Category — Affirmitive Action

The Southern Poverty Law Center, once upon a time a bastion of civil rights work, has resorted to attempting to smear Steve Sailer as some sort of white supremacist the likes of David Duke and the music group Prussian Blue.

Why would they do such a thing? Are they really that thick that they can’t tell the difference between a moderate race realist like Sailer and a conspiracy theorist white supremacist like Duke?

Yes. They are really that thick. But they are also probably aware that Sailer put them on his “Scam Watch.”

The SPLC has long lost its way. I would strongly urge our more liberal friends to view them according to today’s reality, and not through prideful lens of yesteryear.

Unrelated money quote of Steve Sailer for today:

The plain truth is that, the farther up the social ladder a black person is born, the more money affirmative action puts into his pocket.

How can this be happening?

The NY Times reports,

Some thought that offering standardized tests was “a crucial step in a prolonged effort to equalize access to programs that critics complained were dominated by white middle-class children whose parents knew how to navigate the system,”

But in fact,

under the new policy, children from the city’s poorest districts were offered a smaller percentage than last year of the entry-grade gifted slots in elementary schools. Children in the city’s wealthiest districts captured a greater share of the slots.

Now, granted…if we were comparing a disparity between rich whites to poor whites, we would not be shocked. But here, where the underclass is overwhelmingly a different race, well…we simply cannot tolerate this!

“the administration is intent on ensuring equal access to the system’s most coveted offerings and closing the racial achievement gap, which Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein frequently refers to as a critical front in the civil rights battle.”

The NY Times notes,

School districts nationwide are struggling to make gifted programs more racially and economically diverse.

And to think this is even a problem in Jew York City….

Which community’s kids do you think are going to be passed over for the gifted programs for the sake of racial diversity? And don’t kid yourselves…important rich Jews who send their own kids to private schools will be all too willing to rig the schools against middle class Jews in order to prove how progressive they are, and even the majority who won’t support such measures will refrain from fighting them in any significant way.

Terrible news, friends. Children will no longer be looked upon as the racial pawns that they are. They will no longer be denied acceptance to elementary schools according to race.

This calamity has occurred because one Crystal Meredith did not properly appreciate the social benefits to the state stemming from the fact that,

“Her child was twice denied the school nearest their home and had to endure a three-hour bus ride to a facility that was not their top choice. Many African-American parents raised similar concerns.�?

These people clearly do not understand the paramount benefits of diversity. Of course, neither did the supreme court.

Ruth Bader “Jewess�? Ginsberg did, though.

Wonderful.

Full story.

I predict mostly silence from the Lefty group blogs. Remember, Jews swerve right on affirmative action – especially overt (and really stupid) affirmative action programs.

It’s not fighting “racism,�? though it was at one time. All too often, it’s what we all know: Affirmative action is not ensuring people get where they deserve, but rather, helping them get to where they don’t deserve.

Inside Higher Ed reports,

The percentage of African American, Hispanic and Native American students admitted to the University of Michigan Law School for next fall fell from 39.6 percent for those students whose applications were considered before enactment of a state law banning race-based preferences in December to 5.5 percent thereafter [… ] “ I would expect that the percentage of students who were getting racially discriminatory preferences in their favor would go down when those preferences stopped.�? That doesn’t mean that those students won’t go on to lower-tier law schools or even to become successful lawyers, Clegg said — referencing research by Richard Sander, of the University of California at Los Angeles, finding that by admitting poorly qualified black applicants who would perform better at less prestigious institutions, top law schools actually do them a disservice.

“That’s the point, Clegg said, “that kind of discrimination should stop. And … when that discrimination would stop, of course there are going to be lower admit rates to the University of Michigan.�?

One of the strangest lies of the domestic left is the mythical supreme benefits of diversity. We have been trumpeting these fantasies for so long now, we forgot we made them out of thin air. Then we go to test them, and it turns out they’re not true, and we’re as surprised as the protagonist in “Angel Heart.”

The NY Times writes,

But what if diversity had an even more complex and pervasive effect? What if, at least in the short term, living in a highly diverse city or town led residents to distrust pretty much everybody, even people who looked like them? What if it made people withdraw into themselves, form fewer close friendships, feel unhappy and powerless and stay home watching television in the evening instead of attending a neighborhood barbecue or joining a community project?

This is the unsettling picture that emerges from a huge nationwide telephone survey by the famed Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam and his colleagues. “Diversity seems to trigger not in-group/out-group division, but anomie or social isolation,�? Putnam writes in the June issue of the journal Scandinavian Political Studies. “In colloquial language, people living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down’ — that is, to pull in like a turtle.�?

In highly diverse cities and towns like Los Angeles, Houston and Yakima, Wash., the survey found, the residents were about half as likely to trust people of other races as in homogenous places like Fremont, Mich., or rural South Dakota, where, Putnam noted, “diversity means inviting a few Norwegians to the annual Swedish picnic.�?

More significant, they were also half as likely to trust people of their own race. They claimed fewer close friends. They were more apt to agree that “television is my most important form of entertainment.�? They had less confidence in local government and less confidence in their own ability to exert political influence. They were more likely to join protest marches but less likely to register to vote. They rated their happiness as generally lower. And this diversity effect continued to show up even when a community’s population density, average income, crime levels, rates of home ownership and a host of other factors were taken into account.

I understand that we don’t want anyone in our society to be denied opportunity because of race, gender, or whatever. But that doesn’t mean diversity itself is really anything special. In fact, overall, it may be more of a liability.

Regardless, I’m simply not going to pretend it’s the most important thing to accomplish in every facet of work, education, and life. It isn’t. And affirmative action is one of the most egregious ways of cheating to get just that.

As some of you may know, three young men are to be cleared of the false charges that were leveled against them, maybe. To be clear, these men were victims of racism. Academics rushed to judgment at least partially because the young men are white and their lying accuser black.

John Podhoretz writes in the NY Post,

“Some 88 of them - more than 10 percent of the entire Duke professoriat - engaged in a shocking rush to judgment in the weeks following the party where the accuser falsely alleged she had been raped.

They signed an ad declaring they were “turning up the volume at a moment when some of the most vulnerable among us are being asked to quiet down.”

Their shameful conduct helped create the lynch-mob atmosphere that tempted and seduced DA Nifong to believe he could ride an indictment of the three young men to political victory in the Democratic primary that took place only weeks after he charged them.

It is not too much to say that many of the adults at Duke, who should be stewards for their students, actually wanted the false rape story to be true because it fulfilled their ideological predilections.

Since the academic work of those who organized the ad centers around the notion that the white male power structure subjugates and violates all those who are neither white nor male, the case was actually a dream come true for them.“

Now – it’s important to note that almost 90% of the “professoriat�? signed no such advertisement. While this is indicative of the absurdity and bile of a small percentage of academic professors, that is a major problem, but it cannot be proven that they dominate academia.

However, if the signers were overrepresented from the history and sociology departments, then maybe we do have a very big problem indeed. If there is significant density of this point of view in these departments, this surely affects the quality and fairness of their teaching in ways it might not affect the IT or chemistry professor’s.

I would like to see the breakdown.