This Gallup analysis shows some interesting things about race, religion, and politics. The biggest takeaway for me is that for whites, religion is what determines political affiliation, whereas for blacks and hispanics it’s mostly race.
Definitely check out the findings.
Image from edweek.org
I like the New York Times; I think they produce an overall strong product. But sometimes the PC-bend is simply overwhelming. This piece on the New York Firefighters test is a case in point.
They argue that the firefighter’s test is racist in hidden, sneaky ways–like in requiring people to be good at reading comprehension. And when I say “good”, I mean at the primary school level. Here’s a quote from the NYT article:
On the surface, the tests — versions of which remained in use until 2007, according to the court — do not appear racially biased. Each exam consists of 85 multiple-choice questions about firefighting practices: the order in which a firefighter should don gear in an alarm; what the rear of a building would look like, based on its facade; the right situations in which to say “mayday” rather than “urgent” over the walkie-talkie.
But a closer look shows that the exams also required applicants to read and understand long passages, often containing technical terms, and then answer questions about them.
Seriously? Did you just say that? In print? And put your name on it?
Here’s the “racist” question in its entirety:
Which one of the following portable power saw blades must be put out of service?
A) A carbide tip blade missing nine tips
B) a carbide tip blade with three broken tips;
C) an aluminum oxide blade measuring 12 inches;
D) a yellow silicon carbide blade measuring nine inches.
So, do you know the answer? Right, me neither. But right above the question they had a 250 word piece of text that talked about blade saw safety. You know, kind of helper-text you had when you were learning to read in the sixth grade. That text included the following:
A saw blade must be put out of service (OOS) and sent to the Technical Services Division when the blade becomes worn or damaged. Carbide tip blades must be put OOS when eight or more tips are missing or broken.
Well, holy crap. They encoded the answer in anglo-speak! Well, not really anglo-speak, since Asians and Indians would blow the test out of the water. No, they must have encoded it in anti-NAM-speak. A NAM is a Non-Asian-Minority, which is what PC-types really mean when they use the word minority.
Basically, any sort of text in which NAMs score lower than Whites, Asians, or Indians, is racist. That’s it. That’s the new definition. Or, to put it another way, if Blacks and Hispanics tend not to be able to read a 250 word passage and answer a simple question about it, then the test is biased against Blacks and Hispanics.
This is unspeakably lame.
This is not just an affront to education, it’s a blatant insult against any Black or Hispanic person with an education. In a staggering twist of PC-based irony, the statement that reading comprehension skill requirements constitute a white-leaning bias equates to nothing less than a declaration of intellectual inequality. This type of rhetoric says, in a deafening scream:
“Any test that evaluates someone’s ability to read and understand basic instructions, at the elementary school level, is biased toward Whites, Asians and Indians, because Blacks and Hispanics tend not to be good at that stuff.”
Deplorable.
Fix the fucking problem. Don’t jeopardize the safety of the public because certain groups have cultural values that discourage the pursuit of education. When you take that route all you’re doing is telling those same people you’re trying to help that they’re inferior, when instead you should be encouraging them to embrace the culture that pushed the successful to succeed.
That’s the solution–for FDNY and for the country and the world. Lowering the standard helps no one in the long term–least of all those who need the help. ::
Many said during the elections that Obama got to where he is because he is black. They were right in one sense, but they confuse the issue.
Obama race helped him much earlier on than most people think. He was lucky to be picked from a crowd of thousands of lesser political figures who needed to be noteworthy or exceptional in some way. Obama was a black man with the same abilities as the others–so he stood out. So on that point those calling him lucky are correct.
What these people miss, however, is that Obama beat out the final candidates because he is a phenomenal candidate. He defeated them through rhetorical brilliance, a powerfully resonating message, and most of all an intelligent approachability that comes from a personality, not a race. Anyone with those tools has good chances to win.
In short, Obama’s race helped him get noticed early on, but his actually winning was a function of his intelligence and character, not his race. He needed something to get him through the initial vetting that doesn’t focus on deeper qualities, and that was, admittedly, his race. But once he was in public view his actual brilliance took him the rest of the way. ::
Image from maxitees.com
Many white people I speak with have a visceral reaction to Obama. Their faces crinkle up when even considering the idea of him being President. Yet when I ask them what policies of his they don’t like, I get the gaze of nothingness. Many of these same people can’t name the three branches of government.
So what’s the real reason for the near-hostile reaction?
Try this thought experiment: What percentage of white people who severely dislike Obama (for whatever reason) would feel comfortable with their daughter, under any circumstances, marrying a black guy?
Let’s be clear: I’m not saying that anyone who doesn’t like Obama is definitely making the entire decision based on race; that’s a severe overextension. What I’m saying is that if:
…then you should re-evaluate your thoughts/feelings regarding Obama. In short, if both of the above are true you are likely making a significant portion of your decision based on race—not consciously, but subconsciously.
Don’t feel guilty about it. It’s quite natural to make these sorts of background-process decisions about risk and danger. It’s built into us. But it’s the job of our logic and reason to try and counteract these impulses when they are unfounded.
I ask only that you consider it.:
From this NY Times piece:
According to a July New York Times/CBS News poll, when whites were asked whether they would be willing to vote for a black candidate, 5 percent confessed that they would not. That’s not so bad, right? But wait.
The pollsters then rephrased the question to get a more accurate portrait of the sentiment. They asked the same whites if most of the people they knew would vote for a black candidate. Nineteen percent said that those they knew would not.
This is what causes the Bradley Effect, which is where a minority candidate leads in the polls leading up to an election but loses by a surprising margin when people actually vote. In short, it’s White people saying publicly that they’re going to vote for the minority and then voting for the White guy when protected by anonymity.
It’s why my prediction has been stable for the last several months. Obama will lead by approximately 10% in the polls going into the election, and he will lose by roughly that same amount. That’s a 20% swing, caused by latent racism.
Let’s hope I’m wrong.
I found an article on CNN yesterday that severely bothered me. It’s by a Black professor by the name of Michael Eric Dyson. His article is typical of the 90’s theme of high victimization and low responsibility. Here are a few choice excerpts:
There is a vicious prison system that hungers for young black and brown bodies. The more young black and brown folk are thrown in jail, the more cells are built, and the more money made.
This is sickening. I just threw up in my mouth. “Black and Brown” bodies don’t make any more money than White ones. Nobody gives a shit what color the inmates are. Prison systems get money based on capacity needs. Period.
It has been well documented that we spend far more money on penitentiaries than university education for poor black and brown males.
Well, sure, that’s because if they choose not to go to school (often for free), none of that education money that’s available to them is ever spent. Yet if they choose to commit a crime then the money that’s available to lock them up will get spent. And this is precisely what’s happening all over America.
We would permit no other population of American citizens to be locked away with such callous disregard for the educational opportunity that might help stem the tide of incarceration.
There are legions of studies that show that young Black males who embrace intellectualism and education are shunned by their peers. There is also plenty of research that shows that the Black household — even when accounting for income — doesn’t promote academics the same as White and Asian households.
These are the reasons they aren’t succeeding in high school and going on to college. The system itself doesn’t care who participates; in fact, it’s biased heavily in the favor of Blacks. The problem, and solution, is deeply cultural. The cycle of failure is built into the system.
Try this: go to any city in the United States that is roughly half Black and half White on a Friday night. Go to the local book store. Count the people. Do the math. My anecdotal numbers, taken many times, show approximately 2-5% black. Quite simply, going to the book store on a Friday night, as a hangout, because reading is fun, is a “White” thing.
Until that changes, and intellectualism becomes part of the Black culture, professor Dyson will have plenty more opportunity to completely misdiagnose the problem.:
tcpdump Tutoriallsof Tutorialfind and xargs