AFFIRMATIVE ACTION QUOTAS TURNING BLACKS INTO FAILURES

Thomas Sowell writes:

Among the many sad signs of our time are the current political and media attacks on Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, for speaking the plain truth on a subject where lies have been the norm for years.

The case before the High Court is whether the use of race as a basis for admitting students to the University of Texas at Austin is a violation of the 14th Amendment’s requirement for government institutions to provide “equal protection of the laws” to all.

Affirmative action is supposed to be a benefit to black and other minority students admitted with lower academic qualifications than some white students who are rejected. But Justice Scalia questioned whether being admitted to an institution geared to students with higher-powered academic records was a real benefit.

Despite much media spin, the issue is not whether blacks in general should be admitted to higher ranked or lower ranked institutions. The issue is whether a given black student, with given academic qualifications, should be admitted to a college or university where he would not be admitted if he were white.

Much empirical research over the years has confirmed Justice Scalia’s concern that admitting black students to institutions for which their academic preparation is not sufficient can be making them worse off instead of better off.

I became painfully aware of this problem more than 40 years ago, when I was teaching at Cornell University, and discovered that half the black students there were on some form of academic probation.

These students were not stupid or uneducable. On the contrary, the average black student at Cornell at that time scored at the 75th percentile on scholastic tests. Their academic qualifications were better than those of three-quarters of all American students who took those tests.

Why were they in trouble at Cornell, then? Because the average Cornell student in the liberal arts college at that time scored at the 99th percentile. The classes taught there — including mine — moved at a speed geared to the verbal and mathematical level of the top one percent of American students.

The average white student would have been wiped out at Cornell. But the average white student was unlikely to be admitted to Cornell, in the first place. Nor was a white student who scored at the 75th percentile.
That was a “favor” reserved for black students. This “favor” turned black students who would have been successful at most American colleges and universities into failures at Cornell.

None of this was peculiar to Cornell. Black students who scored at the 90th percentile in math had serious academic problems trying to keep up at M.I.T., where other students scored somewhere within the top 99th percentile.

Nearly one-fourth of these black students with stellar qualifications in math failed to graduate from M.I.T., and those who did graduate were concentrated in the bottom tenth of the class.

Posted in Affirmative Action | Comments Off on AFFIRMATIVE ACTION QUOTAS TURNING BLACKS INTO FAILURES

Guns and race: The different worlds of black and white Americans

Whites use guns to shoot themselves, blacks use them primarily to shoot others.

Brookings:

“The nation’s consciousness has been raised by the repeated acts of police brutality against blacks. But the problem of public space violence—seen in the extraordinary distress, trauma and pain many poor inner-city families experience following the killing of a family member or close relative—also deserves our special attention.”

So argued William Julius Wilson, world-renowned scholar and newly appointed Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow, on this blog yesterday. That special attention could usefully start with some of the most important facts. Gun deaths vary dramatically by gender and race:

In 2013, firearm deaths accounted for over 11 percent of all years of potential life lost among the black population, but less than 6 percent of all years of potential life lost among the white population.

White suicides, black homicides

Gun deaths also vary dramatically by type. The vast majority (77 percent) of white gun deaths are suicides; less than one in five (19 percent) is a homicide. These figures are nearly opposite in the black population, where only 14 percent of gun deaths are suicides but 82 percent are homicides:

The firearm homicide rate among black men aged 20-29 is about 89 per 100,000.To put that fact in some international perspective, in Honduras—the country with the highest recorded homicide rate—there were 90.4 intentional murders per 100,000 people in 2012. That includes all means, not just firearm homicides.

‘Distress, trauma, and pain’: social costs

Gun violence can have a series of serious snowball effects in education, health, incarceration, family instability, and social capital. To take one example, anxiety levels rise and cognitive functioning worsens among school children following a violent crime within half a mile of their home, according to a study by Dana Charles McCoy, C. Cybele Raver and Patrick Sharkey. Individuals who witness violence are also at increased risk for a variety of mental health issues, which can manifest as post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, poor academic performance, substance abuse, risky sexual behavior, delinquency, and violent behavior, notes David Hemenway. And as Wilson suggests, these costs weigh largely on the shoulders of black Americans.

Gun violence is part of a vicious cycle of race and inequality in the U.S., reflecting existing social inequalities, and also making it even more challenging for young black people, especially young black men, to escape poverty and violence.

Posted in Blacks, Crime | Comments Off on Guns and race: The different worlds of black and white Americans

The Racial Gap for Titles Among American Chess Players

Jamaal Abdul-Alim, World Chess, December 15, 2015:

After Emory Tate, Jr., an American international master, died in October during a chess tournament in California, one grandmaster described his death as a “devastating loss.”

Tate’s death at 57 was not only sad for those who knew him and admired his tactical skill and outsized personality, it left a major void among international titled black players from the United States.

Only four black Americans–including Tate–have become at least international masters, according to “Drum Majors of Chess,” a web-based wall of fame maintained on “The Chess Drum,” a website devoted to Black chess players throughout the world. Kassa Korley, who lives in New York, is one of the three, but on the Web site of the World Chess Federation, he is listed as playing for Denmark, where he has familial roots and dual citizenship.

Maurice Ashley–the chess commentator and impresario–is often cited as the first and only African-American grandmaster from the United States, though even he was born in Jamaica.

The only other titled black American player is Stephen Muhammad, an inactive international master from Georgia, who is also a Nation of Islam minister.

As the obstacles to playing chess appear to be low–players only need a board and pieces and do not need to be athletes–and the game is popular on the streets of many cities, the dearth of titled black players is puzzling on its surface. But, according to players and people involved in teaching chess, lack of money is one of the biggest barriers to blacks excelling in the world of tournament chess.

“Most of the people that play, they have disposable income,” said Ronald J. Jones, a black expert player and former Washington, D.C., champion. “They can afford to spend $300 for a tournament, $500 for a hotel, another $1000 for an airline ticket to another state.” {snip}

{snip}

Jerald Times, a master and chess coach at the elite Dalton School on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, said, “I believe grandmaster is more an economic measurement than an intellectual one. The idea of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, yes, that can happen every once in a while. But for the most part, that kid (in the inner city) is not gonna take six hours of his life a day and study chess.”

Times noted that the lack of black grandmasters is a worldwide phenomenon. “The numbers are low,” he said. “Out of the 1500 grandmasters in the world, only three or four are black.”

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off on The Racial Gap for Titles Among American Chess Players

It’s Time for the Other 13 Candidates to Drop Out

Ann Coulter writes: At what point in Donald Trump’s inaugural address do you figure the GOP establishment will finally grasp what’s been happening?

Trump is a runaway hit with Americans for the simple reason that he’s the only candidate saying anything Americans care about.

After the San Bernardino terrorist attack, committed by Muslim immigrants–which followed the 1993 World Trade Center terrorist attack committed by Muslim immigrants; the 9/11 terrorist attacks committed by Muslim immigrants; the Fort Hood terrorist attack committed by a Muslim immigrant; the Boston Marathon terrorist attack committed by Muslim immigrants, and on and on–Trump suggested a temporary pause on Muslim immigration.

The other candidates responded by attacking him viciously. Now, the eunuchs are duking it out over who has the most aggressive approach to . . . fighting ISIS!

Asked why he called Trump’s proposal “unhinged,” Jeb! explained: “Well, first of all, we need to destroy ISIS in the caliphate.”

Marco Rubio said: “The problem is we had an attack in San Bernardino,” adding that “what’s important to do is we must deal frontally with this threat of radical Islamists, especially from ISIS.”

Ted Cruz said: “We need a president who understands the first obligation of the commander in chief is to keep America safe. If I am elected president . . . we will utterly destroy ISIS.”

Why are Republicans talking about starting a war in Syria to stop Muslim immigrants from killing Americans in America? Is it our job to straighten out Syria? Can’t our government just stop bringing the terrorists here? If Rubio thinks he knows how to govern Syria, he’s free to run for president there. {snip}

Republicans love pointing out that all the gun restrictions proposed by Democrats after every mass shooting would have done absolutely nothing to stop that particular mass shooting.

But the GOP’s demand that we take out ISIS would also have done nothing to prevent the San Bernardino attack. As we know from Jim Comey, the director of the FBI: Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik were planning a terrorist attack against Americans before ISIS existed.

It’s as if there’s a law of toughness conservation: The weaker a candidate is on protecting our borders, the more aggressively he talks about bombing foreign countries, a move known as “the Lindsey Graham.”

{snip}

Here’s an idea: We let backward, poverty-stricken, misogynistic, clitorectomy-performing Third Worlders scratch out a living in their medieval hellholes, and just keep them out of our country. Also known as: the Trump Plan.

Except the fun parts when Trump was speaking, the candidates talked about almost nothing else at the debate but carpet-bombing the Middle East, taking out this leader or that group, sending American forces to train Sunni Arabs, touting the Kurds, announcing their specific strategies for defeating ISIS, giving perfect little answers about our nuclear throw-weights and the “nuclear triad” and correctly identifying the “good guys” and “bad guys”–all of whom live 7,000 miles away from us.

When do we get to talk about Americans?

Only Trump seems to care. Asked about dictators running the Middle East, Trump said:

In my opinion, we’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that frankly, if they were there and if we could’ve spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems; our airports and all of the other problems we’ve had, we would’ve been a lot better off. I can tell you that right now . . .

{snip}

These debates have turned Republicans into self-parodies of wonkery over common sense. Without Trump in the debate, the entire audience would have been asleep in 30 minutes.

Posted in Republicans | Comments Off on It’s Time for the Other 13 Candidates to Drop Out

The G.O.P. at a Crossroads

Ross Douthat, New York Times, December 17, 2015:

A long time ago, in the era we now know as B.T. (Before Trump), it was possible to envision a Republican primary campaign that would be a real contest of ideas, a clash of genuine policy visions–and therefore different from the empty I’m-not-Obama, no I’m-not-Obama contest of 2012. My favored scenario would have pitted Marco Rubio against Rand Paul: The former representing a reform-minded conservatism in domestic policy and a hawkish internationalism abroad; the latter representing a more libertarian domestic agenda and a noninterventionist posture overseas.

{snip}

Yet the possibility of a real clash of ideas hasn’t gone the way of Paul’s campaign. Instead, if the race came down to the three men currently leading in the national polls, Republican primary voters would be facing their most ideologically consequential choice since 1980. Unlike many G.O.P. campaigns, in which terms like “establishment” and “populist” are mostly about affect and rhetoric, this time the Republican front-runners offer three very different visions for the future of the party.

{snip}

And then there is Donald Trump. On foreign policy, he can sound like Paul when he condemns both parties for the Iraq war and blames United States intervention for many of the world’s ills, and like Cruz when he promises to put an end to the Islamic State from the skies. On immigration and trade, he’s offering a fortress-America vision that echoes the 1920s and 1930s more than the Reagan-era G.O.P.

But on other domestic issues, he can sound center-left (he’s no religious conservative, he loves eminent domain, he’s made favorable noises about single payer) or even liberal–particularly on entitlements, where he’s argued that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be protected from any kind of restructuring and reform.

This combination of views isn’t incoherent; it just puts Trump closer to Europe’s nationalist right than it does to most of the post-1960s American conservative tradition. Like France’s National Front or euroskeptic parties elsewhere on the Continent, he’s a candidate of government programs for the old and native-born, high walls against outsiders and a romanticized idea of national greatness. And it turns out that this Old World combination, at this particular moment, has a great deal of New World appeal.

{snip}

So a vote for Rubio is a vote for adaptation and ambition–for a conservatism that seeks to reassure the anxious middle on domestic policy and shore up the Pax Americana overseas. A vote for Cruz is a vote for rigor and retrenchment–for a more intensely ideological conservatism at home and a narrower definition of the national interest abroad. A vote for Trump is a vote for rupture–for a conservatism defined more by identity politics than ideology, more by nationalism than libertarianism, more by caudillism than the Constitution.

Posted in Republicans | Comments Off on The G.O.P. at a Crossroads

Will Whites Reclaim Their Birthright?

Comment: “The elites are terrified of white Americans reclaiming their birthright because those are exactly the institutions that they have taken over. Cultural institutions such as Universities, Public art or monuments celebrating wars (including the Civil War, Statue of Liberty, etc.) are all part of white heritage. The elites cannot erase the past so they are trying to co-opt it is fast as they can. Yale is not afraid of a bunch of loutish blacks demanding justice, they are afraid of the whites doing it.”

Posted in America, Whites | Comments Off on Will Whites Reclaim Their Birthright?

Jew-hating airline cancels flight rather than allow Israeli passengers

New York Post: Kuwait hates Jews so much that its national airline has ditched a popular and lucrative New York-to-London flight rather than allow Israelis on its planes, authorities said Thursday.

Kuwait Airways killed the flight to spite American officials, who threatened to pull the airline’s permit to fly to the United States if they continued discriminating against Israeli passengers.

The airline says they cannot allow Israelis on the planes because the Middle Eastern kingdom prohibits it citizens from doing business with citizens of the Jewish state.

“On December 15th, Kuwait Airways informed the United States Department of Transportation that they will be eliminating service between JFK and London Heathrow,” said a department spokesperson.

The airline has at least twice refused to let customers with Israeli passports buy tickets on flights from New York to London because of the Islamic state’s ban on trade with Israel.

It did not say when its last flight on that route would be.

Politicians who had pushed for the feds to nix the airline’s permit say they are glad the company decided to end the flight.

Posted in Israel, Kuwait | Comments Off on Jew-hating airline cancels flight rather than allow Israeli passengers

Families of Terrorists See No Evil, Speak No Evil

Why do we need these people in the West? Why do we invite in people who hate us?

Victor Davis Hanson writes:

Amid all the furor over Islamic terrorism in the United States, a few themes are ignored: the role of friends and family of terrorists, and how well the U.S had treated many of those who went on to kill Americans.

Take, for example, the family members of Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook, who recently murdered 14 people and wounded 21 in San Bernardino before being killed by police. The New York Times recently contacted Malik’s sister in Pakistan, Fehda Malik, who insisted that her sister was not an extremist, “She knew what was right and wrong,” Fehda Malik said.

The Times then noted of Fehda herself: “In 2011, on the 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, she posted a remark on Facebook beside a photo of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center that could be interpreted as anti-American.”

Farook’s father gave an interview to the Italian newspaper La Stampa shortly after his son’s murderous rampage. He matter-of-factly remarked, “My son said that he shared [Islamic State leader Abu Bakr] al-Baghdadi’s ideology and supported the creation of the Islamic State. He was also obsessed with Israel.”

If true, the elder Farook, who was welcomed into the United States as an immigrant from Pakistan, knew before the killings that his son was an advocate of the Islamic State. He apparently kept quiet about it.

For that matter, what are we to make of Farook’s mother, who lived in the same rented townhouse with the two killers? She claimed that she knew nothing of her family’s bomb-making and stockpiling of weapons inside the small home. Farook, it should be noted, enjoyed a comfortable job with the state of California.

The parents of the Boston Marathon bombers are Dagestan natives and former Chechnya residents who applied for asylum to the United States after spending time here on a tourist visa. They claimed the family was in danger back in Chechnya.

The Tsarnaev family was welcomed in Boston and at times enjoyed liberal public assistance — at least until the two sons, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar, one a recipient of a college scholarship, murdered three and wounded more than 260 during the 2013 Boston Marathon.

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on Families of Terrorists See No Evil, Speak No Evil

The FBI’s problem with Muslim leaders

Is it best to deform our society with increased surveillance and government regulation or reduce diversity and the number of people who live here who are likely to hate us so much that they will hurt us?

Ronald Kessler writes:

As we all know, the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving. We all have Muslim friends or co-workers who are admirable people. And a handful of terrorist plots have been rolled up by the FBI based on tips from Muslims.

But what the FBI finds disturbing is that Muslim leaders by and large are reluctant to cooperate with the FBI to let the bureau know of radicals within their midst. The FBI is not about to publicize this. But for my book “The Secrets of the FBI,” Arthur M. “Art” Cummings II, who was the FBI’s executive assistant director in charge of counterterrorism and national security investigations, opened up about the problem.

The FBI has outreach programs to try to develop sources in the Muslim community and solicit tips, but Mr. Cummings found little receptivity. He found that while Muslims have brought some cases to the FBI, Muslim leaders in particular are often in denial about the fact that the terrorists who threaten the United States are Muslims.

“I had this discussion with the director of a very prominent Muslim organization here in D.C.,” Mr. Cummings told me. “And he said, ‘Why are you guys always looking at the Muslim community?’ “

Mr. Cummings began laughing.

“OK, you know what I’ll do?” Mr. Cummings said. “I’ll start an Irish squad, or how about a Japanese squad? You want me to waste my time and your taxpayer’s dollars going to look at the Irish? They’re not killing Americans. Right now, I’m going to put my money and my people in a place where the threat is.”

Then Mr. Cummings told him to take a look at the cells the FBI had rolled up in the United States

“I can name the homegrown cells, all of whom are Muslim, all of whom were seeking to murder Americans,” Mr. Cummings said. “It’s not the Irish, it’s not the French, it’s not the Catholics, it’s not the Protestants, it’s the Muslims.”

In response to such points, Muslim groups have told him he is rough around the edges.

“I’m not rough around the edges,” Mr. Cummings has told them. “You’re just not used to straight talk.”

Mr. Cummings found they respond by getting angry at him.

While Muslims will occasionally condemn al Qaeda, “rarely do we have them coming to us and saying, ‘There are three guys in the community that we’re very concerned about,’” Mr. Cummings said. “They want to fix it inside the community. They’re a closed group, a very, very closed group. It’s part of their culture that they want to settle the problem within their own communities. They’ve actually said that to us, which I then go crazy over.”

On one hand, “They don’t want anyone to know they have extremists in their community,” Mr. Cummings observed. “Well, beautiful. Except do you read the newspapers? Everyone already knows it. That horse has left the barn. So there’s a lot of talk about engagement, but realistically, we’ve got a long, long way to go.”

At one meeting, a Muslim group suggested having a photo taken of their members with then-FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to show their community isn’t a bunch of terrorists and that they are partners in the war on terror.

Mr. Cummings responded, “Let me make a suggestion: When you bring to my attention real extremists who are here to plan and do something, who are here supporting terrorism, and I work that based on your information, then I promise you, I will have the director stand up on the stage with you.”

To Mr. Cummings‘ amazement, the answer was: “That could never happen. We would lose our constituency. We could never admit to bringing someone to the FBI.”

“Well, we’ve just defined the problem, haven’t we?” Mr. Cummings told them.

After September 11, according to Mr. Cummings, imams in as many as 10 percent of the 2,000 mosques in the U.S. preached jihad and hatred of America. In a 2011 Pew Research Center poll, 7 percent of American Muslims said suicide bombings against civilian targets are sometimes justified to defend Islam. But in more recent years, “Preaching jihad and hatred of the U.S. overtly has become more unusual and happens more in private,” Mr. Cummings said. Instead, “Radicalization on the Internet has risen to fill the void.”

“If you look at the websites of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, or the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, you see a passive, almost obligatory approach to condemning terrorism,” Mr. Cummings said. “The most prominent crisis for the Arab and Muslim communities is this perception that they’re terrorists, when only a small fraction of them are. Why wouldn’t you have a very loud, active program that says murder of anyone is immoral, illegal and not consistent with Islam, and anyone who supports terrorism or harbors a terrorist is a problem?”

Posted in FBI, Islam | Comments Off on The FBI’s problem with Muslim leaders

Donald Trump Seems Like A Gambler

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Though Trump-as-Hitler meme is tarded, I think Trump has something in common with Fuhrer.
He is a gambler. Many said Hitler had no chance, that he was finished after this or that scandal or setback or etc. But Hitler defied all odds and rose higher and higher. He got so sure of himself that he eventually gambled big on Russia and lost.

Trump who has worked in gambling has a gambling personality. He’s good at bluffing, huffing and puffing, and etc. He can bluster but he can also be slippery and subtle, quality missing in a lunkhead demagogue like McCarthy or Wallace.
And Trump has defied many odds. Many said ‘this’ will finish him, but he’s still in the game and leading among GOP. He’s good at reading the public mood of a certain segment of the US public. He’s like both the crazy guy and the cynical operatives in NETWORK. He plays both the mad prophet and the smooth operator.
So far, he’s done well.

And it’s possible that his Muslim remark was a wager. If in the next months, nothing happens and there is no more terror, he will come across as a fear-monger.

But if there are more terror attacks in Europe and esp in America, it will have been a great bet.
And all those who’d lambasted him will have eggs on their face.

It’s like in JAWS. The town’s establishment is angry about the sheriff scaring everyone away with all this talk of a shark. But a bigger shark happened to be out there, and town elites lost big when it killed more people.

Libs and even cucks have been blasting Trump and feeling awful righteous and good about themselves. And because Trump’s remark was ‘extreme’, he has much to lose if nothing happens in the coming months.
But if major terror attacks do happen, it will have been a super bet.

But betting like that is close to degenerate, and eventually you lose. Hitler lost bunch of bets before he bet too big and lost all.

It’s best not to make reckless bets in politics.

* Right, and some countries today like China that aren’t Muslim but have sizable Muslim communities have state sanctioned versions of Islam that ensure that Muslims are loyal and subservient to the state.

In May 1953, the government set up the China Islamic Association, which was described as aiming to “help the spread of the Qur’an in China and oppose religious extremism”. The association is to be run by 16 Islamic religious leaders who are charged with making “a correct and authoritative interpretation” of Islamic creed and canon.

As you note, because of the First Amendment, the government can’t really do things like this formally, although it apparently does do things like surveil mosques, and in the past the WASP establishment relied on social and cultural pressures and mechanisms to curtail Catholicism’s religious and cultural power in the US. But contemporary elites find overtly pressuring Islam in this fashion to be distasteful and politically incorrect, and basically hope that pop culture and liberal academic and media culture will do the trick for them.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Donald Trump Seems Like A Gambler