Reading the @ManhattanInst report on U.S. race relations, from @epkaufm (media4.manhattan-institute.org/sites/default/…) is fascinating- if depressing. As I've noted before, we don't seem to be facing any measurable increase in racism whatsoever, but instead a moral panic about it.
Some take-aways...
(2) First - while that troubling 6-8% core of bigots we see in housing rental, etc, remains a problem - racism empirically is WAY down. Per page 9, only about 10% of whites object to inter-race marriage on well-done anon surveys, and 17% of ALL marriages are inter-racial.
(3) But, people don't know this. Per "Key Findings," 8/10 Black Americans and 6/10 liberals whites believe Black men are more likely to be SHOT BY POLICE than killed in auto wrecks.
That's insane. For context: there are ~50K fatal and 600K disabling/injuring wrecks per year.
(4) Much of this seems due to the Great Awokening in left-wing media/academia. For all the flaws of the press on "our" side, white cons are FIFTY percentage points more likely to know the actual figures on cop shooting - ~60 unarmed men per year, 15 Black - than are liberals.
(5) This moral panic is of recent vintage. Per a fascinating and depressing chart on pg. 8, between 2-6% percent of Americans ranked racism as our "most important" problem for the entire period between 1975 and 2015 (with one spike for the LA riots). The figure's now 19%.
(6) The panic seems to be driven largely by social media . Per p.10, the % of Black social media users who report whites "acting suspicious" was 53%...as vs. 31% for identical (per age, education, income, partisanship, contact w whites) Black Americans who do NOT often use SM.
(7) Most importantly, race panic seems to affect Black Americans' sense of self-efficacy. In the worst finding of the report (p.22), reading one passage of Ta-Naheshi Coates before taking an attitudinal survey reduced 'Yes' answers about individual ability to succeed by 15%.
(8) In summary: actual racism has been declining sharply since the 1960s. However, perceptions of it as deadly serious surged from 2-4% across most of the 1980s and 1990s to 19% in 2019, driven by tech use.
My take: log off, go outside, and talk to people.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
No one denies racism exists. The center-right Black "1776" position is simply that this variable does not explain all problems in POC communities or differences in performance between groups. A 6% bias in apartment rental does not cause a 72% 'illegitimacy' rate.
(2) There are 3 problems with the "ethnic conflict explains all ills" narrative: (a) many of today's problems (fatherlessness) did not exist when racism was much worse, (b) many do not exist for POC immigrants today, and (c) all exist at very high levels for poor WHITE people.
(3) There's a lot to unpack here. ~Equal rates of bigotry exist against groups that perform very differently. Polls showing 8% of Americans wouldn't vote for a qualified Black President ALSO find 9% rates of bias vs Hispanics and Jews...and 40% vs Muslims. news.gallup.com/poll/183791/su…
This is an actual breakdown of the most recent available national data concerning violence against Asians.
(2) It's interesting that I'm not really dunking on any one group here. Violence against Asians - the last line of the chart - is remarkably diverse: 27.5% Black, 24.1% white, 21.4% Hispanic and "other," and only ~24% ASIAN. But, the "white supremacy" thesis is weak.
(3) This an interesting example of stories we choose NOT to tell. The white-on-Black crime that causes media hysterics is only 10-11% of crime v. Blacks. Even B-on-w crime is max 16% of crime v whites. Anti-Asian crime is 75% (!!!) inter-race; no one cared until this Spring.
Serious if unoriginal question: why are the people/rulers of mighty nations "of color," like Japan, China, Ethiopia, Nigeria, India, Mongolia, Arabia and the UAE...just etc...never referred to as "colonizers?"
(2) I ask this partly to troll SJWs...but also because I'm not ashamed "our" Generals batted .499 against "the whites" - and would have hit for a much higher average if the Great Khans hadn't run into syphilis. Defeat isn't some kind of mark of sophistication.
(3) It has been noted that I "just straight-up ignored" the Ottoman, Moorish, Musan, and post-Muhammad Muslim conquests. Good point. I see you TOO, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Morocco, and Mali!!! #more_colonizers
There is no logical/mathematical argument that people should take an anti-viral vaccine that is 95+% effective - per Israeli data - against a virus that itself poses a 1/5,000 risk of death to healthy non-seniors...and then continue wearing 2-3 face masks and socially isolating.
(2) I keep saying this, because the underlying argument here is so dangerous for freedom: "If you have a 1/20 chance...of causing me a 1/5K risk...given (say) 1/100 odds you HAVE The Thing on Day X...stay inside!!!"
This logic could be used to ban literally anything.
(3) For those saying my first post only breaks down the risks to ME...ok: the risk you pose to someone ELSE post vaxx would be (1/20+ (your daily risk of having COVID) x 1/200-5,000 (average risk to them) x 1/20+ (vaccine risk reduction)). That's a 1/80,000 to 1/2,000,000 risk.
The idea that there are words that cannot even be mentioned when condemning them is just Voldemort-level bullshit. Magic isn't real, gang.
(2) In the absence of many real - or, at least, perceivable - problems of racial/regional conflict in the average person's life, we're literally just redefining non-problems as problems to justify everything from individual excuses to political movements.
(3) This doesn't even mean there are no racial issues. Blacks can wonder about mortgage lending, or whites gripe about affirmative action. But, those are issues of slight variance within massive systems. Noone is often racially insulting you...unless you redefine what that means.
A good quick definition of "equity," in the legal sense of what activists want, would be "treating people/groups as differently as is needed to achieve equal outcomes."
(2) The problem, again, is the Sowell-less assumption that all group gaps must be due to current or past bias. This often makes no sense. Hispanic immigrants don't earn less than Black or Appalachian folks because they suffered more here historically. Same for whites v Asians.
(3) For that matter, for both poor Black AND white communities, many of the most serious problems - fatherlessness, hyper-high crime - date to 1960s welfare culture rather than to the deep past, and are unlikely to be solved by offering more unearned money or college slots today.