Dean's World

Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.

Discrimination

LaShawn Barber is sick of mealy-mouthed liberals rationalizing racial discrimination and making excuses for black people.

I don't blame her.

I'd also like to point out once again the man I have the least respect for in the entire United States Congress: The Dishonorable Harold Ford Jr. This young black man was born in 1970. He's four years younger than me. He was born 6 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act. The man never saw a segregated lunch counter in his entire life. Furthermore, his family was quite wealthy. His father was a Congressman, and had uncles and cousins who were mayors, state legislators, etc. Indeed, the Fords are one of the most wealthy and powerful political families in Tennessee, right up there with the Gores.

This pampered, spoiled little rich brat of power and privilege went to the finest private schools in Washington D.C. He had every privilege, every opportunity handed to him on a silver platter. And then that lowlife sonofabitch had the balls to stand up on national television and defend racial discrimination at the University of Michigan because, and I quote, he "personally benefitted from Affirmative Action."

Harold Ford Jr. is an embarassment to his party, an embarassment to black people, and an embarassment to the United States Congress.

And, oh yeah: he's a racist.

He's also a picture perfect example of why racial discrimination is odious no matter how much you dress it up with pretty words like "Affirmative Action." How any so-called "liberal" can stand up and make mealy-mouthed defenses of this, and say he's "sure no poor white kid was denied any opportunities because of Affirmative Action" I have no idea. I know white kids who were denied opportunities because they weren't black--white kids who went to all-black schools and got turned down for admission to universities that black friends of theirs got into even though the black kids had lower grades. So don't fucking tell me that that shit doesn't happen: it does.

Here's a fact: there are more white children living in poverty than black children. There are more white children in lousy schools than black children. Yet people want to sit around and talk about how just having black skin--just being black--is so psychologically crippling they can't be expected to achieve as much as poor white trash?

As LaShawn notes, black immigrants routinely outperform native American blacks. So how long are we going to keep with this bullshit rationalization that "400 years of slavery and oppression" are such a heavy weight on black children that they need helping hands for the rest of their lives just to get decent jobs or go to decent schools? And need special advantages that poor white kids, poor Arab kids, poor Asian kids aren't entitled to?

It's not just disgusting. It's inexcusable. And it's unAmerican.

Posted by Dean | Permalink | Technorati Trackbacks
Josh Reynolds (mail):
Dean,

You say in the above post that

Here's a fact: there are more white children living in poverty than black children. There are more white children in lousy schools than black children.

Where did you get this fact?

---Josh
7.9.2004 10:12am
Dean Esmay (www):
Census bureau.

Pester me and I'll give you a link.

There are more white people living on welfare than any other ethnic group too, by the way.
7.9.2004 10:20am
Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):
Dean wrote:
"There are more white people living on welfare than any other ethnic group too, by the way."

That's true. Funny, I've always seen that statistic quoted by "liberals", i.e., socialists, who assume that all opponents of socialism and the welfare state are racist, and who think we think most welfare recipients are black and so that's why we don't like welfare.

Not true. Actually, my stereotype of a welfare bum has always been some lazy, unshaven white guy lying on a mattress with a can of beer in his hand watching TV all day.

One book I constantly strongly recommend is Jim Goad's "The Redneck Manifesto", a hard-hitting defense of poor whites. His _style_ is superlative! Jim Goad is one of my favorite writers of all time. As he shows, there are many parallels between poor whites and poor blacks. Just as, I must add, there are many (ominous) parallels between homosexuals and Jews.

I'm against affirmative action. It's racism, pure and simple. What we need instead is a consistent recognition of individual rights.
7.9.2004 1:56pm
Josh Reynolds (mail):
Ok, thanks. I'll look at the census site.

The Redneck Manifesto is a great book I agree.
7.9.2004 3:31pm
Catch 22:
Rep. John Conyers has certainly done a helluva lot for the city of Detroit. I'd definitely place him higher on the scale than say um a Harold Ford.
7.10.2004 12:08am
Casey D Tompkins (mail):
Josh, I can explain it to you through pure reason.

Postulate #1: Poverty is twice as prevalent among black Americans as white Americans.

Postulate #2: White Americans outnumber black Americans at least 4:1. (Black Americans are about 12% of the population. White Americans at least 48% of the population)

Conclusion: worst case, there are the same number of poor whites and poor blacks in America. Note that I've already assumed a 2:1 ratio with respect to poverty and race. Note that I have not addressed the origins of the other 40% of the population. For every counted percentile increase of white population over 48%, there is a corresponding increase in white vs. black poverty numbers.

If we change our parameters, and assume a general correlation between white and black poverty, then poor whites outnumber poor blacks 2:1, even with the strict assumptions above.

Damn, I hate it when my cherished preconceptions fall into ruin... Heh.
7.10.2004 1:35am
M. Scott Eiland (mail):
Dean, I agree that it is unfortunate that Mr. Ford supports affirmative action with the usual tired rhetoric, but given the presence of Maxine "No Justice, No Peace!" Waters (who, IMO, unquestionably has blood on her hands by making inflammatory comments just as the post-Rodney King verdict riots were beginning), Charlie "Tax cuts are the equivalent of KKK lynchings" Rangel, and John Conyers in the House—not to mention the impending return of "Jihad Cindy" McKinney—I think it is way over the top to call him the Congressman least worthy of respect. He's polite, intelligent, and capable of and willing to express a Democratic policy position without implying that Republicans are the spawn of Satan. He's going places in the Democratic party (unless they screw up royally by continuing to disrespect him—as they did in the House Minority Leader election last year—and drive him into the arms of the Republicans), and I'd just as soon not antagonize him into fully embracing the gang of racist scum that control the Congressional Black Caucus by going overboard on slamming him for issues I disagree with him on.

M. Scott Eiland
7.10.2004 5:08am
Account:
Password:
Remember info?
Commenting on Dean's World is a privilege, not a right. Dean is your host, you are his guest, and you should behave in that fashion. Dean is not your babysitter, nor is he your punching bag. Please remember this. In general, you are free to disagree with anyone on any subject you wish, but abusive behavior will not be tolerated.

Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.

Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.