vdare--2020-05-22--This Day In VDARE.com History, 2018: NYT: The Growing Extremism of White Democrats on Race & Immigra

This Day In VDARE.com History, 2018: NYT: The Growing Extremism of White Democrats on Race & Immigration

Originally published here on VDARE.com on this day in 2018 .
From the New York Times : By Sean McElwee Mr. McElwee is a co-founder of Data for Progress .
In response to both the election of Barack Obama in 2008 and the backlash in favor of Donald Trump in 2016 , analysts and commentators have focused mostly on racial attitudes on the right .
… But few have investigated the countervailing trend on the left , the increasing racial liberalism of Democratic voters , which I ’ ve been thinking about for a while .
But of course Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discourse , such as , uh , Breitbart and certain sub-Reddits , along with a thinktank in the Inland Empire .
So it ’ s only natural that all attention has been focused upon Trump voters as the Prime Movers .
Though Mr. Obama ’ s presidency ended up being defined in many ways by America ’ s reaction to his race , he carefully avoided racially liberal appeals during his original campaign , even taking the time to criticize the purported excesses of campus liberalism .
Mr. Obama had begun his national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic convention in 2004 , declaring that “ there ’ s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America ; there ’ s the United States of America.
” During his 2008 campaign , to give just one example , he turned down an invitation to Tavis Smiley ’ s State of the Black Union , an event Hillary Clinton attended .
During her 2016 campaign , Mrs. Clinton invoked concepts like intersectionality , white privilege , implicit bias and systemic racism .
E.g.
, Hillary ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Dallas cops was to lecture whites on “ implicit bias.
” My impression at the time was that current ideological extremism of Democrats on identity politics emerged during Obama ’ s get-out-the-vote drive in 2012 .
Since then , Democrats have carried on by turning on each other — targeting Silicon Valley , Hollywood , universities , etc .
— since there is not all that much left to loot from Red State America .
This shift in political rhetoric has coincided with an underappreciated trend : the rapid increase in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats , which I analyzed in a recent report by my think thank , Data for Progress .
The General Social Survey asks a question about the causes of racial inequality and allows respondents to select whether they think various factors contribute to inequality .
Two possible answers are “ discrimination ” and “ willpower , ” which are the two variables I explore here ( respondents could select both if they chose ) .
The first roughly measures whether respondents take a structural view of racial inequality and the second whether they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inequality .
Sure looks like it wasn ’ t Democrats belatedly responding to Trump ’ s election , it was more like Democrats following their leadership into their post-Ferguson extremism .
As the first chart shows , white Democrats have become much less likely to endorse individualistic explanations of racial inequality and more supportive of structural explanations of racial inequality .
In 2016 , for the first time since the question was asked , a majority of white Democrats agreed that discrimination held black people back .
A similar trend can be seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 41 percent of Democrats agreed that racial discrimination was the main reason black people couldn ’ t get ahead , a number that rose to 64 percent in 2017 .
… In 1994 , 65 percent of Democrats supported decreased immigration ( 67 percent of white Democrats ) , a share that fell to 29 percent in 2016 ( 30 percent of white Democrats ) .
We ’ re witnessing a historically unprecedented shift left in opinions about race among Democratic voters .
But is this the result of a change of heart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives leave the Democratic Party and racial liberals leave the Republican Party ?
To study this , I used the Voter Study Group , a panel survey that re-interviewed individuals in 2016 who had previously been interviewed in 2011 .
By examining only individuals who identify as Democrats in both the baseline survey and the 2016 survey , I can weed out the possibility that the shift I ’ m measuring is due only to attrition .
And indeed , on every question in the racial resentment battery , white Democrats were more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 than they were in 2011 , often startlingly so .
… America ’ s big social problem is that there is too much hate in the hearts of white people , especially too much hate in the hearts of white liberals toward other whites .

Originally published here on VDARE.com on this day in 2018.
From the New York Times:
The Rising Racial Liberalism of Democratic Voters By Sean McElwee
Mr. McElwee is a co-founder of Data for Progress. May 23, 2018 In response to both the election of Barack Obama in 2008 and the backlash in favor of Donald Trump in 2016, analysts and commentators have focused mostly on racial attitudes on the right. … But few have investigated the countervailing trend on the left, the increasing racial liberalism of Democratic voters, which I’ve been thinking about for a while.
But of course Trump voters control the commanding heights of American discourse, such as, uh, Breitbart and certain sub-Reddits, along with a thinktank in the Inland Empire. So it’s only natural that all attention has been focused upon Trump voters as the Prime Movers.
Though Mr. Obama’s presidency ended up being defined in many ways by America’s reaction to his race, he carefully avoided racially liberal appeals during his original campaign, even taking the time to criticize the purported excesses of campus liberalism. Mr. Obama had begun his national political career with a speech at the Democratic convention in 2004, declaring that “there’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America.” During his 2008 campaign, to give just one example, he turned down an invitation to Tavis Smiley’s State of the Black Union, an event Hillary Clinton attended. During her 2016 campaign, Mrs. Clinton invoked concepts like intersectionality, white privilege, implicit bias and systemic racism.
E.g., Hillary’s initial response to the BLM terrorist massacre of Dallas cops was to lecture whites on “implicit bias.”
She warned of “deplorables…”
My impression at the time was that current ideological extremism of Democrats on identity politics emerged during Obama’s get-out-the-vote drive in 2012. Since then, Democrats have carried on by turning on each other — targeting Silicon Valley, Hollywood, universities, etc. — since there is not all that much left to loot from Red State America.
This shift in political rhetoric has coincided with an underappreciated trend: the rapid increase in the racial liberalism of Democrats, including white Democrats, which I analyzed in a recent report by my think thank, Data for Progress. The General Social Survey asks a question about the causes of racial inequality and allows respondents to select whether they think various factors contribute to inequality. Two possible answers are “discrimination” and “willpower,” which are the two variables I explore here (respondents could select both if they chose). The first roughly measures whether respondents take a structural view of racial inequality and the second whether they take a more individualistic view of racial inequality.
Sure looks like it wasn’t Democrats belatedly responding to Trump’s election, it was more like Democrats following their leadership into their post-Ferguson extremism.
As the first chart shows, white Democrats have become much less likely to endorse individualistic explanations of racial inequality and more supportive of structural explanations of racial inequality. In 2016, for the first time since the question was asked, a majority of white Democrats agreed that discrimination held black people back. A similar trend can be seen in Pew data: In 2014, 41 percent of Democrats agreed that racial discrimination was the main reason black people couldn’t get ahead, a number that rose to 64 percent in 2017. … In 1994, 65 percent of Democrats supported decreased immigration (67 percent of white Democrats), a share that fell to 29 percent in 2016 (30 percent of white Democrats). We’re witnessing a historically unprecedented shift left in opinions about race among Democratic voters. But is this the result of a change of heart or a sorting process in which racial conservatives leave the Democratic Party and racial liberals leave the Republican Party? To study this, I used the Voter Study Group, a panel survey that re-interviewed individuals in 2016 who had previously been interviewed in 2011. By examining only individuals who identify as Democrats in both the baseline survey and the 2016 survey, I can weed out the possibility that the shift I’m measuring is due only to attrition. And indeed, on every question in the racial resentment battery, white Democrats were more likely to take the liberal position in 2016 than they were in 2011, often startlingly so. …
America’s big social problem is that there is too much hate in the hearts of white people, especially too much hate in the hearts of white liberals toward other whites.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-05-22--China’s Totalitarian Theater, Economic Pincers, And Sputnik Moment, Etc

10m34s Land of the Lie .
( It 's what commies do . )
33m15s Who you calling `` morbidly @ @ @ @ @ got it wrong . )
36m53s Neil Munro hits one out of the park .
@ @ @ @ @ ) 37m44s The false azure in the window-pane .
( Avicide in Manhattan . )

01m28s Totalitarian theater. (China's "legislature" assembles.)
06m16s China's economic pincer. (An end to blithe rope-selling.)
10m34s Land of the Lie. (It's what commies do.)
14m11s A Sputnik Moment? (A nation sufficiently united.)
22m29s Blackety-black news. (The depths of Goodwhite denial.)
33m15s Who you calling "morbidly obese"? (I got it wrong.)
35m21s Joe Biden's Veep pick. (Take my advice, Joe.)
36m53s Neil Munro hits one out of the park. (The H-1B scam.)
37m44s The false azure in the windowpane. (Avicide in Manhattan.)
40m29s Signoff. (With some Bluegrass.)
01—Intro. And Radio Derb is on the air! Greetings, listeners, from your quotably genial host John Derbyshire.
Rather a lot of this week's podcast—around 45 percent, I think—concerns China. I didn't set out intending that; but once I got under way, I just had more and more to say, and I was up at the 20-minute mark in no time. And in justification, much of what happens in China is directly relevant to us Americans and our concerns … as we have learned this past few weeks.
There is other stuff in the podcast, too, though: a round-up of blackety-black news, some insults, some politics, some Eng. Lit. references, and some ornithology, all topped off with a little Bluegrass.
Let's get started.
[Permalink]
02—Totalitarian theater. One thing that, it seems to me, is much more apparent than it was three months ago is that we are living in a bipolar world, or soon shall be.
I know a bipolar world when I see one. I spent my first 45 years in one: the world of the Cold War, dominated by the USA and the USSR.
That bipolar world ended twenty-nine years ago. For a while thereafter the USA stood supreme, economically and militarily. We still do, actually, on indices like per capita GDP and forces deployed overseas. Communist China's been coming up fast, though. It's plain they are aiming for parity with us, regional—I mean, in Asia—if not global. Perhaps they are aiming for global dominance.
Whether they are or not, we are heading into a bipolar world once again. People are waking up fast to this. The coronavirus pandemic has us thinking and talking about China in a way that we weren't before, not in the public realm at any rate. Some sour-faced skeptics and grouches on the commentarial fringes, like your acerbically genial host here, were talking that way; now it's wellnigh universal.
As I come to the mike today, China's national legislature, the National People's Congress, has just completed the first day of its 2020 annual session. Here are a couple of headliners from this first day:
For the first time in thirty years, there will be no announced target for GDP growth this year—that's Gross Domestic Product, a key economic indicator.
There will be revisions to the Basic Law that defines the status of Hong Kong. The point of the revisions will be to, quote: "safeguard national security in Hong Kong," end quote.
What does any of this mean, and why should Americans care?
To take the first part of that question first: What it means is that these are some of the decisions worked out by the ChiCom Party bosses in secret meetings these past weeks. The words "some of" in that sentence indicate that these are decisions the Party bosses want to make public. For sure there are many more they don't want made public.
The NPC is not really a legislature in any dictionary sense. It's totalitarian theater. There is very occasionally—two or three times per decade—some muffled resistance to edicts from the Politburo; but even those have had a staged quality about them, and were probably just a theatrical way of settling some minor power struggle at the top.
Still, the NPC is not without value for outside observers. The things that are announced, like the two items I have noted being announced in Friday's opening session, give clues as to what the Party bosses are thinking. Carefully scrutinized and sensibly interpreted, they can give us the lie of the land.
Those two Friday announcements illustrate the point. I'll give over a segment to each.
[Permalink]
03—China's economic pincer. From the first of my bullet points there, about there being no GDP growth target this year, we can deduce that the ChiComs are seriously worried about China's economy.
Like our economy and everyone else's, China's economy has taken a big hit from the pandemic and the measures taken to slow or contain it. There have been huge employment losses in both manufacturing and services, in a nation with much less of a social safety net than ours. The thought of a couple hundred million hungry, angry, unemployed workers gives ChiCom bosses the heebie-jeebies.
And this couldn't be happening at a worse time for China's economy, which is looking at a pincer trap. I'll describe the two arms of the pincer in turn as the Past Arm and the Future Arm.
The past thirty years have been a sensational boom time for China, with living standards rising faster, I think, than anywhere else, ever, in modern history. By the end of the 2010s, though, the low-hanging fruit had all been picked, and the rate of improvement was slowing. That is one arm of the economic pincer—call it the Past Arm.
And now there is widespread anger and suspicion towards China among its former trading partners—the nations that, by opening their markets and exporting their factories, made the Chinese economic miracle possible. The developed nations of North America, Western Europe, and Australasia are waking to the fact that we have sold the Chinese Communist Party a whole lot of rope with a gift card attached saying "Please Hang Us." They are backing off from China.
There is even talk of boycotts. In a poll done mid-May, forty percent of Americans said they won't buy products made in China.
It's the same all over. Some headline-writer at the London Daily Mail has taken up Radio Derb's Godfather theme: headline, May 22nd: PM "moves to end UK's reliance on China for essential supplies and manufacturing" amid fury at its coronavirus "cover-up" as Beijing hawk MP accuses regime of acting like the "Mafia". End headline.
So looking forward, the era of Western nations blithely helping the ChiComs to consolidate their power, domestic popularity, and international influence by jacking up their economy, are over. That's the other arm of the pincer—call it the Future Arm.
The Past Arm: no more low-hanging fruit. The Future Arm: no more illusions about the regime we've been enabling this past thirty years.
[Permalink]
04—Land of the Lie. On to my second NPC bullet point from today's NPC session, about the status of Hong Kong. What the ChiComs are proposing here reinforces the Future Arm of the economic pincer.
Under the agreement with Britain that handed the city back to China 23 years ago, the ChiComs promised that Hong Kongers would enjoy British levels of social and political freedom, or at least something closer to them than the mainland dictatorship, until 2047.
Well, that promise will no longer be operative. It was just a convenient lie assented to by the ChiComs while they pumped up their economy.
I spoke of the NPC giving us clues about the lie of the land behind the closed doors of ChiCom deliberating. Lie of the land? Politically, China is the Land of the Lie. Strategic lying is not just an occasional aberration in their diplomacy, it is all of it.
Given the feisty spirit shown by the Hong Kong demonstrators this past year, it's not likely that bringing the city back into the warm embrace of the Motherland can be accomplished without highly visible repression, possibly on the scale of Tiananmen Square in 1989, but much more amply recorded in this age of the cellphone camera.
That will just further reinforce the ChiComs' image as a thuggish gangster clique, fortifying the Future Arm of the pincer, shredding any illusions Western populations still have about the nature of the ChiCom regime.
Did I mention Tiananmen Square? Eh: just a few antisocial trouble-makers in need of stern law enforcement. Tibet, Taiwan, and Eastern Turkestan? Integral parts of China since ancient times. Fifty years of autonomy for Hong Kong? Absolutely!—where do we sign? If we are admitted to the World Trade Organization, shall we observe the rules? Of course we shall! COVID-19 originated in China? Certainly not; it was brought in by visiting U.S. soldiers.
Land of the Lie. The world is awakening from its dream of China as a trustworthy commercial nation whose public declarations mean what they say. Communist China is the Land of the Lie.
[Permalink]
05—A Sputnik Moment? So … this coming new bipolar world is nothing to worry about, right? The ChiComs are going to get crushed in that economic pincer I've been describing, right? And Uncle Sam will sail on forward into the middle 21st century as the dominant world power, right?
Well, there are many possible futures, and that is one of them. It's by no means the most probable one, though. China has advantages, and we have dis-advantages, that could shape the future in a Chinese direction.
I'd list China's main advantages as three:
Despotism, which makes it easier to get some things done.
A big Smart Fraction. Smart Fraction Theory argues that "national wealth is determined by the fraction of workers with IQ equal to or greater than some minimum value."
Demographic homogeneity; low levels of ethnic diversity and ethnomasochism.
To the first point there, the one about despotism: Look, I really don't want to live under the ChiComs; and I speak as a person who did live under them for a year. There is no denying, though, that despotism has its advantages, especially in technological development. Exhibit A: China's high-speed rail system. Where is ours?
The second point, about a big Smart Fraction, has a link with the first. The name of the link is "eugenics," both positive and negative.
Positive eugenics means encouraging people with positive heritable traits to breed; negative eugenics means dis-couraging—or actually forbidding—people with negative traits to do so. The despotic power of course gets to decide the definitions of "positive" and "negative" and the degree of coercion.
Are the ChiComs interested in eugenics? Oh yeah. I had things to say about this in my November Diary last year, to which I refer you if you're interested.
It's the third point that most powerfully addresses American weakness. China has some ethnic diversity, but it's mostly out at the territorial fringes, in occupied Tibet, Mongolia, and Eastern Turkestan. The great majority of China's population—and an overwhelming supermajority in metropolitan China, away from those fringes—is of a single ethny. If the Chinese withdrew from those occupied fringes, China would be the world's most homogenous big nation.
This spares China from all the rancors and disorders that sap so much of our social and political energy.
Not only are China's minority ethnies proportionally much smaller than ours, the Han Chinese supermajority is not split down the middle as our own white just-barely-majority is.
It is not the case that one half of the Han Chinese loathes and despises the other half. No Chinese politician ever sought advantage by describing half of his fellow Chinese as "deplorables." No public intellectual in China ever wrote that "The yellow race is the cancer of human history" as Susan Sontag wrote of the white race to which she herself belonged. Ethnomasochism is a white pathology.
And as social dogma, quite a recent one. Susan Sontag wrote her words in 1967. You can take them as the beginning of the rise of white ethomasochism to its present position as a major social dogma.
There is a line of American commentary on China, argued most clearly and persistently by David Goldman at Asia Times (now apparently with Gordon Chang also on board) telling us that we Americans should consider ourselves to be in a Sputnik Moment: a moment in history where, if we don't stop the fruitless squabbling and begin engaging in some serious, co-ordinated national effort, the ChiComs will eat our lunch, breezing past us in key technologies like artificial intelligence, big data, microchip fabrication, and quantum computing.
The problem with that prescription is that the original Sputnik Moment, to which America reacted with such spectacular success, occurred in 1957, a whole decade B.S.—"Before Sontag." White ethnomasochism was not entirely unknown in 1957, but it was restricted to tiny cliques of urban intellectuals.
We could make a united national response to Sputnik sixty years ago because we were a sufficiently united nation. You need that qualifying word "sufficiently" there because there was what people of the time called "the Negro Problem."
White Americans didn't think about black Americans any more than they absolutely had to, though, and the race issue didn't split whites down the middle as clearly and angrily as in what I call today's Cold Civil War. Sputnik-wise, we were a sufficiently united nation—sufficiently to co-operate in a colossal national effort with a minimum of bickering.
If we had been at today's level of social rancor back in 1957, would we have been able to get to a Moon landing in just twelve years? Of course not. It would have taken us twelve years just to figure out and litigate, appeal, re-litigate, and re-appeal the affirmative-action protocols for staffing Mission Control.
[Permalink]
06—Blackety-black news. Ah, the Negro Problem. Every once in a while—quite a long while; I need to be in a certain mood—I go to the Southern Poverty Law Center website and read their entry on me.
This is not from vanity, although I'll admit to being a little flattered at having been noticed by the anti-white witch-hunters of Montgomery. No; it's more to remind myself of the depth of denial and delusion that prevails among Goodwhites.
The task they set for whichever SPLC lower-echelon flunky got assigned to composing my page was to find the most damning possible quote from my writing: something so snarlingly, frothingly hate-filled, so preposterously, inconceivably unreasonable as to put me for ever beyond the bounds of civilized discourse. So what did they come up with?
I'll quote you the relevant paragraph from the SPLC web page. Most of the quote is me speaking—actually writing, of course—so I'll tag that main part with "inner quotes." Quote:
[Inner quote.] "A small cohort of blacks—in my experience, around five percent—is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us," [end inner quote] Derbyshire wrote. [Continuing inner quote.] "They will do this out of racial solidarity, the natural willingness of most human beings to be led, and a vague feeling that whites have it coming." [End inner quote.]
End quote.
The first thing to note is that they have edited my words so that the second of those two sentences makes no sense. In what I actually wrote, there is a sentence in between those two that the SPLC-bot omitted, whether from lazy incompetence or from malice, I don't know. There is plenty of both at the SPLC website.
Here is what I actually wrote, with the omitted sentence included. Quote:
A small cohort of blacks—in my experience, around five percent—is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of blacks—around half—will go along passively if the five percent take leadership in some event. They will do this out of racial solidarity, the natural willingness of most human beings to be led, and a vague feeling that whites have it coming.
End quote.
So that pronoun "they" starting off the third sentence refers not to the five percent, as the SPLC mis-quote implies, but to the fifty percent identified in my second sentence—the sentence they left out.
That's by the by. My main point here, and the reason I get satisfaction from re-reading my words, even in the mangled form presented on the SPLC page, is the perfectly obvious truth of what I expressed in that first sentence. Re-quote:
A small cohort of blacks—in my experience, around five percent—is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us.
End quote.
Is there really anyone who does not know this? Really? Are there really such dark depths of Goodwhite denial?
You might, of course, argue with my estimate of five percent. When that column was first published I got a great many emails from people who did so argue. "Five percent?" they scoffed. "You kidding, Derb?" Then the emailer would proceed to offer his estimate, which was always higher, often much higher, than five percent.
(And to be perfectly truthful I dialed down my estimate to five percent from somewhat higher in hopes of making allowance for my implicit bias. I was trying hard to be nice. See where it gets you!)
All that came to mind yesterday when I saw that video clip of a black orderly beating up a frail old man in a Michigan care facility. I'd read out a link for you so you could see the clip for yourself; but Twitter and the other social media censors—BitChute so far an honorable exception—are deleting it as fast as they can.
Tucker Carlson said in last night's show that he's going to cover the incident this evening, Friday. Tucker, though, while a worthy fellow in many ways, is a pussy about race, so he may back out.
If you can find the clip and watch it all the way through, and still tell me that the thing I'm quoted as saying in the SPLC web page on me is untrue; well, then, you are a very good person indeed, a paragon of race denial.
In other race news—I may as well bundle these together—a site search on the New York Times for Paul Marino, the 86-year-old gent murdered along with his 85-year-old wife in a Delaware cemetery by a black man on May 8th … my site search yielded no references for the past week. I tried the Washington Post, too: same result.
A couple more from the same bucket, this one relating to the February shooting in Brunswick, Georgia of a black guy by Travis McMichael, a white guy. Travis and his father Greg, who accompanied him, were arrested and charged with murder May 7th, as reported on Radio Derb that week.
Well, this week William Bryan, who followed the McMichaels in his own truck and shot the famous video of the fatal encounter, William Bryan was also arrested this week and likewise charged with murder—in fact with "felony murder," according to my New York Post. Presumably there are jurisdictions in which murder is not a felony, don't ask me.
William Bryan had made the video public in hope of showing that the McMichaels behaved reasonably, as a District Attorney had concluded. So much for trying to be a good neighbor.
In further related news on the Brunswick shooting, state police and the FBI are hunting for Travis McMichael's high-school home-room teacher, who they think may have communicated incorrect ideas about race to the younger Travis. The McMichael family dentist has been arrested and interrogated for having recently filled one of Greg McMichael's teeth. A Starbucks employee who served the McMichaels with coffee just two weeks before the shooting has also been taken in for questioning …
The Brunswick shooting, by the way, now has its own Wikipedia page, and it's a big one. I logged the main narrative part of the text—not counting headings, references, and footings—as nearly five thousand words. The Fall of Constantinople, by way of comparison, has somewhat over six thousand.
The killing of Paul and Lidia Marino has no Wikipedia page that I can find. No doubt the good Wikifolk are working on it, though. I'm sure they are.
[Permalink]
07—Miscellany. And now, our closing miscellany of brief items.
Imprimis: When you do as much browsing of news sites as I do, and have a mind as fuddled with age and liquor as mine is, fragments of news blur together in your mind.
So it was this week. I noted in passing not very attentively through media output that some politician X had referred to some other politician Y as, quote, "morbidly obese."
A day or so later I was browsing again, and for some reason there was a whole lot about Stacey Abrams. I'd forgotten who she was, so I brought up an image. Oh, right: that must have been what politician X had been referring to.
Accurate enough, but not very kind. Perhaps the poor lady has some kind of medical condition.
Only later, in conversation with a person more attentive than myself, did I realise my error. Politician X was Nancy Pelosi; politician Y, who she called "morbidly obese," was President Trump, not Stacey Abrams.
Having opened a can of appearance bias there on Stacey Abrams, albeit in error, I may as well draw attention to that gap in her front teeth. It reminds me of an old English belief that such a gap indicates lustfulness. The Wife of Bath in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales was thus endowed, Chaucer's way of explaining her five marriages.
[Permalink]
Item: The reason for all the coverage of Stacey Abrams is, that she is being promoted—most vigorously by herself—as a possible running mate for Joe Biden.
Don't buy it, Joe. Amy Klobuchar is the right pick. Radio Derb advised you way back in mid-January that, quote from me:
I think a Biden-Klobuchar ticket would be the sweet spot for the Democrats in November. It's dull as all get-out—the anti-weird ticket.
End quote.
Joe Biden has all the blackety-blackness he needs from eight years of tongue-polishing Barack Obama's loafers. He doesn't need crazy Kamala Harris, Mulatto Mafia Susan Rice, or the Wife of Bath to pull in the black vote.
As for white possibilities: Well, there is Michigan's strict governess, but … I don't think so. The nation is not that far gone in masochism.
If Joe Biden has half a brain he'll pick Amy Klobuchar. Wait … what did I just say?
[Permalink]
Item: As I sometimes do, I'm going to direct your attention to a really really good, out-of-the-park column by another opinionator.
The opinionator here is Neil Munro over at Breitbart, May 20th. Neil's topic is the H-1B visa scam, and he leaves no stone unturned.
It's a long piece, but well worth your time. There is some overlap with the 2015 book Sold Out by Michelle Malkin and John Miano; and in fact Neil interviewed John Miano for the column, and quotes him several times.
Beautifully done, Neil. Thank you!
[Permalink]
Item: If you are well-read in 20th-century American fiction you may recognize this couplet:
I was the shadow of the waxwing slain
By the false azure in the window-pane …
Those are the opening lines of the second section in Vladimir Nabokov's strange 1962 novel Pale Fire. That second section is all in verse: nine hundred and ninety-nine lines.
The waxwing is a kind of small bird, although the one in Pale Fire is of a fictitious species. Nabokov's waxwing has mistaken the reflection of sky in a window-pane for actual sky, flown into it at full speed, and died.
What has this got to do with anything? With a news story, of course. Would I hit you with some empty literary whimsy totally unrelated to the news? Me? Come on!
So, New York Post, May 19th, headline: Deathtrap NYC condo killed 28 birds in one day.
See, there is this big 11-storey condo building right on the edge of Central Park in Manhattan, fronted with dozens of big glass windows, built three years ago. Migrating birds see the park's reflection in the glass and think it's the actual park. Thump!—dead birds, as many as 28 in a single day.
Are any of them waxwings? I don't know, and couldn't tell from the pictures given in the Post.
"There is no question that this is a problem now," local resident and bird-watcher Terence Zahner told the Post. I'm sure he's right; but New York City has rather a lot of problems right now, and I doubt this one's going to get much attention.
I'll file this under "Life Imitates Art."
[Permalink]
08—Signoff. That's it, ladies and gentlemen, for this Memorial Day weekend. Thank you for listening, and may all be well with you and yours.
Take some time over the weekend to quietly remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our nation. Then, take some other time to relax with loved ones and friends, to enjoy the life that those heroes, by their sacrifice, gifted to us. It's what they would have wanted.
In the matter of signoff music, I recently received a rather impertinent email from a reader. Not a listener, a reader: some people prefer to wait until Wednesday and read the transcript. Here's what this reader said, edited quote.
Mr Derbyshire:
I enjoy reading the transcripts of your weekly podcast. At the end of the transcript I always click on the link so I can watch the YouTube clip of your signout music.
I have noticed that when you sign out with a country-music clip, the performance always features a comely young female. This was the case most recently in your podcasts on November 29th, April 3rd, and April 24th.
Are you practicing appearance bias in your selections?
End quote.
The answer is: absolutely not! Radio Derb is known worldwide as a sober, serious, and family-friendly news outlet. We would never stoop so low as to use crude sex appeal in choosing our sign-out clips. The sole criterion is musical quality. Shame on this reader for suggesting otherwise.
So much for that very unseemly insinuation. Now to this week's signout music. How about something on the banjo? Here's a little snippet in the bluegrass style, played by Willow Osborne. I don't know the name of it, but it sure got my attention.
There will be more from Radio Derb next week.
[Permalink]
[Music clip: Willow Osborne, unnamed piece.]


vdare--2020-05-23--Q. Why Is the SAT Falling Out of Favor? A. Asian Supremacy

My best guess for why the SAT is falling out of favor , as exemplified by it getting Cancelled at the U. of California campuses , would be what you see in this 2019 graph by Unsilenced Science : Namely , Asians have been pulling away from everybody else on the SAT college admissions test , especially since David Coleman got his hands on the SAT , opening an unprecedented 100 point lead over whites in the last couple of years .
Making college admissions more subjective seems like it would hurt white parents in Santa Monica less than it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because upscale whites are cooler than upscale Asians .
Santa Monica parents can invent and follow new fashions in college application “ Me !
” essays that are more appealing to Berkeley admissions staffers than what Arcadia parents can come up with for their kids .
But the news media practically never ever mentions this 20-year-long development in Asian average test scores pulling away from everybody else like Secretariat in the Belmont .
It just doesn ’ t fit into the reigning worldview .
Nonetheless , I think at the level of upper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high school , their growing awareness of Asian Supremacy is a big deal , and is a major cause of growing white disenchantment with the SAT , even though it is almost never phrased in those terms .
Are the Asians genetically superior , culturally superior , or are they cheating more ?
Nobody knows for sure , but whites are increasingly seeing the SAT as a game they are destined to lose at to Asians .
Let ’ s see what answers the New York Times news section comes up with to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Falling Out of Favor ?
The University of California will no longer use SAT and ACT scores in admissions decisions .
Critics say the tests put less wealthy students at a disadvantage .
By Shawn Hubler , May 23 , 2020 , 5:00 a.m .
ET SACRAMENTO — The University of California ’ s decision this past week to stop requiring the SAT and ACT tests for admissions renewed a debate that could be a prompt on a college application : Are the tests that were first deployed to diversify the Ivy League @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or are they , as one U.S. regent put it , “ a proxy for privilege ” ?
… As I pointed out in February , the University of California faculty task force found that the r2 of GPA-only forecasting models was 16 % but the r of SAT-only forecasting models was 21 % .
Higher education is running out of white kids .
They are looking at a hyper stratified future of Asians versus Latinos , so they are engaging in various kinds of Shoot the Messenger behavior .
Critics of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they are inherently biased in favor of affluent , white and Asian-American students .
During the debate among the California regents this week , numerous speakers used the word “ racist ” to describe the exams .
Critics also say the tests are too easily gamed by students who can pay thousands of dollars for private coaching and test prep .
Carol Christ , the chancellor of the University of California , Berkeley , has long called for a move away from standardized testing for admissions .
She cited the recent college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point , calling the episode “ grotesque.
” Obviously , because the Desperate Housewives actress got herself in big legal trouble for paying $ 15k to have a ringer take the test for her daughter , we must abolish the SAT and ACT , just like Spanish classes nationally abolished holding tests after Ted Kennedy was caught paying a ringer to take his Spanish test for him at Harvard in 1951 .
Plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of California say use of the tests build on existing disparities .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the SAT , 55 percent of Asian-American test takers and 45 percent of white test takers scored a 1200 or higher on the SAT in 2019 .
For Hispanic and black students , those numbers were 12 percent and 9 percent .
Proponents of a change say it is fairer to judge students by other measures , such as teacher recommendations .
Some studies have suggested that high school grades better measure a student ’ s likelihood of graduation and cumulative performance in college .
The conventional wisdom among the well-informed was long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than SAT , but SAT was a good complement to GPA .
But the new U of C faculty task force study found SAT dominated GPA .
Non-Armenian white people generally don ’ t know about or think about this huge back door to a UCLA degree .
They assume you must go to a 4 year college for 4 years , but lots of Armenians send their kids to decent junior colleges like Pasadena , Glendale or Santa Monica for two years , then off to UCLA for the last two years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen next ?
John A. Pérez , chairman of the system ’ s board of regents , said that college officials in other states had told him privately that they would likely follow suit if California moved to eliminate the test from its admissions requirements .
“ I have talked to leaders at other public universities over the last couple of months , ” Mr. Pérez said , “ and would not be surprised if others looked at this question as well.
” … The end of the SAT and ACT in California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not necessarily mean the end of admissions testing there .
University officials said they were studying the feasibility of developing their own replacement test — with less baggage .
How hard could it be to invent a valid test on which blacks and Hispanics score as well as Asians ?
Obviously , the reason we don ’ t have such a test today is because it never ever occurred to anybody until last week to try to invent one .

My best guess for why the SAT is falling out of favor, as exemplified by it getting Cancelled at the U. of California campuses, would be what you see in this 2019 graph by Unsilenced Science:
Namely, Asians have been pulling away from everybody else on the SAT college admissions test, especially since David Coleman got his hands on the SAT, opening an unprecedented 100 point lead over whites in the last couple of years.
Making college admissions more subjective seems like it would hurt white parents in Santa Monica less than it would hurt Asian parents in Arcadia, because upscale whites are cooler than upscale Asians. Santa Monica parents can invent and follow new fashions in college application “Me!” essays that are more appealing to Berkeley admissions staffers than what Arcadia parents can come up with for their kids.
But the news media practically never ever mentions this 20-year-long development in Asian average test scores pulling away from everybody else like Secretariat in the Belmont. It just doesn’t fit into the reigning worldview. Nonetheless, I think at the level of upper middle class white parents with kids in high school, their growing awareness of Asian Supremacy is a big deal, and is a major cause of growing white disenchantment with the SAT, even though it is almost never phrased in those terms. Are the Asians genetically superior, culturally superior, or are they cheating more? Nobody knows for sure, but whites are increasingly seeing the SAT as a game they are destined to lose at to Asians.
Let’s see what answers the New York Times news section comes up with to these questions:
Why Is the SAT Falling Out of Favor?
The University of California will no longer use SAT and ACT scores in admissions decisions. Critics say the tests put less wealthy students at a disadvantage. By Shawn Hubler, May 23, 2020, 5:00 a.m. ET SACRAMENTO — The University of California’s decision this past week to stop requiring the SAT and ACT tests for admissions renewed a debate that could be a prompt on a college application: Are the tests that were first deployed to diversify the Ivy League beyond rich prep schoolers a worthwhile yardstick, or are they, as one U.S. regent put it, “a proxy for privilege”? …
At the University of California, a faculty task force found that standardized tests were a better predictor of college success than high school grades were. They also found that including the SAT and ACT in the formula for admissions helped some black, Hispanic and low-income students by offering an additional metric for those who might have been rejected based on grades.
As I pointed out in February, the University of California faculty task force found that the r2 of GPA-only forecasting models was 16% but the r of SAT-only forecasting models was 21%.
So why the move away from the tests?
Higher education is running out of white kids. They are looking at a hyper stratified future of Asians versus Latinos, so they are engaging in various kinds of Shoot the Messenger behavior.
Critics of the tests cite decades of data indicating that they are inherently biased in favor of affluent, white and Asian-American students. During the debate among the California regents this week, numerous speakers used the word “racist” to describe the exams. Critics also say the tests are too easily gamed by students who can pay thousands of dollars for private coaching and test prep. Carol Christ, the chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, has long called for a move away from standardized testing for admissions. She cited the recent college admissions bribery scandal as a case in point, calling the episode “grotesque.”
Obviously, because the Desperate Housewives actress got herself in big legal trouble for paying $15k to have a ringer take the test for her daughter, we must abolish the SAT and ACT, just like Spanish classes nationally abolished holding tests after Ted Kennedy was caught paying a ringer to take his Spanish test for him at Harvard in 1951.
Plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of California say use of the tests build on existing disparities. According to the College Board, which administers the SAT, 55 percent of Asian-American test takers and 45 percent of white test takers scored a 1200 or higher on the SAT in 2019. For Hispanic and black students, those numbers were 12 percent and 9 percent. Proponents of a change say it is fairer to judge students by other measures, such as teacher recommendations. Some studies have suggested that high school grades better measure a student’s likelihood of graduation and cumulative performance in college.
The conventional wisdom among the well-informed was long that GPA was a better single measure than SAT, but SAT was a good complement to GPA. But the new U of C faculty task force study found SAT dominated GPA.
And some school officials say the tests are superfluous. California’s community college chancellor, Eloy Ortiz Oakley, who is also a University of California regent, reminded the board this week that the university already enrolls tens of thousands of transfer students who are not required to take any standardized admission tests.
Non-Armenian white people generally don’t know about or think about this huge back door to a UCLA degree. They assume you must go to a 4 year college for 4 years, but lots of Armenians send their kids to decent junior colleges like Pasadena, Glendale or Santa Monica for two years, then off to UCLA for the last two years for the fancy diploma.
What will happen next?
John A. Pérez, chairman of the system’s board of regents, said that college officials in other states had told him privately that they would likely follow suit if California moved to eliminate the test from its admissions requirements. “I have talked to leaders at other public universities over the last couple of months,” Mr. Pérez said, “and would not be surprised if others looked at this question as well.” … The end of the SAT and ACT in California’s most prestigious public universities will not necessarily mean the end of admissions testing there. University officials said they were studying the feasibility of developing their own replacement test — with less baggage.
How hard could it be to invent a valid test on which blacks and Hispanics score as well as Asians? Obviously, the reason we don’t have such a test today is because it never ever occurred to anybody until last week to try to invent one.


vdare--2020-05-24--Neil Munro On Indentured Labor: "Fortune 500 CEOs Use H-1B Visa Workers to Grow a Bonded-Labor Workf

Neil Munro On Indentured Labor: "Fortune 500 CEOs Use H-1B Visa Workers to Grow a Bonded-Labor Workforce"

Earlier : The Curse Of Stein And THE DAILY CALLER ’ s Neil Munro As I sometimes do , I @ @ @ @ @ attention to a really really good , out-of-the-park column by another opinionator .
The opinionator @ @ @ @ @ at Breitbart , May 20th .
Neil 's topic is the H-1B visa scam , @ @ @ @ @ unturned .
It 's a long piece , but well worth your time .
There @ @ @ @ @ 2015 book Sold Out by Michelle Malkin and John Miano ; and in fact Neil @ @ @ @ @ column , and quotes him several times .
Beautifully done , Neil .
Thank you @

Earlier: The Curse Of Stein And THE DAILY CALLER’s Neil Munro
As I sometimes do, I'm going to direct your attention to a really really good, out-of-the-park column by another opinionator.
The opinionator here is Neil Munro over at Breitbart, May 20th. Neil's topic is the H-1B visa scam, and he leaves no stone unturned.
The inflow of India's visa-workers creates a huge 'bonded labor' workforce that empowers Fortune 500 CEOs & shrivels professionalism, say US/India tech-professionals.
"We’ve lost our competitive, innovative advantage because of it," says US manager. #H1Bhttps://t.co/EgkcLsf4Xm — Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) May 21, 2020
It's a long piece, but well worth your time. There is some overlap with the 2015 book Sold Out by Michelle Malkin and John Miano; and in fact Neil interviewed John Miano for the column, and quotes him several times.
Beautifully done, Neil. Thank you!


vdare--2020-05-24--How Many Quality-Adjusted Life Years Is Coronavirus Costing Us?

The government has spent decades studying what a life is worth .
It hasn ’ t made a difference in the covid-19 crisis .
The U.S. government often studies the trade-off between cost and safety .
But the White House has failed to release any analysis of the pandemic , which could offer clues to what ’ s ahead .
by Todd C. Frankel May 23 , 2020 at 3:29 p.m. PDT When President Trump said in late March he didn ’ t think the economic devastation from stay-at-home orders was a good trade off for avoiding covid-19 deaths , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF , ” economists across the country already were busy working on the exact kind of cost-benefit analysis implied by the president .
They reached a very different conclusion from Trump .
Economists at the University of Wyoming estimated the economic benefits from lives saved by efforts to “ flatten the curve ” outweighed the projected massive hit to the nation ’ s economy by a staggering $ 5.2 trillion .
Another study by two University of Chicago economists estimated the savings from social distancing could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficult to think of any intervention with such large potential benefits to American citizens.
” In other words , the economists are saying , “ the cure ” doesn ’ t come at a cost at all when factoring in the economic value of the lives saved .
What these academics are doing — and what Trump ’ s tweet is getting at — is measuring how the extreme efforts to avoid covid-19 deaths compare to the devastating economic fallout .
They do this by putting a price tag on the deaths avoided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government does all the time when deciding whether to require carmakers to install new safety features or drugmakers to add new warning labels .
And it ’ s required by law for big-ticket new regulations , such as road safety laws and pollution controls .
But this kind of approach has been missing from the debate about how to respond to the covid-19 pandemic , which has killed almost 100,000 Americans and fueled historic unemployment rates .
The calculation — known as Value of a Statistical Life or VSL — is the amount @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk enough to save one life .
The VSL at most federal agencies , developed over several decades , is about $ 10 million .
If a new regulation is estimated to avoid one death a year , it can cost up to $ 10 million and still make economic sense .
At what age , though ?
I looked at Wikipedia ’ s list of notable American deaths from Coronavirus and the mean age was 78 and the median age was 82 .
Only a tiny number of these people who had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves prominent within their professions were still in their primes , and only a limited number were still earning much income .
But is VSL the proper metric for a disease that slays primarily the aged and infirm ?
The feds have other , less crude measures such as Disability-Adjusted Life Years .
From Wikipedia : For example , if somebody with Alzheimer ’ s is killed , they first estimate how many more years he was most likely to live , then deduct 2/3rds of those years on the grounds that having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good as being alive and healthy .
The British call their equivalent of DALY the Quality-Adjusted Life Years or QALY .
As an older person , I say : of course not .
It ’ s sadder that Mozart died at 35 than that Beethoven died at 56 , even though Beethoven ’ s late stuff is phenomenal and it ’ s sad to think of what we are missing from Beethoven not living his three score and ten .
A while ago we discussed how Beethoven perhaps invented ragtime in his last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 1825 appears to have invented metal : If Beethoven had lived to be 70 , he probably would have invented Debussy ’ s impressionist music and Schoenberg ’ s twelve-tone , and swing .
If he ’ d lived to be 80 , he would have invented disco .
90 , rap .
But , still , we are likely missing Mozart ’ s peak ( Charles Murray ’ s Human Accomplishment lists creative individuals whose birthdate isn ’ t known by when they “ flourished , ” which Murray sets at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mozart and Beethoven both in Vienna competing from 1792 to 1826 ( along with the elder Haydn [ d. 1809 ] and the younger Schubert [ d. 1828 ] ) is staggering .
But that ’ s silly .
We need to try to estimate the Quality-Adjusted Life Years lost to this disease .
But if it ’ s “ incalculable , ” how did they calculate it ?
In reality , we need more calculation , not less .
One analysis of Italian deaths , which have been highly skewed toward the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Northern Italy Alpine foothill small cities are among the healthiest people on earth , suggested that 10 years of life expectancy were lost per life lost .
But that ignores the likelihood that those who died rather than recovered were likely frailer .
Plus it ignores quality adjustments .
Some of the dead likely had Alzheimer ’ s or other disabilities .
But … Americans and Britons both appear to be getting hit younger and harder than Continentals are by coronavirus .
In John Ionannidis ’ s paper on the toll by age @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skewed as much toward the old as the Continent is the best-educated US state Massachusetts .
On the other hand , it ’ s quite possible that the bigger danger in terms of QALYs is less immediate mortality from those who die right now than illness and early death in the future .
Say that the infection fatality rate is 1 % ( I hope it ’ s lower and that it can be lowered much further ) and that 5 QALYs are lost : that ’ s a loss of .05 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ those who get infected and survive lose an average of 5 QALYs off their lives .
That ’ s an order of magnitude greater QALY toll than that from immediate lethality .
There ’ s also the QALY loss from feeling really sick for one to six weeks .
Say that 50 % of those infected lose 0.05 QALY from being sick : that ’ s half as big of a toll as the immediate deaths .
In summary , while there is much to be learned about the toll of this disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about learning it and stop playing partisan games like this article does with an extremely serious subject .

From the Washington Post news section:
The government has spent decades studying what a life is worth. It hasn’t made a difference in the covid-19 crisis.
The U.S. government often studies the trade-off between cost and safety. But the White House has failed to release any analysis of the pandemic, which could offer clues to what’s ahead. by Todd C. Frankel
May 23, 2020 at 3:29 p.m. PDT When President Trump said in late March he didn’t think the economic devastation from stay-at-home orders was a good trade off for avoiding covid-19 deaths, tweeting, “WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF,” economists across the country already were busy working on the exact kind of cost-benefit analysis implied by the president. They reached a very different conclusion from Trump. Economists at the University of Wyoming estimated the economic benefits from lives saved by efforts to “flatten the curve” outweighed the projected massive hit to the nation’s economy by a staggering $5.2 trillion. Another study by two University of Chicago economists estimated the savings from social distancing could be so huge, “it is difficult to think of any intervention with such large potential benefits to American citizens.” In other words, the economists are saying, “the cure” doesn’t come at a cost at all when factoring in the economic value of the lives saved.
Uh … actually, it’s expensive.
What these academics are doing — and what Trump’s tweet is getting at — is measuring how the extreme efforts to avoid covid-19 deaths compare to the devastating economic fallout. They do this by putting a price tag on the deaths avoided. It’s something the federal government does all the time when deciding whether to require carmakers to install new safety features or drugmakers to add new warning labels. And it’s required by law for big-ticket new regulations, such as road safety laws and pollution controls. But this kind of approach has been missing from the debate about how to respond to the covid-19 pandemic, which has killed almost 100,000 Americans and fueled historic unemployment rates. The calculation — known as Value of a Statistical Life or VSL — is the amount people are willing to spend to cut risk enough to save one life. The VSL at most federal agencies, developed over several decades, is about $10 million. If a new regulation is estimated to avoid one death a year, it can cost up to $10 million and still make economic sense.
At what age, though?
I looked at Wikipedia’s list of notable American deaths from Coronavirus and the mean age was 78 and the median age was 82. Only a tiny number of these people who had at one point in their lives made themselves prominent within their professions were still in their primes, and only a limited number were still earning much income.
The debate over letting the economy reopen or protecting more lives has become one of the many political fights dividing the nation. But a cost-benefit analysis using VSL, while far from perfect, would force policymakers to confront the reality of their decisions in a much more precise way. Without it, they are left to gut feelings, educated guesses or political arguments.
But is VSL the proper metric for a disease that slays primarily the aged and infirm? The feds have other, less crude measures such as Disability-Adjusted Life Years. From Wikipedia:
The DALY is becoming increasingly common in the field of public health and health impact assessment (HIA). It not only includes the potential years of life lost due to premature death, but also includes equivalent years of ‘healthy’ life lost by virtue of being in states of poor health or disability. In so doing, mortality and morbidity are combined into a single, common metric
For example, if somebody with Alzheimer’s is killed, they first estimate how many more years he was most likely to live, then deduct 2/3rds of those years on the grounds that having Alzheimer’s is only 1/3rd as good as being alive and healthy.
The British call their equivalent of DALY the Quality-Adjusted Life Years or QALY.
… But the most controversial aspect is whether older people should be assigned the same VSL as younger people.
As an older person, I say: of course not.
It’s sadder that Mozart died at 35 than that Beethoven died at 56, even though Beethoven’s late stuff is phenomenal and it’s sad to think of what we are missing from Beethoven not living his three score and ten. A while ago we discussed how Beethoven perhaps invented ragtime in his last piano sonata, and his Grosse Fuge of 1825 appears to have invented metal:
If Beethoven had lived to be 70, he probably would have invented Debussy’s impressionist music and Schoenberg’s twelve-tone, and swing. If he’d lived to be 80, he would have invented disco. 90, rap.
But, still, we are likely missing Mozart’s peak (Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment lists creative individuals whose birthdate isn’t known by when they “flourished,” which Murray sets at age 40). The notion of Mozart and Beethoven both in Vienna competing from 1792 to 1826 (along with the elder Haydn [d. 1809] and the younger Schubert [d. 1828]) is staggering.
The Environmental Protection Agency in 2002 suggested a clean air rule would offer less of a benefit to senior citizens. Some academics agreed with the agency’s reasoning. But when critics decried it as a “senior discount,” it proved politically untenable.
But that’s silly. We need to try to estimate the Quality-Adjusted Life Years lost to this disease.
The NY Times headline today reads:
U.S. Deaths Near 100,000, an Incalculable Loss
But if it’s “incalculable,” how did they calculate it?
In reality, we need more calculation, not less.
One analysis of Italian deaths, which have been highly skewed toward the elderly, probably because the residents of Northern Italy Alpine foothill small cities are among the healthiest people on earth, suggested that 10 years of life expectancy were lost per life lost. But that ignores the likelihood that those who died rather than recovered were likely frailer. Plus it ignores quality adjustments. Some of the dead likely had Alzheimer’s or other disabilities.
But … Americans and Britons both appear to be getting hit younger and harder than Continentals are by coronavirus. In John Ionannidis’s paper on the toll by age, the only American state that is skewed as much toward the old as the Continent is the best-educated US state Massachusetts.
On the other hand, it’s quite possible that the bigger danger in terms of QALYs is less immediate mortality from those who die right now than illness and early death in the future.
Say that the infection fatality rate is 1% (I hope it’s lower and that it can be lowered much further) and that 5 QALYs are lost: That’s a loss of .05.
But, say that 10% of those who get infected and survive lose an average of 5 QALYs off their lives. That’s an order of magnitude greater QALY toll than that from immediate lethality.
There’s also the QALY loss from feeling really sick for one to six weeks. Say that 50% of those infected lose 0.05 QALY from being sick: That’s half as big of a toll as the immediate deaths.
In summary, while there is much to be learned about the toll of this disease, we really need to get serious about learning it and stop playing partisan games like this article does with an extremely serious subject.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-05-25--Great Moments In Color Coding Diversity Graphs

Unsilenced Science ’ s chart of average SAT scores by race from 1941-2019 has attracted accusations of bias due to @ @ @ @ @ recognized colors to represent each race : e.g.
, a black line represents blacks while @ @ @ @ @ .
As everybody knows , respectable institutions try to make their color schemes as hard @ @ @ @ @ iSteve commenter Calvin Hobbes points to this masterpiece of the inscrutable from an official University @ @ @ @ @ The Facts : Diversity : ” The pie-chart color scheme is “ shades of blue @ @ @ @ @ the shades differing only slightly from each other .
The shades-of-blue coding also differs from @ @ @ @ @ of this invidious coding of different groups with different colors .
The purpose of official @ @ @ @ @ communicate facts about diversity , they are to give us something to blankly stare in @ @ @ @ @ think about something else .

Unsilenced Science’s chart of average SAT scores by race from 1941-2019 has attracted accusations of bias due to his or her using easily recognized colors to represent each race: e.g., a black line represents blacks while a yellow line represents Asians.
As everybody knows, respectable institutions try to make their color schemes as hard to read as possible. iSteve commenter Calvin Hobbes points to this masterpiece of the inscrutable from an official University of California website entitled “The Facts: Diversity:”
The pie-chart color scheme is “shades of blue”, with some of the shades differing only slightly from each other. The shades-of-blue coding also differs from graph to graph. None of this invidious coding of different groups with different colors.
The purpose of official diversity graphs is not to communicate facts about diversity, they are to give us something to blankly stare in the direction of while we think about something else.


vdare--2020-05-25--It's Science: Comprehensible Color Coding Shows "Strong Confirmation Bias"

Students taking the SAT felt Stereotype Threat mindrays from the future emanating from @ UnsilencedSci ’ s upcoming decision to @ @ @ @ @ by race using easily comprehensible line colors ( e.g.
, black for blacks , yellow @ @ @ @ @ ) and thus scored high or low .

I don't know if this #SAT chart is accurate.
But let's assume it is.
The depiction of data shows strong confirmation bias.
Look closely at the lines.
Male students: BLUE line
Females: PINK
Asians: YELLOW
Blacks: BLACK
Native: RED
Hispanic: BROWN
Pre-conceived ideas matter. https://t.co/YKDZfhaofo — Lynnette KhalfaniCox (@themoneycoach) May 24, 2020
Students taking the SAT felt Stereotype Threat mindrays from the future emanating from @UnsilencedSci’s upcoming decision to graph SAT average score trends by race using easily comprehensible line colors (e.g., black for blacks, yellow for Asians, etc.) and thus scored high or low.
It’s Science.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-05-25--JOHN DERBYSHIRE: China Has Problems In New Bipolar World—But U.S. Has Worse

[ Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb , now available exclusively through VDARE.com ] See also : GOP Plans To Scapegoat China .
But That Must Include ENDING CHINESE IMMIGRATION !
One thing that , it seems to me , is much more apparent than it was three months ago : we are living in a bipolar world , or soon shall be .
I know a bipolar world when I see one .
I spent my first 45 years in one : the world of the Cold War , dominated by the USA and the USSR .
That bipolar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a while thereafter the USA stood supreme , economically and militarily .
We still do , actually , on indices like per capita GDP and forces deployed overseas .
Communist China 's been coming up fast , though .
It 's plain they are aiming for parity with us , regional—I mean , in Asia—if not global .
Perhaps they are aiming for global dominance .
Whether they are or not , we are heading into a bipolar world once again .
People are waking up fast to this .
The coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a way that we were n't before , not in the public realm at any rate .
Some sour-faced skeptics and grouches on the commentarial fringes , like your acerbically genial Radio Derb host , were talking that way ; now it 's well-nigh universal .
As I write this , China 's national legislature , the National People 's Congress , has just completed the first day of its 2020 annual session .
Here are a couple of headliners from this first day : • For the first time in thirty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ target for GDP growth this year—that 's Gross Domestic Product , a key economic indicator .
• There will be revisions to the Basic Law that defines the status of Hong Kong .
The point of the revisions will be to `` safeguard national security in Hong Kong . ''
[ NPC : China 's congress will be about Hong Kong , the virus and the economy , BBC , May 24 , 2020 ] What does any of this mean .
And why should Americans care ?
To take the first part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ means is that these are some of the decisions worked out by the ChiCom Party bosses in secret meetings these past weeks .
I italicized the words `` some of '' in that last sentence to emphasize that these are decisions the Party bosses want to make public .
For sure there are many more they do n't want made public .
The NPC is not really a legislature in any dictionary sense .
It 's Totalitarian Theater .
There is very occasionally—two or three times per decade—some muffled resistance to edicts from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had a staged quality about them , and were probably just a theatrical way of settling some minor power struggle at the top .
Still , the NPC is not without value for outside observers .
The things that are announced , like the two items I have noted , give clues as to what the Party bosses are thinking .
Carefully scrutinized and sensibly interpreted , they can give us the lie of the land .
From my first point about the NPC announcements—about there being no GDP growth target this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are seriously worried about China 's economy .
Like our economy and everyone else 's , China 's economy has taken a big hit from the pandemic and the measures taken to slow or contain it .
There have been huge employment losses in both manufacturing and services , in a nation with much less of a social safety net than ours [ A slump exposes holes in China ’ s welfare state , Economist , May 7 2020 ] .
The thought of a couple hundred million hungry , angry , unemployed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And this could n't be happening at a worse time for China 's economy , which is looking at a pincer trap .
I 'll describe the two arms of the pincer in turn as 1 ) the Past Arm and 2 ) the Future Arm .
The past thirty years have been a sensational boom time for China , with living standards rising faster , I think , than anywhere else , ever , in modern history .
By the end of the 2010s , though , the low-hanging fruit had all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ improvement was slowing .
That is one arm of the economic pincer—call it the Past Arm .
And now there is widespread anger and suspicion towards China among its former trading partners—the countries that , by opening their markets and exporting their factories , made the Chinese economic miracle possible .
The developed countries of North America , Western Europe , and Australasia are waking to the fact that we have sold the Chinese Communist Party a whole lot of rope with a gift card attached saying `` Please Hang Us . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ There is even talk of boycotts .
In a poll done mid-May , forty percent of Americans said they wo n't buy products made in China .
[ Americans Are Giving Made-in-China the Cold Shoulder , by Brendan Murray , Bloomberg , May 17 , 2020 ] It 's the same all over .
Some headline-writer at the London Daily Mail has taken up Radio Derb 's Godfather theme : PM `` Moves To End UK 's Reliance On China For Essential Supplies And Manufacturing '' Amid Fury At Its Coronavirus `` Cover-Up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Of Acting Like The `` Mafia '' .
By David Wilcock , May 17 , 2020 So , looking forward , the era of Western countries blithely helping the ChiComs to consolidate their power , domestic popularity , and international influence by jacking up their economy , are over .
That 's the other arm of the pincer—call it the Future Arm .
The Past Arm : no more low-hanging fruit .
The Future Arm : no more illusions about the regime we 've been enabling this past thirty years .
• None @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What the ChiComs are proposing for Hong Kong reinforces the Future Arm of the economic pincer .
Under the agreement with Britain that handed the city back to China 23 years ago , the ChiComs promised that Hong Kongers would enjoy British levels of social and political freedom , or at least something closer to them than the mainland dictatorship , until 2047 .
Well , that promise will no longer be operative .
It was just a convenient lie assented to by the ChiComs while they pumped up their economy .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the lie of the land behind the closed doors of ChiCom deliberating .
Lie of the land ?
Politically , China is the Land of the Lie .
Strategic lying is not just an occasional aberration in their diplomacy , it is all of it .
The Hong Kong demonstrators this past year have shown feisty spirit [ Rally against HK national security law on Sunday , by Jeff Pao , Asia Times , May 22 , 2020 ] .
It 's not likely that bringing the city back into the warm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without highly visible repression , possibly on the scale of Tiananmen Square in 1989 , but much more amply recorded in this age of the cellphone camera .
[ Hong Kong Protest Movement Left Reeling by China ’ s Power Grab , by Vivian Wang and Austin Ramzy , NYT , May 24 , 2020 ] That will just further reinforce the ChiComs ' image as a thuggish gangster clique , fortifying the Future Arm of the pincer , shredding any illusions Western populations still have about the nature of the ChiCom regime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eh : just a few antisocial troublemakers in need of stern law enforcement .
Tibet , Taiwan , and Eastern Turkestan ?
Integral parts of China since ancient times .
Fifty years of autonomy for Hong Kong ?
Absolutely !
—where do we sign ?
If we are admitted to the World Trade Organization , shall we observe the rules ?
Of course we shall !
COVID-19 originated in China ?
Certainly not ; it was brought in by visiting U.S. soldiers .
[ China Spins Tale That the U.S. Army Started the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , NYT , March 13 , 2020 ] The world is awakening from its dream of China as a trustworthy commercial nation whose public declarations mean what they say .
Communist China is the Land of the Lie .
So … this coming new bipolar world is nothing to worry about , right ?
The ChiComs are going to get crushed in that economic pincer I 've been describing , right ?
And Uncle Sam will sail on forward into the middle 21st century as the dominant world power , right ?
Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that is one of them .
It 's by no means the most probable one , though .
China has advantages , and we have dis-advantages , that could shape the future in a Chinese direction .
• Despotism , which makes it easier to get some things done .
• A big Smart Fraction .
Smart Fraction Theory argues that `` national wealth is determined by the fraction of workers with IQ equal to or greater than some minimum value . ''
[ The Smart Fraction Theory of IQ and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lion , March 2002 ] To the first point there , the one about despotism : Look , I really do n't want to live under the ChiComs ; and I speak as a person who did live under them for a year .
There is no denying , though , that despotism has its advantages , especially in technological development .
Exhibit A : China 's high-speed rail system .
Where is ours ?
The second point , about a big Smart Fraction , has a link with the first .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' both positive and negative .
Positive eugenics means encouraging people with positive heritable traits to breed ; negative eugenics means dis-couraging—or actually forbidding—people with negative traits to do so .
The despotic power of course gets to decide the definitions of `` positive '' and `` negative '' and the degree of coercion .
Are the ChiComs interested in eugenics ?
Oh yeah .
I had things to say about this in my November Diary last year , to which I refer you .
It 's the third point that most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some ethnic diversity , but it 's mostly out at the territorial fringes , in occupied Tibet , Mongolia , and Eastern Turkestan .
The great majority of China 's population—and an overwhelming supermajority in metropolitan China , away from those fringes—is of a single ethny .
If the Chinese withdrew from those occupied fringes , China would be the world 's most homogenous big nation .
This spares China from all the rancors and disorders that sap so much of our social and political energy .
Not only are China 's minority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Han Chinese supermajority is not split down the middle as our own white just-barely-majority is .
It is not the case that one half of the Han Chinese loathes and despises the other half .
No Chinese politician ever sought advantage by describing half of his fellow Chinese as `` deplorables . ''
No public intellectual in China ever wrote that `` The yellow race is the cancer of human history '' as Susan Sontag wrote of the white race to which she herself belonged .
Ethnomasochism is a white pathology .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent one .
Susan Sontag wrote her words in 1967 .
You can take them as the beginning of the rise of white ethomasochism to its present position as a major social dogma .
There is a line of American commentary on China , argued most clearly and persistently by David Goldman at Asia Times ( now apparently with Gordon Chang also on board ) telling us that we Americans should consider ourselves to be in a Sputnik Moment : a moment in history where , if we do n't stop the fruitless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , co-ordinated national effort , the ChiComs will eat our lunch , breezing past us in key technologies like artificial intelligence , big data , microchip fabrication , and quantum computing .
The problem with that prescription is that the original Sputnik Moment , to which America reacted with such spectacular success , occurred in 1957 , a whole decade B.S.— '' Before Sontag . ''
White ethnomasochism was not entirely unknown in 1957 , but it was restricted to tiny cliques of urban intellectuals .
We could make a united national response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were a sufficiently united nation .
You need that qualifying word `` sufficiently '' there because there was what people of the time called `` the Negro Problem . ''
White Americans did n't think about black Americans any more than they absolutely had to , though , and the race issue did n't split whites down the middle as clearly and angrily as in what I call today 's Cold Civil War .
Sputnik-wise , we were a sufficiently united nation—sufficiently to co-operate in a colossal national effort with a minimum of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today 's level of social rancor back in 1957 , would we have been able to get to a Moon landing in just twelve years ?
Of course not .
It would have taken us twelve years just to figure out and litigate , appeal , re-litigate , and re-appeal the Affirmative Action protocols for staffing Above , the almost entirely white male staff of NASA 's Mission Control , the day men landed on the moon .
email him ] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ includes National Review , whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him . )
He is the author of We Are Doomed : Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books .
He has had two books published by VDARE.com com : FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT ( also available in Kindle ) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II : ESSAYS 2013 .
For years he ’ s been podcasting at Radio Derb , now available at VDARE.com for no charge .
His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com .
Readers who wish to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earmarked for John Derbyshire 's writings at VDARE.com can do so here .

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through VDARE.com]
See also: GOP Plans To Scapegoat China. But That Must Include ENDING CHINESE IMMIGRATION!
One thing that, it seems to me, is much more apparent than it was three months ago: We are living in a bipolar world, or soon shall be.
I know a bipolar world when I see one. I spent my first 45 years in one: the world of the Cold War, dominated by the USA and the USSR.
That bipolar world ended twenty-nine years ago. For a while thereafter the USA stood supreme, economically and militarily.
We still do, actually, on indices like per capita GDP and forces deployed overseas. Communist China's been coming up fast, though. It's plain they are aiming for parity with us, regional—I mean, in Asia—if not global. Perhaps they are aiming for global dominance.
Whether they are or not, we are heading into a bipolar world once again. People are waking up fast to this. The coronavirus pandemic has us thinking and talking about China in a way that we weren't before, not in the public realm at any rate. Some sour-faced skeptics and grouches on the commentarial fringes, like your acerbically genial Radio Derb host, were talking that way; now it's well-nigh universal.
As I write this, China's national legislature, the National People's Congress, has just completed the first day of its 2020 annual session. Here are a couple of headliners from this first day:
For the first time in thirty years, there will be no announced target for GDP growth this year—that's Gross Domestic Product, a key economic indicator. There will be revisions to the Basic Law that defines the status of Hong Kong. The point of the revisions will be to "safeguard national security in Hong Kong." [NPC: China's congress will be about Hong Kong, the virus and the economy, BBC, May 24, 2020]
What does any of this mean? And why should Americans care?
To take the first part of that question first: What it means is that these are some of the decisions worked out by the ChiCom Party bosses in secret meetings these past weeks.
I italicized the words "some of" in that last sentence to emphasize that these are decisions the Party bosses want to make public. For sure there are many more they don't want made public.
The NPC is not really a legislature in any dictionary sense. It's Totalitarian Theater. There is very occasionally—two or three times per decade—some muffled resistance to edicts from the Politburo; but even those have had a staged quality about them, and were probably just a theatrical way of settling some minor power struggle at the top.
Still, the NPC is not without value for outside observers. The things that are announced, like the two items I have noted, give clues as to what the Party bosses are thinking. Carefully scrutinized and sensibly interpreted, they can give us the lie of the land.
China's economic pincer.
From my first point about the NPC announcements—about there being no GDP growth target this year—we can deduce that the ChiComs are seriously worried about China's economy.
Like our economy and everyone else's, China's economy has taken a big hit from the pandemic and the measures taken to slow or contain it. There have been huge employment losses in both manufacturing and services, in a nation with much less of a social safety net than ours [A slump exposes holes in China’s welfare state, Economist, May 7, 2020].
"There are, in other words, upwards of 78m people who are out of a job and are receiving no benefits." https://t.co/5sJSMNNCcy — Matheus Andrade (@MGAndrade96) May 16, 2020
The thought of a couple hundred million hungry, angry, unemployed workers gives ChiCom bosses the heebie-jeebies.
And this couldn't be happening at a worse time for China's economy, which is looking at a pincer trap. I'll describe the two arms of the pincer in turn as 1) the Past Arm and 2) the Future Arm.
The past thirty years have been a sensational boom time for China, with living standards rising faster, I think, than anywhere else, ever, in modern history. By the end of the 2010s, though, the low-hanging fruit had all been picked, and the rate of improvement was slowing.
That is one arm of the economic pincer—call it the Past Arm.
And now there is widespread anger and suspicion towards China among its former trading partners—the countries that, by opening their markets and exporting their factories, made the Chinese economic miracle possible. The developed countries of North America, Western Europe, and Australasia are waking to the fact that we have sold the Chinese Communist Party a whole lot of rope with a gift card attached saying "Please Hang Us." They are backing off from China.
There is even talk of boycotts. In a poll done mid-May, forty percent of Americans said they won't buy products made in China [Americans Are Giving Made-in-China the Cold Shoulder, by Brendan Murray, Bloomberg, May 17, 2020].
It's the same all over. Some headline-writer at the London Daily Mail has taken up Radio Derb's Godfather theme:
PM "Moves To End UK's Reliance On China For Essential Supplies And Manufacturing" Amid Fury At Its Coronavirus "Cover-Up" As Beijing Hawk MP Accuses Regime Of Acting Like The "Mafia," by David Wilcock, May 17, 2020
So, looking forward, the era of Western countries blithely helping the ChiComs to consolidate their power, domestic popularity, and international influence by jacking up their economy, are over.
That's the other arm of the pincer—call it the Future Arm.
The Past Arm: no more low-hanging fruit.
The Future Arm: no more illusions about the regime we've been enabling this past thirty years.
What the status of Hong Kong means
What the ChiComs are proposing for Hong Kong reinforces the Future Arm of the economic pincer.
Under the agreement with Britain that handed the city back to China 23 years ago, the ChiComs promised that Hong Kongers would enjoy British levels of social and political freedom, or at least something closer to them than the mainland dictatorship, until 2047.
Well, that promise will no longer be operative. It was just a convenient lie assented to by the ChiComs while they pumped up their economy.
I spoke of the NPC giving us clues about the lie of the land behind the closed doors of ChiCom deliberating. Lie of the land? Politically, China is the Land of the Lie. Strategic lying is not just an occasional aberration in their diplomacy, it is all of it.
The Hong Kong demonstrators this past year have shown feisty spirit [Rally against HK national security law on Sunday, by Jeff Pao, Asia Times, May 22, 2020]. It's not likely that bringing the city back into the warm embrace of the Motherland can be accomplished without highly visible repression, possibly on the scale of Tiananmen Square in 1989, but much more amply recorded in this age of the cellphone camera [Hong Kong Protest Movement Left Reeling by China’s Power Grab, by Vivian Wang and Austin Ramzy, NYT, May 24, 2020].
That will just further reinforce the ChiComs' image as a thuggish gangster clique, fortifying the Future Arm of the pincer, shredding any illusions Western populations still have about the nature of the ChiCom regime.
Did I mention Tiananmen Square? Eh: just a few antisocial troublemakers in need of stern law enforcement. Tibet, Taiwan, and Eastern Turkestan? Integral parts of China since ancient times. Fifty years of autonomy for Hong Kong? Absolutely!—where do we sign? If we are admitted to the World Trade Organization, shall we observe the rules? Of course we shall! COVID-19 originated in China? Certainly not; it was brought in by visiting U.S. soldiers [China Spins Tale That the U.S. Army Started the Coronavirus Epidemic, by Steven Lee Myers, NYT, March 13, 2020].
The world is awakening from its dream of China as a trustworthy commercial nation whose public declarations mean what they say. Communist China is the Land of the Lie.
So … this coming new bipolar world is nothing to worry about, right? The ChiComs are going to get crushed in that economic pincer I've been describing, right? And Uncle Sam will sail on forward into the middle 21st century as the dominant world power, right?
Well, there are many possible futures, and that is one of them. It's by no means the most probable one, though. China has advantages, and we have dis-advantages, that could shape the future in a Chinese direction.
I'd list China's main advantages as three:
Despotism, which makes it easier to get some things done. A big Smart Fraction. Smart Fraction Theory argues that "national wealth is determined by the fraction of workers with IQ equal to or greater than some minimum value" [The Smart Fraction Theory of IQ and the Wealth of Nations, La Griffe Du Lion, March 2002]. Demographic homogeneity; low levels of ethnic diversity and ethnomasochism.
To the first point there, the one about despotism: Look, I really don't want to live under the ChiComs; and I speak as a person who did live under them for a year. There is no denying, though, that despotism has its advantages, especially in technological development. Exhibit A: China's high-speed rail system. Where is ours?
The second point, about a big Smart Fraction, has a link with the first. The name of the link is "eugenics," both positive and negative.
Positive eugenics means encouraging people with positive heritable traits to breed; negative eugenics means dis-couraging—or actually forbidding—people with negative traits to do so. The despotic power of course gets to decide the definitions of "positive" and "negative" and the degree of coercion.
Are the ChiComs interested in eugenics? Oh yeah. I had things to say about this in my November Diary last year, to which I refer you.
It's the third point that most powerfully addresses American weakness. China has some ethnic diversity, but it's mostly out at the territorial fringes, in occupied Tibet, Mongolia, and Eastern Turkestan. The great majority of China's population—and an overwhelming supermajority in metropolitan China, away from those fringes—is of a single ethny. If the Chinese withdrew from those occupied fringes, China would be the world's most homogenous big nation.
This spares China from all the rancors and disorders that sap so much of our social and political energy.
Not only are China's minority ethnies proportionally much smaller than ours, the Han Chinese supermajority is not split down the middle as our own white just-barely-majority is.
It is not the case that one half of the Han Chinese loathes and despises the other half. No Chinese politician ever sought advantage by describing half of his fellow Chinese as "deplorables." No public intellectual in China ever wrote that "The yellow race is the cancer of human history" as Susan Sontag wrote of the white race to which she herself belonged. Ethnomasochism is a white pathology.
And as social dogma, quite a recent one. Susan Sontag wrote her words in 1967. You can take them as the beginning of the rise of white ethomasochism to its present position as a major social dogma.
There is a line of American commentary on China, argued most clearly and persistently by David Goldman at Asia Times (now apparently with Gordon Chang also on board) telling us that we Americans should consider ourselves to be in a Sputnik Moment: a moment in history where, if we don't stop the fruitless squabbling and begin engaging in some serious, co-ordinated national effort, the ChiComs will eat our lunch, breezing past us in key technologies like artificial intelligence, big data, microchip fabrication, and quantum computing.
The problem with that prescription is that the original Sputnik Moment, to which America reacted with such spectacular success, occurred in 1957, a whole decade B.S.—"Before Sontag."
White ethnomasochism was not entirely unknown in 1957, but it was restricted to tiny cliques of urban intellectuals.
We could make a united national response to Sputnik sixty years ago because we were a sufficiently united nation. You need that qualifying word "sufficiently" there because there was what people of the time called "the Negro Problem."
White Americans didn't think about black Americans any more than they absolutely had to, though, and the race issue didn't split whites down the middle as clearly and angrily as in what I call today's Cold Civil War.
Sputnik-wise, we were a sufficiently united nation—sufficiently to co-operate in a colossal national effort with a minimum of bickering.
If we had been at today's level of social rancor back in 1957, would we have been able to get to a Moon landing in just twelve years?
Of course not. It would have taken us twelve years just to figure out and litigate, appeal, re-litigate, and re-appeal the Affirmative Action protocols for staffing Mission Control.
Above, the almost entirely white male staff of NASA's Mission Control, the day men landed on the moon.
John Derbyshire [ email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him.) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He has had two books published by VDARE.com com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT II: ESSAYS 2013.
For years he’s been podcasting at Radio Derb, now available at VDARE.com for no charge. His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.
Readers who wish to donate (tax deductible) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire's writings at VDARE.com can do so here.


vdare--2020-05-24--74% Black Albany, GA Hit Hard By Both Coronavirus AND Increasing Levels Of Black On Black Violence

As Albany , Georgia represents one of the worst spots for the Coronavirus outbreak in the South—because of a failure for blacks to socially distance at funerals at the Martin Luther King Memorial Chapel—another type of plague has also set upon the 74 percent black city .
Dougherty Co. coroner concerned about black on black crime , WALB.com , May 15 , 2020 ] : Dougherty County Coroner Michael Fowler is very concerned about the number of violent crimes in Albany lately .
Especially the gun violence , that , for the most part , he said have been black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has to be done to stop deadly gunfire in the community .
Last week , a 16-year-old teen was killed and three friends wounded in a drive-by shooting in Albany .
This week , a 40-year-old father and grandfather was gunned down in another drive-by attack .
Police have made arrests in both shootings .
“ And to make it so bad , it ’ s black on black crime .
And it seems like nobody is really saying anything about it .
Just another black going to jail , another black gone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be said .
Something needs to be done , ” said Fowler .
It ’ s not only murder , recently a woman was wounded when bullets were fired into her home .
Two men were caught on surveillance video shooting at a car with women and children trying to get away from them , again , black on black crime .
“ Shooting up the cars , shooting up one mother ’ s house , killing one another , it just doesn ’ t make sense , ” Fowler said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some gang on gang crimes , ” Greg Edwards , the district attorney for the Dougherty Judicial Circuit .
Edwards said the coronavirus pandemic could be partly to the blame for the surge of violence .
“ A lot of the instigation of these particular crimes has come over social media .
I think the fact that people are sheltering in place and communicating more in this method is causing them to want to act out , ” explained Edwards .
Fowler said national eyes are on Albany right now because it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He said now , with many people in Albany dying and sick from the virus , out of work , some hungry , that senseless gun violence hurts the city even more .
“ Only thing you did is create another problem for two families .
One family has got to now start going to court to deal with you .
Then another person going to the grave with their loved ones .
It just don ’ t make sense , ” said Fowler .
Edwards said most involve teenagers and high caliber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asking the people of Albany to put the guns down and stop the violence .

As Albany, Georgia represents one of the worst spots for the coronavirus outbreak in the South—because of a failure for blacks to socially distance at funerals at the Martin Luther King Memorial Chapel—another type of plague has also set upon the 74 percent black city.
Dougherty Co. coroner concerned about black on black crime, WALB.com, May 15, 2020]:
Dougherty County Coroner Michael Fowler is very concerned about the number of violent crimes in Albany lately. Especially the gun violence, that, for the most part, he said have been black on black crimes.
Fowler said something has to be done to stop deadly gunfire in the community.
Last week, a 16-year-old teen was killed and three friends wounded in a drive-by shooting in Albany.
This week, a 40-year-old father and grandfather was gunned down in another drive-by attack.
Police have made arrests in both shootings.
“And to make it so bad, it’s black on black crime. And it seems like nobody is really saying anything about it. Just another black going to jail, another black gone to the grave. Something needs to be said. Something needs to be done,” said Fowler.
It’s not only murder, recently a woman was wounded when bullets were fired into her home.
Two men were caught on surveillance video shooting at a car with women and children trying to get away from them, again, black on black crime.
“Shooting up the cars, shooting up one mother’s house, killing one another, it just doesn’t make sense,” Fowler said.
“I want to acknowledge we are having some gang on gang crimes,” Greg Edwards, the district attorney for the Dougherty Judicial Circuit.
Edwards said the coronavirus pandemic could be partly to the blame for the surge of violence.
“A lot of the instigation of these particular crimes has come over social media. I think the fact that people are sheltering in place and communicating more in this method is causing them to want to act out,” explained Edwards.
Fowler said national eyes are on Albany right now because it was one of the first coronavirus hotspots. He said now, with many people in Albany dying and sick from the virus, out of work, some hungry, that senseless gun violence hurts the city even more.
“Only thing you did is create another problem for two families. One family has got to now start going to court to deal with you. Then another person going to the grave with their loved ones. It just don’t make sense,” said Fowler.
Edwards said most involve teenagers and high caliber weapons.
Both Fowler and Edwards are asking the people of Albany to put the guns down and stop the violence.