter on cultural Marxism is excellent.
I agree absolutely. I don't know why we don't hear this more from Republicans. It seems like an obvious winning position.
Republicans are timid in talking about these issues. That needs to change.
Especially GOP senators, (with a few exceptions such as Cruz, Hawley, Kennedy, ...) They really are disgracefully AWOL.
I suggest reading "Unwoke: How to Defeat Cultural Marxism in America" by Ted Cruz. He has lots of ideas and suggestions.
Your solutions make obvious sense. But the DEI profession is so vast and entrenched throughout our society, and the ideology is so essential to the political power of the Democrat party, that they will say and do anything to preserve it. I was so discouraged to hear the new head coach of the New England Patriots, who is Black and a former star linebacker, proclaim at his inaugural press conference that he “does see race,” and believes people must see it in order to recognize and prevent racism. In other words, the opposite of a colorblind society, which we were well on our way to becoming prior to the disastrous summer of 2020.
Right.
Isn't Boston where the Chinese Mayor celebrates throwing a “ no whites “ party ?
Yes. Shameful and outrageous.
The DEI ideology promotes the notion that to state one is “colorblind” is to be racist in that colorblindness dismisses the value and pride another might take in his or her cultural heritage associated with their race. However, this notion simplifies and insults the better sense of humanity in those of us who prefer colorblindness to the divisive and preposterous aspiration to place others into racial categories, especially as a growing majority of people are multiracial. (See Eli Steele’s documentary, “How Jack Became Black.”) I can respect the influence of race or ethnicity on one’s person and still strive not to make blanket assumptions about that person based upon their race or ethnicity. Striving to not make assumptions based upon these categories invites me into the multiple layers of identity that bind us one to the other in our shared experience of humanity.
Sadly, "Jack became black" when the "One-Drop Rule" was a legal principle of racial classification that was prominent in the 20th-century United States. It asserted that any person with even one ancestor of black ancestry ("one drop" of "black blood")[1][2] is considered black (Negro or colored in historical terms). It is an example of hypodescent, the automatic assignment of children of a mixed union between different socioeconomic or ethnic groups to the group with the lower status, regardless of proportion of ancestry in different groups.[3]
This concept became codified into the law of some U.S. states in the early 20th century.[4] It was associated with the principle of "invisible blackness"[5] that developed after the long history of racial interaction in the South, which had included the hardening of slavery as a racial caste system and later segregation.
Before the rule was outlawed by the Supreme Court in the Loving v. Virginia decision of 1967, it was used to prevent interracial marriages and in general to deny rights and equal opportunities and uphold white supremacy. Racial segregation was adopted legally by southern states of the former Confederacy in the late 19th century, legislators resisted defining race by law as part of preventing interracial marriages. In 1895, in South Carolina in comments made by George Tillman.
The one-drop rule was not formally codified as law until the 20th century, from 1910 in Tennessee to 1930 as one of Virginia's "racial integrity laws", with similar laws in several other states in between. It is a sad commentary of our racial history that is thankfully in our past, but has recently reared its head again as pointed out in When Jack Became Black.
Indeed, the law of 1/32nd black, as I learned it, also served to enslave the bi-racial or interracial children that resulted from the slave master’s exploitation and rape of black enslaved women, thus increasing the pool of free labor and minimizing shame for the wives of these men. We have come along way! My hope is that American society continues to evolve away from these reductive and limiting mentalities about race, while acknowledging these aspects of our history.
Yes, thank God, we have come a long way.
And you spelled “a long” correctly. 🤦♀️
Because certain racist laws in the South and elsewehere were still on the books as law, doesnt mean people abided by them or were even aware they were laws. The South held onto racial divison long after the rest of the country moved on, and I have a suspicion that it had to do more with a Hatfield/McCoy sort of feud, deep seated distrust on both sides. Let's admit that people are often crap which is what makes our Constitution and the rule of the law so very important.
Maybe (maybe not) many did not abided by them, but they were on the books and those bad actors (however many there were) had the law on their side when they wanted to make life miserable for blacks.
Perhaps the best example is the Anti-miscegenation laws (ban on inter-racial relationships & marriage). The 1st Anti-miscegenation law was passed in Maryland in 1691 and existed 29 states in 1924. There are reports of it being enforced in the late 1950s.
Finally, in 1967 the law banning interracial marriage was ruled unconstitutional (via the 14th Amendment adopted in 1868) by the U.S. Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia.[3]
Instead of colorblind, let’s speak of being “post-racial.” Colorblind leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths.
Yeah, but only because the phrase has been bad-mouthed by the pro-DEI types and the like of Ibram X. Kendi and company. I feel like changing the phrasing lets them win on souring what the term is supposed to mean. Instead, I think we need to retake the term and show people what it really means. We can be aware of racial disparities of the past, and be sensitive to those issues, while at the same time, move forward with color blindness in the sense that we judge people by the content of their character, regardless of what color their skin is. Take it back to what MLK Jr.’s vision was.
Point well taken.
I completely share this concern about the entrenched establishment of wokeness in our culture. However, our illustrious host has (even very recently) shown that it's still possible for victories, even if mostly symbolic (c.f. Harvard and Penn).
And, while I'm at it...This made me laugh 😂
"...like most libertarian proposals, is unfeasible..."
"Once more to the breach!"
Excellent work. The key to success in politics is simple; make people physically safe and economically secure. Some people need to go look back at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. It’s an old idea that needs to be refreshed in new light.
The key to success in politics is simple ...
The left's version of that is to scare (terrorize?) the populace and promise to be their savior.
Eloquently stated and equally enlightening & refreshing writing, Chris. These concepts should be enshrined into the Republican and Libertarian platforms.
Common sense is brilliant and its virtuous application is the glue that holds together the tenets of our Constitution.
Thank you!
I’m so glad you’re forging a way forward.
If conservatives would make colorblindness, a priority issue in their platform, and talk about it often, it would put the left in a precarious position. They would have to either admit they’re against colorblindness, or lie, and pretend they’re for colorblindness.
Agreed!
DEI is discrimination. Discrimination is illegal. We have seen the Supreme Court strike down affirmative action. Why are lawsuits not being filed against every corporation and institutions practicing DEI?
It’s very difficult and expensive. More needs to be done.
“Embracing the philosophy of the American Founding—with its emphasis on natural rights and liberties—will suffice.” Yes, and many libertarians agree. So are we cool?
Yes, I simply want to show that repeal of civil rights law, like abolition of public schools, is not realistic.
I’m happy that public education can be resurrected in your view. I went to public school in Florida in the 80s and early 90s. Then became a charter Montessori teacher in Arizona in the 2000s. Where do we go from here?
Small scale abolitions may be possible in certain communities in certain states over the next few decades. Plausible?
"If a re-invigorated GOP ever did really get its act together about re-invigorating America's traditional values (and the votes to back it), it would need both an unashamedly sledgehammer legislative approach plus a Machiavellian administrative sleight of hand. To the DEI abolition/Colour Blindness measures in Chris's excellent proposal it might seek to:
- end the decades-long absurdity of academic 'woke studies'-type courses and other left wing proselytising NGOs being actually funded by the taxpayer.
- some mechanism to fire academics who have cravenly caved in to spoilt-brat ‘radicalism’.
- a complete overhaul of teacher training that has long been allowed to become a training ground in progressive ideology.
- an end to all public sector security-of-tenure unrelated to performance."
https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/invasion-of-the-virtue-signallers
And before you say it....no I don't know exactly HOW all this could be acheived!
Ramaswamy's proposal to dismantle the federal Dept. of Education would be a good start and is within the reach of a President's executive powers.
Yes.
These are very interesting proposals.
Thank you....if I ruled the world (as the song goes)....!
The root of this problem, which has proliferated like noxious weeds of colorful thistles in practically every field of American life, is that ‘an enemy has done this.’ It’s not accidental, or a fluke of nature, it’s enemy strategy. Strategery for mass psychosis. St Johnswort, Musk thistle, Canada thistle, Scotch broom -- CT/CRT; DEI; M1 Howard what’s his name.
The key is short-stopping these invasive species at opportune moments; otherwise, the seeds can be 20M or more from each pod. It’s like an object lesson straight from Jesus. So that is also a key to understanding the vicious hatred these lpd’s (little progressive despots) have for their opposition, since we have identified them as enemies of unmolested nature, derailing the productive potential of life.
This is a no brainer for people who know there are principles of life higher than coveting someone else’s life, then violating their rights to live unmolested.
"the doctrine that disparate group outcomes are de facto evidence of racial discrimination"
Very good arguments against in the article.
Anyone with any education in math/stats knows that correlation is not causation.
Exactly, and that there are multiple potential causes for a given outcome.
Excellent action steps about all of the bureaucracies that need to be abolished. Thomas Sowell has clearly shown that disparate impacts are completely normal and do not provide any evidence, by themselves, of discrimination. I suggest reading "Discrimination & Disparities" by Thomas Sowell.
Sowell is great.
Great piece! Griggs v. Duke Power Co. is such an abomination of logic it is depressing.
Truly horrible decision.
I forgot to add that I think you are very correct on the CRA: it shouldn't be repealed, but it needs reform. Bigly.
Just like what the Chevron case will hopefully be used to dismantle any power of the administrative state.
Bigly, indeed!
Chris -- I agree with 95% of what you're saying, and I agree that disparate impact does NOT necessarily imply actionable race discrimination. But you're kind of overlooking the holding of Griggs, which was that the disputed job requirements (aptitude tests) were not "shown to bear a demonstrable relationship to successful performance of the jobs for which it was used". You can argue with the court's logic on these facts (and it seems wrong to me) but you can't deny that SOME facially equal job requirements could be a pretext for race discrimination. Suppose an employer located in an all or nearly all white neighborhood said it would only hire employees who live within 5 miles of its location. Mightn't that be actionable race discrimination, since that job requirement isn't related to job performance?
The implication was banning IQ tests, which do, in fact, have bearing on job performance, especially for complex positions. The military administers something similar with the ASVAB. These tests are not discriminatory or biased. Disparate outcomes by group are just what they appear: disparate outcomes by groups, which shouldn't matter, because the tests measure individuals.
Bart, you should tead Thomas Sowell. You will find your answer there.
This is just my experience and I know this is anecdotal and may have nothing to do with the article. I live in north Alabama... I was born and raised here. Black and white people have interacted together since I can remember....I didn't know any different. From elementary to high school, we(black and white people)were friends. I only remember us interacting together...the girls were cheerleaders together, on the dance team together, guys in sports together. Yes, in Alabama. Currently, I live in a planned community and there are people from all over the world that live here. We all get along and have each other's back. A few years ago, we had a neighbor who was very sick with cancer. One evening, many of us gathered outside her home to pray for her...black and white people. Maybe much of this racial animus and division occurs in the mainstream, leftist media and doesn't represent many of the people? Maybe I'm wrong but this has been my experience. I bet many of you have not heard of the movie Woodlawn. It's based on a true story about a football team at a high school in Birmingham in the early 70's. Look it up because it showed how one man had a profound impact on the players(black and white) and bridged the racial divide. I guess I wanted to share all of this to show that it is possible to have racial harmony and that it probably happens more often that we think 😊
Thanks for sharing your experience.
I realized that I didn’t comment on your article and I don’t know if you’ll read this. It was excellent and your ideas are excellent. I have to believe the majority of Americans would agree with your ideas especially regarding affirmative action. I do believe most Americans treat others and they want to be treated...much of our mainstream media are the ones that sow the seeds of discord. Much of the time only half the story is told which is unfair and evil. It has led to people being cancelled, doxxed, etc. Thanks be to God for people like you!
I can second this. Born and raised up north, but moved south many years ago. If you live up north and all you read or watch is the mainstream media, you still think it's 1955 down here. It isn't. People get along. They respect each other. Are there still a handful of morons? Yep. They have been part of humanity since the start, and I'm afraid are not going anywhere. There will always be resentful, angry people who will find a reason to dislike the "other". They're just much harder to find here, and I suspect pretty much everywhere, than we are being sold.
I love the idea of colorblindness. I've been following Coleman Hughes and find myself agreeing with him and as we've discussed, MLK never wanted race to be a proxy for class. Things like the census need reform. Race is a social construct because obviously there is only one race, human. Same with public schools that break down achievement by ethnicity and skin color. That is for sure using race as a proxy for class. The terms BIPOC, people of color, brown people, etc. are repulsive in that way, too. Half of my family are Mexican immigrants and not once have I ever heard them refer to themselves as brown people. Yikes. Worse yet, Latinx. Ugh. I've been thinking of starting to testify at Seattle City Council, King County Council, and WA state legislature about the problematic nature of their use of these racist proxies for class. Here in the Washington State the highest incomes are the Asians including East Indian immigrants and others. That's what makes it convenient to consider Asians white-adjacent in woke terminology. I always ask: which people are you talking about? If it's BLM, I ask which ones matter because I can easily name black lives that do not matter to me. Could say the same about "white" people. Which ones? I can easily name white lives that do not matter to me. Not all BIPOC people are poor or disadvantaged. Not all white people are advantaged. It's all so stupid. I really look forward to the DEI bureaucracies going away. Could not come soon enough for me.
Right. The individual is the best way to measure it.
Yes Kate. I am ethnically jewish and never thought about the color of my skin much, or my ethnicity. Hey, when I was a kid, "ethnic" was the term for jews, Italians, and Irish. That is, until I was race-baited by "white racialist conservatives" who insisted I was not white -- whatever. Personally, using race and ethnicity as a building block for opinions is IMHO quite stupid. And extremely rude. Buying into race, like the oppressor/oppressed model of the left or the racialist people on the right -- is disrespectful. Race has no place in serious discussion. Any not just because it's disrespectful but because people are individually more different than they are the same, even when grouped by race and ethnicity. Also, my family and fellow staff are Korean, Black, Vietnamese, European, Hispanic, and multi-race. Using simple one-dimensional terms like nerd, perky, super smart, level headed, stoic, fearful, etc, even have greater meaning.
Except race does in fact correlate with everything from IQ to criminality, and rather strongly as well.
Absolutely. But correlation is not causation. More of a cultural issue which also correlates with race but is a cause, not an affect. Note: Blacks as a group had marriage rates in the 1950s far greater than whites today. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4850739/figure/F1/
> Note: For example, blacks as a group had marriage rates in the 1950s far greater than whites today.
But less than those of Whites back then, i.e., controlling for culture there is still a difference.
Also 60 years of attempts at cultural intervention have failed to move the needle. Also the correlation is universal worldwide.
Even if race and genetics is a factor and even if controlling for culture there is still a difference, that does not raise the bar to race-based legislation. Regarding "Also 60 years of attempts at cultural intervention have failed to move the needle," Agreed. The left has intervened for 60 years and things are getting worse. Being colorblind is about not intervening. Which I agree with.
Congratulations on reaching the "bargaining" stage of HBD acceptance.
https://web.archive.org/web/20211118113418/https://www.xenosystems.net/five-stages-of-hbd/
Totally.
Simple version of our situation: The left says that failure to achieve equal outcomes justifies racism. Thus, if blacks are deficient in some area (education, income, etcetera), the whites must be punished until the outcome is equal. The basic solution to much of it is to fix our education system, not easy, but possible. When major school districts have dropout rates near 50%, the system is seriously flawed and throwing money at it is not the fix.
Unfortunately, the legal system has been created to protect this reverse Robinhood, reverse racism method because the practitioners make a lot of noise and get wealthy.
As Chris says, the real solution is a colorblind system.
Yes please. And, though we have a different system, I’d ask the same for England.