I tend to like "humor" where after a while you are thinking, "Wait. Is this even funny? Or is it offensive? And am I the one being made fun of?" Like, this, for example.
Because frankly I deserve to be made fun of.
Anyway, courtesy of Jackie Blue, Key and Peele in "Negrotown."
Glenn Firebaugh et al.
Demography, December 2014, Pages 2025-2045
Abstract:
Lifespans are both shorter and more variable for blacks than for whites in the United States. Because their lifespans are more variable, there is greater inequality in length of life — and thus greater uncertainty about the future — among blacks. This study is the first to decompose the black-white difference in lifespan variability in America. Are lifespans more variable for blacks because they are more likely to die of causes that disproportionately strike the young and middle-aged, or because age at death varies more for blacks than for whites among those who succumb to the same cause? We find that it is primarily the latter. For almost all causes of death, age at death is more variable for blacks than it is for whites, especially among women. Although some youthful causes of death, such as homicide and HIV/AIDS, contribute to the black-white disparity in variance, those contributions are largely offset by the higher rates of suicide and drug poisoning deaths for whites. As a result, differences in the causes of death for blacks and whites account, on net, for only about one-eighth of the difference in lifespan variance.
Have been getting a lot of pushback, questions like, "Can you be specific about what aspects of being poor and black are against the law?" (And then, presumably, person mentally drops the mic and walks off stage....)
My question is, "Did you even read the article?"
I never claimed that the LAWS oppress the poor. The POLICE do. But it's not really the fault of the police, at least not primarily.
We all have a lot of normal, nonviolent daily activity. And a LOT of it is illegal, because we have criminalized everything.
The police, in their defense (and I mean that, sincerely), can't possibly arrest everyone who commits a crime. So they focus, quite sensibly, on people who (1) for reasons of simple prejudice we "all know" commit more crimes and (2) are less likely to be able to defend themselves or make trouble for the police.
There has been developing an interesting split in the reactions to Ferguson and the Staten Island chokehold.
The left is outraged that the state is not doing exactly what the left expects from an idealized, unicorn state. In fact, the state is actually made up of actual human-style people, and people are flawed. The left wants to rely on abstract systems, and then be perpetually astonished when things go really wrong. It's not bad people that are the problem. The THING, the thing itself is the abuse, folks.
The libertarian splinter accepts parts of the both arguments. The system is in fact working exactly as designed, so the right is correct. But this is a really bad outcome, and so the left is correct.
As long as the left (with the active complicity of the non-libertarian right) continues to criminalize being black, it's not surprising that the police will continue to treat black people as criminals.
White people are largely unaffected, because the system is designed to protect white people. #crimingwhilewhite shows the truth: rich white people can break the law, but they won't get charged.
This kind of race-based law enforcement is given the stink-eye by our friends on the left, but they can't seem to draw the obvious inference: the answer is not better police. The answer is fewer laws. Decriminalize normal nonviolent daily activity, and the police will have a lot fewer excuses to harass people they don't like and who can't fight back.
Let me come out and say it: I know I do it. I try to be aware of it. But I do it. The way I react to people depends on several factors, but race is one of them. Knowing that can help you avoid sticking to that view, and one can overcome it by being aware.
This video is interesting, in this regard. I'm thinking of the Zimmerman trial, in particular. Zimmerman may have thought what many people would think, using race as a sign of suspicion. But you don't get to act that way.
(Yes, I blogged about this before. The stuff I wrote in the second half is still where I stand. It's not just statistical discrimination. It's UNjust statistical discrimination).
What is "political," exactly? It is NOT true that
African-American parents don't care about their children's education.
So the "political" problem must be that politicians do not validate that
desire? Am I missing something?
The Political Foundations of the Black–White Education Achievement Gap Michael Hartney & Patrick Flavin American Politics Research, forthcoming Abstract:
More than 50 years after Brown v. Board, African American students
continue to trail their White peers on a variety of important
educational indicators. In this article, we investigate the political
foundations of the racial “achievement gap” in American education. Using
variation in high school graduation rates across the states, we first
assess whether state policymakers are attentive to the educational needs
of struggling African American students. We find evidence that state
policymaking attention to teacher quality — an issue education research
shows is essential to improving schooling outcomes for racial minority
students — is highly responsive to low graduation rates among White
students, but bears no relationship to low graduation rates among
African American students. We then probe a possible mechanism behind
this unequal responsiveness by examining the factors that motivate White
public opinion about education reform and find racial influences there
as well. Taken together, we uncover evidence that the persisting
achievement gap between White and African American students has
distinctively political foundations.
LL Cool J? Seriously? To be fair, Brad Paisley is a master of satire. But if this is satire, it's pretty edgy.
UPDATE: 1. I meant deaf as in "tone deaf," not "def," because I'm not sure what the latter means. 2. Apparently it is NOT satire...he actually thinks the song will start a discussion. That may be right, actually. 3. If you listen closely, you will hear LL Cool J rap the following line: "If you don't judge the gold chains/I'll forget the iron chains." Holy kanarski.
1. If anything, coaches already try to find white players. 2. Some black people have racial prejudices; everyone does. But "racism" is directed at the societal minority, which is NOT white people. Affirmative action tries to overcome racism (which is an aggregate effect), not racial prejudice (which is individual). 3. Performance in sport (as in music, and the military) is objective. The idea of using race in those categories is silly. And of course that's why sports, music, and the military have long been the most integrated parts of U.S. society (although even there white racists said blacks didn't have the "character" to be a quarterback, boxer, etc.). But academics and hiring are more subjective. A bad time in the 40 yard dash means you are slow. A bad SAT score could mean all sorts of things. When I ran admissions at UNC MPA, I was surprised how many low GRE score students did VERY well once they were admitted. 4. Basketball is the key sport among urban populations, many of whom are black. Hockey, swimming, lacrosse much less so. This is sorting, not racism.
Nonetheless, I was amused to see the kids struggle with making ANY of the above arguments. The video does a good job of showing how our "support" for aff-action is a religion, not a considered conclusion.
Duke tuition + room/board: $52,000 6,400 Undergrads African-American 10.3% Basketball team graduation rate: 90%
Michigan tuition + room/board: out of state $49,000 (in state: $21,000) 51,000 Undergrads African American 5.8% Basketball team graduation rate: 44%
SNAP! Duke has far more African-American students, as a proportion of the student body. Tuition/costs are roughly the same. And Duke recruits students who have some chance of graduating. Michigan recruits some guys like Jalen Rose, who left early and had a fine NBA career. But they also recruit a lot of guys who take fake classes and are simply exploited as basketball cannon fodder. So, yes, it may be true that Duke recruits a different sort of player, the sort who has a chance of graduating with a degree. But I think it's more likely that Duke players are told they MUST focus on graduating, and that they have to work. Michigan players can just hope to have a career shooting off their mouths...like Jalen Rose.
Gosh, when did the observance of MLK day become a religious obligation? Gov of Maine suggests NAACP can give him a nice nether kiss. A petty, silly squabble. No doubt the Gov. will next say, "You know, I have a lot of black friends!" Still, the NAACP folks in Maine (a large group? probably not...there are only 16k black folks in the state of Maine, total) are pretty insistent: Gov MUST observe MLK day. Strange.
For my own part, that would be easy, because I am a fan of MLK day. I am not a fan of the parasites such as Jesse Jackson who have come to make a lavish living trading on their associations with Dr. King. The whole "Rent a Riot" business, and "Give me money or I'll call you a racist" extortion racket is actually an affront to the memory of the man. If the NAACP wants to go after someone who is shaming Dr. King, they should try to distinguish between Dr. King and Kingists (something like admiring Marx, but laughing at Marxists).
So, on this MLK day, let me suggest "The Letter From A Birmingham Jail." An excerpt: We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant 'Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."
We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jet-like speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse-and-buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five-year-old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross-county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you no forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness" then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.
ATSRTWT, it's worth it. It's hard to read without getting tears in your eyes, in fact. The simple dignity of the claim, and of the man...wow.
Just as we formerly pointed out that "hatred and violence have no sanction in our religious and political traditions," we also point out that such actions as incite to hatred and violence, however technically peaceful those actions may be, have not contributed to the resolution of our local problems. We do not believe that these days of new hope are days when extreme measures are justified in Birmingham.
An interesting echo, down through the years. The clergymen thought non-violent actions and speech that might incite bad people to violence are immoral. Dr. King didn't think so.* To a reflective MLK holiday...
(*No, I won't try to connect this to the criticism after the Arizona shooting; you can do that yourself).
Stanley Milgrom used guys with white coats. But it turns out all he needed was a cute blonde.
As one of the commenters says: "Good lord, are men ever stupid."
The earlier video is perhaps more disturbing. Actually, it just IS more disturbing.
What's disturbing is that I wonder if I would have treated the white kid and the black kid the same. I'm not sure. Just not sure. Disturbing.
UPDATE: A commenter asks, "Isn't this just statistical discrimination?"
"Just statistical discrimination"? Um...yes. But the point is that I knew what was going on, and I *still* found myself watching the black kid and getting madder, thinking, "It looks like he's stealing that bike."
Racism is persisting in a biased race-based belief even when evidence to the contrary is clear and convincing. I knew the trick, but I still was watching the black kid and getting mad.
When I was at Wash U, with Angus in grad school, sharing our office with Steve from "Day-ton," I went out on night late to ride my bike home. I saw a black kid sitting beside my bike, and immediately thought, "Is he stealing my bike?" In my defense, it was 3 a.m., and an odd time to be just sitting beside a bike in a parking area.
But I thought, don't be an asshat racist. Just go over there. As I walked up, he tried to hide the bolt cutters under his leg, and struck up a conversation. I asked if he had seen any really big rats around, since something had chewed the cable on my bike lock nearly through.
He jumped up, took his bolt-cutters, and sauntered off, whistling.
I reported the attempted theft. The Wash U po-po was all excited, "We know that guy." (My description had been, "Black guy, medium height, orange shirt.")
Next day, they called me in to do a photo line-up. Nine photos. Now, I am not making this up, people. Of the nine, four of the photos were of white guys. Of the remaining five, four were black and white photos. The remaining one was in color. The color was...orange. It was a black guy with an orange shirt.
I am ashamed to admit I went through with it, pointing out ("j'accuse!") the one color photo guy. The local Dick Tracies were VERY excited; "That's the one, all right, that's him, yepper!"
They told me he would be charged, and I would be called as a witness. But apparently when they called St Louis police to do the arrest, the kid ran. He ran out into a street, and was hit by a taxi. He died the next day.
The point is that I have some baggage here, on the whole black kid stealing a bike with bolt cutters thing. "Just statistical discrimination?" It is unjust statistical discrimination, I'm afraid.
I don't think there should be laws against anti-gay hate speech, or bullying. A teacher is obliged to protect ALL students from abuse and threats. A classroom has to be safe, and to feel safe. Singling out gay students for special protections will make the problem worse.
But the article raises some questions, to me. First, no Confederate flags? Really? In my high school, that would have meant sending about half the kids home. Even the women. Yes, it would have. There were lots more Confederate flags than U.S. flags on jackets, pockets, and so on.
Second, "the" home of the KKK? Nice that we have those dangerous maniacs segregated off into one small town in Michigan, but my impression was that the problem was somewhat more widespread, frankly. It's hard to prove a negative, but it appears that the headquarters of the Michigan KKK was near Howell, emphasizing the "WAS." If you are really worried about hate speech, perhaps you shouldn't go making up blatantly false stuff about Howell, MI.
Finally, what is the procedure for expelling a kid? I don't see why the teacher would be a hero for just telling the bully / problem kid to "get out of my classroom." Sure, it's a hassle to follow the rules. But the 14 year old kid who was told to "get out" is in school because the law forces him to be there. You can't just let him wander the halls. If the teacher was suspended for ignoring the rules on suspensions, then I have to say the suspension is consistent with standard practice.
So, two cheers for the teacher. And three cheers for the kid in the vid; good advocacy, and well done standing up to bullies that way.
Interesting controversy. If the idea of "soul food" has any meaning, then it can't be inappropriate for Black History month.
On the other hand, it is such a stereotype, I can see why people might be upset. Anyway, a kerfuffle. Make sure and watch the short video by the cook who chose the menu that day.
