« Temper, Temper | Main | Dishonor »

October 10, 2008

Comments

There is a difference, however subtle, between noting that someone is making racist assertions and arguments, and calling them a racist.

This is completely correct -- and I stand by what I said.

Nonetheless, since hilzoy has spoken, I shan't further.

Gary,

If you look at Figure 81 in Bowling Alone, it the states with high social capital index (where people work together and participate in their community), the top states are North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Minnestoa, Montana, and Nebraska. The states at the bottom are Nevada, Mississippie, Alabama, and Georgia.

I leave it as an exercise to you to figure out the different. Putnam was too afriad to mention the reason in "Bowling Alone" and had to write another book before he would admit the reason. What is odd is that the progressive white elite Democrats keep making proposals to make the U.S. less like Vermont and more like Nevada. The elite progressives seem to believe, like yourself, that government programs can create social capital when is reality current government programs are destroying social capital.

From http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/
"political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings"

So much for diversity being a good thing. If diversity was good,the government would not have to create programs to fix the problems caused by diversity. Even elite whites know that diversity is bad for them personally and that is why they send their children to private schools that are overwhelmingly white.

From:

http://www.law.upenn.edu/blogs/dskeel/archives/2008/03/race_and_crimestuntz.html

"the black murder rate in 2006 stood at 23.7 per 100,000. The white murder rate stood at 3.1. (The links to the relevant sources of data are here and here. I allocated the cases in which the race of the offender is unknown proportionately to the relevant racial groups, as is customary in discussions of these data.) The belief that one of those two groups poses a greater risk of criminal violence is not racist; it’s rational—just as it’s rational to believe that a man of any race poses a greater risk than a woman: the male and female murder rates in 2006 were 10.7 and 1.0. The belief that race and sex have nothing to do with the risk of violent crime isn’t enlightened or virtuous. It’s just wrong."

So, no blacks and whites do not commit crimes at the same rate and there is a huge racial component to crime. And like I predicted above, just pointing that out to progressive whites will cause them to deny it and scream racism. so much for being fact and expert driven.

Unbelievably, there is actually someone who has studied the difference between White and Asian Parents.

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/45899/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

"Results indicate that both Asian immigrants and Asian Americans spent significantly more time on homework and perceived higher parental educational expectation than did White American students. White American students, on the other hand, reported more parental involvement in school activities."

Asian parents concentrate on what benefits their children while Whites are more likely to perform work that actually benefits children other than their own.

To tie this to McCain/Palin and the dark side. Many Blue collar and middle class whites feel that they are being left behind in an Amierca that does not want them (See Barack Obama, who does not speak a second language, stating that Americans should learn Spanish). They believe that the progressive, liberal elites in the U.S. are hypocrites that will force the white middle class to do things (like busing in Louisville) that they will never do themselves.

If the progressive elite whites want to mitigate the anger of blue collar and middle class whites, then the elites should align their politics with their personal actions. If elites believe diversity is good then they should stop moving to Vermont and Portland and maybe start moving to El Paso, Texas.

I used to really believe in the value of communication. I thought that people could engage in the exchange of information and ideas and that people's ideas would actually adapt and evolve.

I am tentatively coming to the conclusioon that at least in reagrd to political ideas there is a subset of people who are incapable of this. Impervious to facts. Indeed, prone to inventing their own facts. Deep, faith-based loyalty to an ideology or to a simple set of assumptions that gives the believer a comforting sense of knowing it all, understanding everything better that other people. This combined with a viseral fear of anything or anyone that contradicts the faith. In other words such deep ego-invovement in one's opinions that the posibility of learning or changing or adapting is simply out of the question.

I don't think that modern conservatism in America is a political philosophy. I think it is a habit of mind: the habit of prefering simple solutions to complex situations which become a belief system impervious to information which gives the believer a way to simitaneously feel smarter thatn everyone else without having to ever bother thinking again.

"If you look at Figure 81 in Bowling Alone, it the states with high social capital index (where people work together and participate in their community), the top states are North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Minnestoa, Montana, and Nebraska. The states at the bottom are Nevada, Mississippie, Alabama, and Georgia.

I leave it as an exercise to you to figure out the different [sic].

Well, we know what difference sd thinks is all-important, but of course, there are others - history and economics and 'environment' are also important, not just albedo. Certainly there's a lot of geographical proximity - with one exception each, the high social capital index states are clustered in the northern plains/upper midwest region, while the low SCI states are the heart of the Deep South. (The outliers keeping to the North/South pattern, at least). Certainly this does correspond roughly to "diversity" (esp. in the way it's often used), but there's also shared cultural traits, etc. (thinking of Albion's Seed-style fun). If nothing else, the 'core' high SCI states aren't just pretty white, they're specifically pretty German/Scandinavian, descended from immigrant farming communities facing relatively harsh conditions. The low SCI outlier, Nevada - well, I suspect we're looking at Las Vegas, among other things. Vt. - well, it's interesting that the rest of New England - esp. N. New England - scores pretty high as well, and there are various explanations for that besides 'low diversity'.

"So much for diversity being a good thing. If diversity was good,the government would not have to create programs to fix the problems caused by diversity."

SD: supposing for the moment that everything Putnam says is right: it would not follow that diversity was not a good thing unless the stuff you listed was the sum total of goodness. Nor would it follow that there would not have to be government programs to support it: there are plenty of things that are good that cannot be provided by private individuals. National defense, for one; a system of laws for another.

Besides, I'm still curious what government programs promote diversity in communities. If you're talking about things like enforcement of fair housing laws, that's not about promoting diversity, but about making sure everyone operates on a level playing field.

the top states are North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Minnestoa, Montana, and Nebraska. The states at the bottom are Nevada, Mississippie, Alabama, and Georgia.

Yes, and BLACK PEOPLE LIVE IN THOSE BAD, BAD STATES!

We understand.

Here is a simple thought experiment.

Imagine that, in the places where blacks live in large numbers, they are less engaged in the society at large than whites because lots of white people hate them, can't stand to be in the same room with them, and will resist the engagement of blacks in their communities with every fiber of their being.

Hmmm, has anything like that ever happened?

Facts can have many explanations. Sometimes it's useful to consider the ones that aren't the first freaking ones that pop into your head before deciding that you actually understand what's going on.

And with that, I'm really and truly done talking with you, superdestroyer, about anything that has to do with black people. You appear to have some kind of allergic reaction to them, and I have no desire to make your condition worse.

Thanks -

"Putnam was too afriad to mention the reason in 'Bowling Alone'"

Yeah, I'm sure he confided that in you.

"From [here]" you nicely selectively quote, omitting, for instance:

[...] Diversity, it shows, makes us uncomfortable -- but discomfort, it turns out, isn't always a bad thing. Unease with differences helps explain why teams of engineers from different cultures may be ideally suited to solve a vexing problem. Culture clashes can produce a dynamic give-and-take, generating a solution that may have eluded a group of people with more similar backgrounds and approaches.

[...]

His paper argues strongly that the negative effects of diversity can be remedied, and says history suggests that ethnic diversity may eventually fade as a sharp line of social demarcation.

[...]

"It would be unfortunate if a politically correct progressivism were to deny the reality of the challenge to social solidarity posed by diversity," he writes in the new report. "It would be equally unfortunate if an ahistorical and ethnocentric conservatism were to deny that addressing that challenge is both feasible and desirable."

[...]

In his findings, Putnam writes that those in more diverse communities tend to "distrust their neighbors, regardless of the color of their skin, to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television."

[...]

n documenting that hunkering down, Putnam challenged the two dominant schools of thought on ethnic and racial diversity, the "contact" theory and the "conflict" theory. Under the contact theory, more time spent with those of other backgrounds leads to greater understanding and harmony between groups. Under the conflict theory, that proximity produces tension and discord.

Putnam's findings reject both theories. In more diverse communities, he says, there were neither great bonds formed across group lines nor heightened ethnic tensions, but a general civic malaise. And in perhaps the most surprising result of all, levels of trust were not only lower between groups in more diverse settings, but even among members of the same group.

[...]

If ethnic diversity, at least in the short run, is a liability for social connectedness, a parallel line of emerging research suggests it can be a big asset when it comes to driving productivity and innovation. In high-skill workplace settings, says Scott Page, the University of Michigan political scientist, the different ways of thinking among people from different cultures can be a boon.

"Because they see the world and think about the world differently than you, that's challenging," says Page, author of "The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies." "But by hanging out with people different than you, you're likely to get more insights. Diverse teams tend to be more productive."

In other words, those in more diverse communities may do more bowling alone, but the creative tensions unleashed by those differences in the workplace may vault those same places to the cutting edge of the economy and of creative culture.

[...]

But Putnam says he's also received hundreds of complimentary emails laced with bigoted language. "It certainly is not pleasant when David Duke's website hails me as the guy who found out racism is good," he says.

I don't think Putnam likes you, superdestroyer. Or your selective reading.
[...] In the final quarter of his paper, Putnam puts the diversity challenge in a broader context by describing how social identity can change over time. Experience shows that social divisions can eventually give way to "more encompassing identities" that create a "new, more capacious sense of 'we,'" he writes.

[...]

While acknowledging that racial and ethnic divisions may prove more stubborn, Putnam argues that such examples bode well for the long-term prospects for social capital in a multiethnic America.

In his paper, Putnam cites the work done by Page and others, and uses it to help frame his conclusion that increasing diversity in America is not only inevitable, but ultimately valuable and enriching.

I'm sure you agree with Putnam. Right?

" The states at the bottom are Nevada, Mississippie, Alabama, and Georgia.

The SCI bottom 10 (from the bowling alone website ranking):
Rank---Name----Score
40 Kentucky -0.79
41 North Carolina -0.82
42 West Virginia -0.83
43 South Carolina -0.88
44 Tennessee -0.96
45 Louisiana -0.99
46 Alabama -1.07
47 Georgia -1.15
48 Mississippi -1.17
49 Nevada -1.43

Using 2005 data, TN is 81.5% white, WV is 95.9% white, KY 91.2% white (almost entirely non-Hispanic white).

Some of the high scoring states, I'd almost think that some of it is just that we're talking about whomever's left at this point - Vermont has had waves of emigration since a bit after the Civil War, and out on the Plains large chunks have reverted back to (demographic definitions of) frontier, with populations dwindling since the early 20thC century. It wouldn't be surprising if the remaining population, both in terms of individuals and local culture, was very much invested in community structure. On the other hand, it's possible that regions which have had certain kinds of rapid and fractured growth - for example, exurban sprawl, which some have suggested as fostering a kind of rootless, communityless anomie - are esp. at risk for collapsing social capital. But both sides of this are clearly way too simplistic, with no easy fit and numerous counterexamples. It's probably best to think of networks of causation and risk factors - and to be fair, ethnic homogeneity likely does help some, given that we've had here - as russell points out - so many things working to break down relationships between peoples, not to mention centuries of salting any piece of earth they might grow from, and such a short time trying to cultivate them.

Community diversity is particularly interesting to me because (among the usual reasons), we live in Philly's Mt. Airy neighborhood, which (W. Mt, Airy specifically) is an (academically, at least) famous example of neighborhood integration, in part because starting in the 1950s community leaders saw what was happening in other areas - frantic white flight - and decided to fight for a strong, stable and diverse community. (Some of the things suggested as making this possible include diverse housing stock, relatively low housing density, liberal values, and generally relatively high SES on both ends, which does sorta speak to the more palatable bits of what sd's been saying - as one study of the area suggests:

" The post-World War II experience of continuous appreciation of property values transformed homeownership, for vast segments of the working and middle classes, into a solid form of preretirement savings. Their houses constituted their financial security. Thus, African-American movement into a neighborhood, which is often portrayed as tantamount to falling property values, is perceived as a great financial risk. For families with a financial cushion beyond their house, perceptions of risk may differ.

When combined with high levels of education and liberal values, financial stability may facilitate racial diversity in yet another way. In his study of early integration in West Mount Airy, Heumann (1973) suggested that residing in a segregated neighborhood was a mechanism whereby certain working- and middle-class Whites acquired status among their peers. A similar theme was revealed in a Michigan study that found that many working-class Whites felt that “not being African-American is what constitutes being middle class; [and that] not living with African-Americans is what makes a neighborhood a decent place to live” (Greenberg, 1985) Thus one would expect to find a high level of resistance to integration among such populations. In contrast, Whites who derive significant status from their occupational and/or educational success do not have the same status needs to live in an all-White community (Heumann, 1973). Their preexisting status combined with their financial stability makes them much more receptive to living in a racially diverse neighborhood.
In turn, this position may have a spillover effect, to the extent that it encourages Whites of lower socioeconomic means to remain in the neighborhood. The operative assumption is that the commitment of higher status Whites to a neighborhood keeps property values fairly stable and thus decreases the perceived risk factor for Whites with fewer economic resources.
"

I leave it as an exercise to you to figure out the different. Putnam was too afriad to mention the reason in "Bowling Alone" and had to write another book before he would admit the reason. What is odd is that the progressive white elite Democrats keep making proposals to make the U.S. less like Vermont and more like Nevada.

Nevada is 85% white. I leave it as an exercise to you to figure out what point you think you're trying to make here.

You know another state that has a really high crime rate? Alaska. Interestingly, this indicates that Alaska's crime rate is about 50% higher per capita than Alabama; it also shows that, for 2005, Minnesota's crime rate had edged slightly above that of Mississippi. Kansas and Iowa also have higher crime rates than Mississippi.
Guess you'll conclude that white folks are just criminal by nature- how else can you explain this data, using your bizarro-world logic?

If elites believe diversity is good then they should stop moving to Vermont and Portland

Portland (77% white) is an example of a 'white' location. Nevada (85% white) is an example of a 'non-white' place.
Why does this apparent mismatch occur? Becuase Nevada has a high crime rate, and you want to blame that on the n*****s. High crimes rates, you think, are solely caused by n*****s ruining the neighborhood. So, in your mind, Nevada becomes racially mixed.
You are a sick, sick puppy.

Carleton Wu,

Nevada is White persons not Hispanic, percent, 2006 58.9% See http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/32000.html Nevada has had a huge influx of illegal aliens from Mexico and Hispanics from California. Of course Las Vegas has lousy public schools and a public universtiy system that is straining with teaching http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/28365419.html

Dan S.

If upper class whites have no need to live in majority white neighborhoods, then why do they and then why do they send their children to all white schools. Look at the Demographics of a place like Northwest Washington versus Northeast Washington.

Also, it is hard to believe that the governments goal in full integration of minority and immigrant groups. When the government has programs such as affirmative action, black mentoring progras at colleges, minority set aside contracting, separate and unequal admissions at universities, and the old race norming on civil service exams, the government has promote the separateness of minorities. If you look at most flagship state universities, they have programs to suport and mentor blacks, Hispanics, and even Asians but always lack mentoring and support groups for whites.

If you want to know why middle class whites are so angry, look at the difference between an Ivy League schools and a direcitonal state where their children go to college. A middle class white attending a directional state can choose between law enforcement, teaching, nursing, or low level business management. Jobs in fields such as Law, finance, publishing, and entertainment are basically cut off to them. The middle and blue collar whites feel that they are squeezed between poor blacks, Hispanics, and immigrants for blue collar jobs and elite whites and Asians for high level jobs. And the only answer the Democrats have for their concerns is to call them racist and tell them to shut up and live with being second class citizens.


To bring it back to the beginning point. It does not matter that white middle class Republicans are mad. They are a shrinking demographic groups that will soon have zero affect on government policy. Instead of worrying about what mad Republicans will do, think about what happens after the Republican Party collapses and all of the disguntled former Republicans start voting in the Democratic Primary. My guess is that the DEmocratic Party will adopt some fairly undemocratic ideas such as closed primaries, more caucuses, and party approval of candidates to limite the impact. I also guess that as the Democratic Party becomes dominate that they will find a way to eliminate initative and referendum from the states that have it. Why give a group of whites who will sign petitions a means to still affect policy in the coming one party state.

"See [superdestroyer's inactive link:">http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/32000.html">link:

White persons, percent, 2006 (a) 81.7%
Apparently sd has as much trouble reading English as writing it. So, superdestroyer, at what university do you teach that they let your inability to write, punctuate, or spell get by?

What university lets past ignorance of how to use an apostrophe, or turns a blind eye to sentences such as "Also, it is hard to believe that the governments goal in full integration of minority and immigrant groups"? Where do they teach random capitalizations of words like "Demographics," "Primary," and "Law"? Where do they hire teachers who couldn't pass an eighth grade writing test?

Enlighten and impress us with your fabled teaching credits, by all means, please.

Thanks!

If you want to know why middle class whites are so angry, look at the difference between an Ivy League schools and a direcitonal state where their children go to college. A middle class white attending a directional state can choose between law enforcement, teaching, nursing, or low level business management. Jobs in fields such as Law, finance, publishing, and entertainment are basically cut off to them.

Anyone with decent grades and standardized test scores can get into their state university system, where they can major in economics or get an undergrad degree leading to law school. The CEO of Lehman Brothers graduated from Colorado-Boulder, so even my local state school can lead you to ignominy.
If your kids can only get into the local community college, then the elites aren't keeping them down...
Now, Id admit that getting into the elite levels of the business work or into the top law schools in the country is easier from the Ivies- but there's nothing stopping smart people from getting MBAs from their state systems and making it, even on Wall St.
As for entertainment- I have no idea what you're smoking, but I can't think of an entertainment career path that demands an Ivy League-class education (except perhaps 'classical musician'). Do you think that David Letterman, Brittany Spears, or Dr.Dre went to Ivies?

As for the rest, I noticed that you've not followed your logic(?) to its conclusion and decided that white people cause crime- based on the Mississippi having a lower violent crime rate than Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Alaska (more than 2x as much), and Montana. Heck, those dangerous whites in Alaska have a higher violent crime rate than either multicultural New York or California.

And you haven't used the word "dogma" in a while, check your meds. We worry.

demands an Ivy League-class education (except perhaps 'classical musician').

This is an interesting observation. If by 'Ivy-class', you mean places like Julliard and Eastman, that may be true, but I think that is more true for string players than wind players, because the US has such a tradition of school bands, so you have this huge population of wind players moving up thru state institutions.

People,
You seem to think you hold the monopoly on education. What I find liberals to hold the monopoly on are 'soft' degrees in English, Art, Humanities, Social Science, etc. I am a conservative college educated individual with a hard science degree. The degree that took great sacrifice to achieve. One that opened up a great many doors and led me to make more money then I should be allowed according to some of my liberal peers.
Liberals should look at the core constituency of the Democratic Party before tossing stones about education.



You seem to think you hold the monopoly on education.

Are you quoting a statement written by a participant on this blog?
If so, may we see the citation please? If not, what group of "People" exactly are you addressing here?


What I find liberals to hold the monopoly on are 'soft' degrees in English, Art, Humanities, Social Science, etc.

Do you have a citation or link to some stats backing up this assertion? People trained in the "hard sciences" normally expect to see numbers supporting an argument such as this, or so it has been my experience in the past, speaking as a fellow holder of a "hard science" degree.


I am a conservative college educated individual with a hard science degree.

I'm confused - are you an individual who obtained a college education and who also has conservative political views, or are you someone who obtained an education from a conservative college?


The degree that took great sacrifice to achieve.

You mean you got the only one? Wow, I'm impressed.


One that opened up a great many doors and led me to make more money then I should be allowed according to some of my liberal peers.

Why did you go into a career field where people are so mean? It must be unpleasant having other people opine about how much money you should be allowed to make, especially your peer group.


Liberals should look at the core constituency of the Democratic Party before tossing stones about education.

And what exactly is the "core constituency" of the Democratic Party, as you see it? I mean your rhetoric is so persuasive that I'm going to get right onto that as soon as I know where to look, but I could use some pointers on where to start.

kthxbai.

I am a conservative college educated individual with a hard science degree.

Just one? Never mind. I see, upon previewing, that TLT beat me to it.

Liberals should look at the core constituency of the Democratic Party before tossing stones about education.

As a liberal, I look at the core constituency of the Republican Party, when it comes to "education". I am not amused.

--TP

Dana,
I get a chuckle out of the idea that the party that denies global climate change and evolution is the party of hard scientists.

Not sure where your screed came from; try adjusting your molar radio.

"There is a significant political divide in beliefs about the origin of human beings, with 60% of Republicans saying humans were created in their present form by God 10,000 years ago, a belief shared by only 40% of independents and 38% of Democrats." Gallup poll conducted May 2008

"Recent Gallup Poll results suggest that this [global warming] skepticism among Republican and conservative elites has led rank-and-file Republicans to follow suit, as currently there is a large gap between self-identified Republicans and Democrats in terms of perceptions of global warming. The growing gap is apparent in results from a decade of Gallup polling on the issue, including the results from this year's Gallup Environment Poll, conducted March 6-9, 2008." link

Gary,

The difference between your cite of 81% and by cite of 58% is the number you cited includes Hispanics and if you would have looked a few lines fewer down, you would have notice the white, non-Hispanic number of 58%. Thus, Nevada is less white than the U.S. as a whole with a much larger Hispanic population that all of those northern, whiters states. That is one of the reasons that the social capital index is so low (in addition to the transitory nature and the low number of locally born people). I bet that in most of the public schools in Nevada, the PTA meetings are thin in the number of parents.

On a side note, to comply with new DHS regulations, many academics had to be fingerprinted. On the federal fingerprint card, one has to put your race. There is not space for ethnicity. It was funny to tell people from Iran, Pakistan, India, and Columbia that for that day, they were honorary white people as far as the government was concerned.

I bet that in most of the public schools in Nevada, the PTA meetings are thin in the number of parents.

Dan.

Becareful about linking creationsim and political party. Blacks are the most Democratic Party supporting demographic groups in the U.S., yet only six percent believe in evolution. http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

Liberals should look at the core constituency of the Democratic Party before tossing stones about education.


And what exactly is the "core constituency" of the Democratic Party, as you see it?

Teacher unions. Duh.

Becareful about linking creationsim and political party.

Why? Cause if the Dems really let African-Americans know that they support evolution, the African-Americans are going to run to a party that tries to disenfranchise them and has members who long for the days of Strom Thurmond and call them 'uppity'? And they are going to go running into the arms of people who try and suggest, oh so subtly, that it is genetic deficiencies that keep them back? It's a chance I'm willing to take.

Dan.

Becareful about linking creationsim and political party.

This is a most ignorant comment. Which party supported "intelligent design" and "teach the controversy"? Republicans, not Democrats.

I bet that in most of the public schools in Nevada, the PTA meetings are thin in the number of parents.

We've seen what happens with your 'hunches' before- eg your hunch that almost all of the white people in Seattle send their kids to public schools didn't turn out so well.
As I pointed out above, it takes a lot longer to debunk your racist nonsense than it does for you to ignore those debunkings (eg you *still* haven't responded to the bit about Alaska, Iowa, et al being more violent than Mississippi) and make up more racist stuff.

A middle class white attending a directional state can choose between law enforcement, teaching, nursing, or low level business management. Jobs in fields such as Law, finance, publishing, and entertainment are basically cut off to them.

I'm not sure what a "directional" state is, but if you're talking about plain old state colleges and universities, this statement is utter crap.

I went to a state university. It was excellent, in every way. The reason it was so good was because the State of New York decided they wanted to have a state university system that was excellent, and they invested money to make that happen.

And that's the whole state, including the dairy farmers and the factory workers, not just the "liberal elites" in the Upper West Side. And the dairy farmer and factory worker kids went to them, right alongside the kids from the Upper West Side.

If that's not available in your state, contact your state legislature and let them know you'd like some better offerings in higher education. It ain't "liberal elites" that are holding you back, dude.

My wife went to Kent State in OH. We get their alumni publication. That school has excellent programs, sponsors important research in a number of fields, and is still reasonably affordable. I emphasize "reasonably". My wife's nephew is there now as a pharmaceutical student.

My Congressional Rep went to the state university that is around the corner from where I live now. He then went on to law school, and thence to Congress. I've taken a number of math classes there since I've lived in the area, and they were all great. And cheap.

Basically, sd, you're just making crap up. You have some kind of issue with black and brown people, and you want to convince the rest of us that all the nation's problems are their fault.

Well, that's a lie. And, your issue with black people is *your issue*. Go deal with it somewhere else, please, and quit wasting everybody's time by expecting us to fact-check every insane gust that blows out of your behind.

Please.

Dana, I have no idea, on earth, what point you are trying to make.

Thanks -

Russell,

You must not be a college sports fan if you do not know what directional state refers to. They are the state schools with directions are hyphens in their name. They are the non-flagship state universities that produce the mid-level managers, teachers, allied healthcare workers. They are not competative for admission, have a high drop out rate, and usually have over 90% of their students from public schools. Think the California State University System.

You mentioned your nephew in pharmacy schools. That is the sterotypical middle class major at directional state (like Kent State University). There is not a pharmacy school at any of the Ivy leagues (only one Ivy league has an undergraduate nursing school and only three have graduate nursing schools). See http://www.uspharmd.com/school/. People who go to private prep schools do not go to pharmacy school because it is hard,long, it is a degree where classes build on one another, and these days, it is filled with immigrants.

If you want to entertain yourself look at the bios on the websites at Bain, McKinsey, for the Big Law firms in NYC or DC. You will have to look a long time to find many of the schools that have pharmacy schools.

I am also surprised that you mentioned the SUNY system since there have been some controvery because New York will not pick a university to be a flagship university. When you look at US News, New York state universities are not at the top of the list. What is also odd is that the blue states of the north east lead the nation in students leaving the state to attend college elsewhere. See http://www.ctdhe.org/info/oldreports/rptexportstudents.htm That is a sign of rich, white elites who know that a degree from UCONN, Rhode Island, or UMAss-Amherst makes it much harder to land a job in finance consulting, or to get a position in top ten B-Schools or top 14 law schools.

I have not said that all problems are cause by minorities. I have used minorities as an example of why middle class whites are worried about the future and as an example of why elite, white progressive have a crediblity problem with middle class and blue collar whites. The actions of posters here with the constant screams of racism and the refusal to face facts or the opinionsof experts have helped prove that point.


liberal japonicus,

I was making a point that a large demographic group that are significant players in the Democratic Party are even less likely to believe in creationism than the average Republican. It demonstrates than when elite, white progressive call Republicans stupid or ignorant and DEmocrats smart, that they are making the claim by excluding blacks and Hispanics from their calcuations. Remember, the chance that a high school drop out is a Democratic voter is is greater than his being a Republican voter http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

It demonstrates than when elite, white progressive call Republicans stupid or ignorant and DEmocrats smart, that they are making the claim by excluding blacks and Hispanics from their calcuations.

sd, you seem to have some serious issues. The crux is not whether someone believes in creationism or not, it is whether a party uses it to try and win elections, as the Republicans have. In other words, you are only ignorant if you believe in creationism AND you let it influence who you vote for. So in that regard, all of those creationism believing AAs have a leg up on you.

I have used minorities as an example of why middle class whites are worried about the future and as an example of why elite, white progressive have a crediblity problem with middle class and blue collar whites.

If minority participation in public school booster clubs are what's keeping middle class and blue collar whites up nights nowadays, they need to find something else to worry about.

I'm not sure exactly who it is you're talking about when you refer to "middle class and blue collar whites". I'm a middle class white person, FWIW.

If you're referring to folks who vote for guys like George Bush because they think he'd be fun to hang out with, or who will vote for Sarah Palin because she shoots and rides a Harley, then my personal opinion is that those folks need to establish some credibility with me, rather than the other way around, because I think they are largely responsible for running this country into the dumper.

Other than the way they vote, I have no problem with them. If they have a problem with me, they need to go sort themselves out, because I'm not the cause of their troubles. Nor are the blacks, the Mexicans, or any of the 100 other things you seem to think they believe are getting in their way.

There are lots of problems facing working people in this country. Liberals, blacks, and Hispanics are not even close to the top of the list.

You can tell them I said so.

Thanks -

What is also odd is that the blue states of the north east lead the nation in students leaving the state to attend college elsewhere. See http://www.ctdhe.org/info/oldreports/rptexportstudents.htm That is a sign of rich, white elites who know that a degree from UCONN, Rhode Island, or UMAss-Amherst makes it much harder to land a job in finance consulting, or to get a position in top ten B-Schools or top 14 law schools.

This is my last comment to you; I want to point out that your thinking is basically composed of nuggets like this one- a fact, followed by a completely unsupported guess that fits your bizarre theories. I don't know where you think these kids are going (or that they're white!)- if they can't get into the best schools of the NE, they aren't going to Stanford either. And, of course, one can go from UNCONN to Harvard, it's just not as easy as Dartmouth to Harvard. Probably no more difficult than Tulane to Harvard.

Your jump in this case is not just completely unjustified by the fact you present, it is also contradicted by the second chart on the page, which shows that all of the top 18 destinations for Connecticut undergrads out of state are still in the Northeast (nb this is as far as the chart goes). In a humiliating reversal for you, the University of Rhode Island tops the list, and UMASS-Amherst is 12th (UCONN doesn't make the list bc it wouldn't be out of state). If they're fleeing Connecticut, it's not because they find the 2nd-tier of NE schools to be below par.

You can't think straight, and you can't see a fact 2 inches from your nose if it contracts what you think about black people and white people.

But Carleton, you have to realize that sd is motivated by fear. What initially seemed like concern trolling, his assertions in earlier threads that the US was on the path to becoming a one party state because the Republican brand had become so toxic, was actually an true expression of his beliefs. It illustrates the fear that motivates sd and blogs out the possibility for logical thinking. For sd, the country is being overrun by minorities and soon, god-fearing white folks are going to be in the same position as the minorities. The question is whether it is worth the time and effort to convince him that his analysis is nothing more than grabbing onto factoids and weaving a story that, when one string is pulled, falls completely apart, or not. Given his vehemence, I suspect not.

" Blacks are the most Democratic Party supporting demographic groups in the U.S., yet only six percent believe in evolution. http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm"


I don't get over to religioustolerance.org enough nowadays - it was one of my major go-to sites before blogs, back in the 90s - fond memories of coming home on break and sitting (at that point) in Tenafly watching it slooooooowly load on aol w/dialup (right around the time aol got a bit overextended . . . ).

But - while I *am* skimming, I'm not seeing that figure. What I do see is poll results from '91 basically:
Group of adults Creationism Theistic Evo Naturalistic Evo . . .
Caucasians 46% 40% 9%
African Americans 53% 41% 4%

Theistic evolution the idea, more or less, that evolution is how God works (with, in this case, some guidance); naturalistic evolution is that God was not involved (The question is phrased a bit trickily because it focuses on human evolution, which probably inflates the creationist side.) A few folks *do* insist that Theistic Evo. isn't really accepting evolution, but that's kinda silly - at the same time, *nowadays* some IDers might end up here - not a problem in '91. You'll note that at that point African Americans were somewhat more creationist than 'Caucasians', but not by very much. (Most likely these numbers haven't changed much over the years, but if you have more recent poll data . . .). If so, than the percentage of African Americans who think God created people 10,000 years ago - poof! - is lower than the percentage of GOPpers who think so (and yes, those are two almost entirely non-overlapping groups). According to a 2005 Pew poll,70% of white evangelicals said "that humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time".

Also, you seem to have utterly missed the point of the original post, which isn't that "Republicans are retarded", but that they've not just played to, but encouraged ignorance and anti-intellectualism as hallmarks of their party, until people who best represent these traits are running around screaming to the cameras about how Obama is a Muslim terrorist, booing their own candidate when he tries to inject a tiny bit of toolittletoolate common sense, and apparently driving away more educated folks . And it's an incredibly harmful thing to do to their members . We're all incredibly, almost infinitely ignorant, and the most we can hope for is becoming a tiny bit less so in some minute & extremely specific areas - but help convince people that education and learning is for pointy-headed Godless elites, and you virtually destroy any chance of them doing so at all, virtually destroy any chance they have at making informed choices in the face of the various vast industries dedicated to manipulation, from faith healers to bubble-era mortgage brokers to politicians to oil companies paying for AGW denialism to the folks making those asinine corn syrup commercials. They might well decide they and their children's values/ hopes/ aspirations etc. are best served by Gramps/Alaska Disasta '08, but if they're supporting to them because otherwise the scary secret Muslim terrorist will destroy America in a nightmare of socialism and sharia, that's not what's happening - instead, they're getting played. Wolves like sheep keeping the wool over their eyes.

I don't get over to religioustolerance.org enough nowadays - it was one of my major go-to sites before blogs, back in the 90s - fond memories of coming home on break and sitting (at that point) in Tenafly watching it slooooooowly load on aol w/dialup (right around the time aol got a bit overextended . . . ).

But - while I *am* skimming, I'm not seeing that figure.

Surprise, surprise.

I have no doubt in my mond that if sd had been around in the 1800's he would have been talking about the influx of the non-white Irish and if in the early 20th century the non-white Italians and Greeks.

All three groups were seen the same as Hispanics are now by the anti-immigration forces. And yes, it is the anti-immigrationists, not anti-illegal-immigrationists.

"Surprise, surprise."

What's odd is that if sd wanted just to count naturalistic evolution, they could push a 4% figure, which is even better for their argument, if meaningless and misleading. Don't know where the 6% came from - I'm honestly not finding it. Seems like extra work for less effort.

John Miller,

What government policies existed in the 1800's to encourage the irish to remain separate. Was their a voting rights acted that require government to develop majority/minority districts. Was there minority set aside programs in government contracts, government hiring, college admissions, or even deciding high school magent attendance.

When you see how the left has resisted English immersion education for Hispanics and propose bilingual that limits integration.

When you see how the left has resisted English immersion education for Hispanics and propose bilingual that limits integration.

Hey, can I be on the left?

I've consistently voted for English immersion, and against extended bilingual ed programs, here in MA.

The reason for that is you ain't going nowhere in this country if you can't speak English.

Thought you'd be pleased to know.

Nothing magic about English, it's just the language most of us speak here. If I thought that bilingual ed was, net/net, more constructive for foreign-speaking immigrants, I'd vote the other way.

Are you going to have change your argument now, or does your dialectic admit of people who don't comply with your prejudices?

Thanks -

When you see how the left has resisted English immersion education for Hispanics and propose bilingual that limits integration.

Beyond the fact that the last half of this statement isn't grammatical, which is kind of embarrassing when you rant about people not being able to speak English, precisely what type of immersion education are you talking about? Full immersion, partial immersion, structured immersion, FLEX, FLES, or two-way immersion? Or is it that you don't really know anything about immersion programs and are just advocating a sink or swim approach that fits with something that, for all appearances, seems to be a racist mindset?

liberal juponicus,

The left in California has resisted immersion language educatin and have proposed ways to keep Hispanics isolated.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_020208.htm


In looking up the definitions of all of ther immersion programs, what is clear is that most of them are not immersion programs.

And if you really wanted to find a program to scare middle class whites, it would be two way immersion. While the children of elite whites

If you want to see what middle class parents resent compare two way immersion education with what 10th graders read at Sidwell Friends School in DC: epic heroism of Beowulf,British Literature through the words of Chaucer, Shakespeare,Milton, Swift, Austen, Coleridge, Wordsworth, Keats, and other eminent writers.

Another reason why the middle class does not trust the elite whites. The elite whites was to bus middle class children to bad schools (See Seattle and Louisville) or use their children to teach English to the children of immigrants, while the children of the rich read dead, white males that are no longer read in public schools. but then again, this kind of social engineering government policy is what should be expect from the left.

Russell,

Ask yourself this, if I put 100 people in a room who support bilingual education and believe that immersion is evil, who many would be voting for Obama. My guess is 100 of them would be.

Nothing magic about English, it's just the language most of us speak here. If I thought that bilingual ed was, net/net, more constructive for foreign-speaking immigrants, I'd vote the other way.

Russell,

There are very few things about which I can speak with authority, but learning English as a second language is one of them.

I came to the states at age 9, in April of 1966. I attended school in Chelmsford, tagging along with my cousin, for the last couple of months of the school year. It was English immersion with a vengeance: nobody in the entire school spoke a word of Greek, not even my cousin. I spoke no English going in, I spoke no English coming out.

Over the summer, I watched Major Mudd, and a lot of Three Stooges on TV. The experience shaped my world view to a large extent, but hardly improved my English.

In the fall, I started school in Lowell. There was a fair crop of immigrant kids in the Lowell system that year -- maybe 100 or so. Around the first of October, there started up a special program for us. I don't know if it was local, state, or federal. Buses would collect us from our regular schools around lunchtime and bring us to one central location, where we spent the rest of the day in intensive English language instruction. Luckily for me, I was in the section taught by a Greek seminary student, so I had a leg up on the Spanish-speaking kids. At any rate, by Thanksgiving my English was good enough to return to the regular classroom. I was in 4th grade, BTW. The older kids certainly had a harder time of it.

FWIW, I draw certain conclusions from this experience:
1) Sink-or-swim immersion is pretty useless.
2) Intensive language instruction works well, if you catch'em young enough.
3) It helps to have an instructor who knows your native language.
4) The half-day thing worked well for me. Returning full-time to the regular classroom was far easier than it might have been otherwise.
5) Learning English was a Good Thing (TM).

By contrast, it took me 3 years (including a year in France) to learn French in my teens, and in 30 years of trying I never learned Japanese as an adult. Age matters. In elementary school, missing a couple of months of arithmetic in favor of English language instruction is a good trade-off. In high school, missing a year or two of algebra is more costly. So I favor teaching high-schoolers subjects like math in their native language, alongside of teaching them English.

Incidentally, the richest man I know personally is a neighbor of yours on the North Shore. He is barely literate in two languages. But I have certainly known native-born Americans who were even less literate than him -- and English was their only language :-)

--TP

The hilarity of superdestroyer talking about who should be learning English and how they should be learning it is really making my afternoon. Physician . . .

Hey superdestroyer -

I'm trying to figure out what your actual point is. It appears to be this:

Wealthy white people tend to be liberal, or maybe white liberals tend to be wealthy, it's not clear which.
Those liberals advocate policies that advantage black and brown people at the expense of whites.
Those liberals are *not* the whites who end up being disadvantaged. Rather, middle and lower class whites bear the brunt.
Middle and lower class whites therefore resent them.

Do I get the gist of it?

Here are my comments.

I'm not sure all that many liberal people are wealthy or "elite", or that all that many wealthy whites are liberal.

But, certainly the demographics overlap, so I'll spot you that one.

Liberals do, in fact, often advocate for policies that help black and brown people, sometimes at the expense of whites. It's a subspecies of a more general liberal inclination to help folks who are, generally, at a disadvantage in society.

What a bunch of saps, eh?

It's a sad fact of history that many of those folks are black and brown. Whites do, however, also benefit from liberal efforts.

It's definitely true that upper middle class and wealthy folks escape many of the consequences of policies that they advocate. That's because people with money are, generally, able to insulate themselves from the vicissitudes of life. It comes along with having money.

This may, in fact, seem hypocritical in a lot of cases. It may, in fact, *be* hypocritical in some cases.

Nobody's perfect.

All of the above may, in fact, cause resentment among, and generally piss off, middle to lower class whites.

I make that out to be their problem, not mine. It ain't me, the blacks, or the brown folks that are holding them back. They need to think a little harder about the causes of their problems.

Things are tough all over, believe it or not. Folks need to quit worrying about whether someone else is dissing them. They need to roll their sleeves up, and pitch in on some solutions. If they can't do that, they need to just STFU and let the rest of us get on with it.

Everybody has someone who doesn't like them, and everybody just has to get past it. This is no time for whiners.

Either you think it's good to help folks who are less well off, or you don't. Liberals do, and they are comfortable using the agencies of government to do so.

If that gets up your nose, vote for conservatives.

In any case, please do not bother replying to me with another 10 examples of all the reasons that middle and lower class whites resent the liberal elites. I ALREADY KNOW THEY RESENT LIBERAL ELITES, whoever the hell those people are.

They need to get over it. The sooner the better.

Thanks -

There are very few things about which I can speak with authority, but learning English as a second language is one of them.

Hey Tony -

Thanks for this comment. I will certainly keep it in mind whenever the issue comes up again (as it, no doubt, will).

Thanks again -

Whatever happened to the ancient - and wise - doctrine: DNFTT?

"When you see how the left has resisted English immersion education for Hispanics and propose bilingual that limits integration."

So when will you take to writing in coherent English, sd?

"Whatever happened to the ancient - and wise - doctrine: DNFTT?"

A good idea, but sometimes one is tempted to play with one's food.

Trying to actually argue with a troll like sd is pointless.

Whatever happened to the ancient - and wise - doctrine: DNFTT?

The really good trolls know how to get under your skin. It's an evolutionary mechanism - the comments must make you scratch that itch in order to reproduce. So their ability to irritate you must improve faster than your ability to ignore them. Lots of infections work that way.

Russell,

I wonder how anyone could justify that policy of "shut up and do as your told" as being good leadership. i guess that Democratic party's big tent is limited to those who hold only certain views.

The thing you left out is that many of the policies that are meant to help blacks and Hispanics and that harm blue collar whites also help the white progressive elites. Things like immigration will produce millions of more automatic voters for the progressive Democrats while not harming their children's education, their career prospects, or the quality of life. However, million of additional immigrants will lower the standard of living of blue collar whites, lower their education prospects, and hurt their chances for a job.

What many of the scared blue collar whites are those who produce poll numbers that show that 90% of Americans believe America is on the wrong track. However, they just believe that coming progressive policies of huge entitlements, more regulation, and open borders will just make their lives worse.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad