vdare--2020-02-21--Will Islam Will Prove That Demographics Is Destiny?

Edward Dutton ’ s new book , Why Islam Makes You Stupid … But Also Means You ’ ll Conquer the World [ Washington Summit Publishers , 2020 ] , offers a frightening if interesting theory : Though rigorous adherence to Islam suppresses intelligence , the advantages conferred by ethnocentrism and fertility are so great that , in the everlasting conflict between the Islam and formerly-Christian Europe , the former will triumph despite the intellectual and technological advantages of the latter .
Dutton , in his usual resolute and confident style , packs his exploration of Islam with information and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affects the IQ not only of Muslims but also the Europeans whose lands Mohammed ’ s disciples are colonizing .
Chapter 1 introduces modern research on intelligence in the context of human biodiversity and group selection : You pass on your genes by having children , by investing in your kind , or by investing in your group .
Chapter 6 closes the book with Dutton ’ s reflections of Western man ’ s future in light of the general deterioration of Western civilizational strength , the declining average intelligence of Europeans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heartlands of aliens in general and Muslims in particular .
But Dutton , originally educated as a theologian , is at his strongest in the middle when dealing with Islam ’ s stultifying effects on IQ—which will not , he predicts , thwart its triumph over the West .
Dutton reiterates Winston Churchill ’ s grim evaluation of Islam in his 1899 book on the Reconquest of Sudan , How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries !
Besides the fanatical frenzy , which is as dangerous in a man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is this fearful fatalistic apathy .
The effects are apparent in many countries .
Improvident habits , slovenly systems of agriculture , sluggish methods of commerce , and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live .
A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement ; the next of its dignity and sanctity .
The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child , a wife , or a concubine – must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men .
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities .
Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen : all know how to die : but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it .
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world .
Far from being moribund , Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith .
It has already spread throughout Central Africa , raising fearless warriors at every step ; and were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the strong arms of science , the science against which it had vainly struggled , the civilization of modern Europe might fall , as fell the civilization of ancient Rome .
[ The River War , 1st edition , v. 2 , p. 248 ] And in some sense even reprises Hilaire Belloc ’ s warning in The Great Heresies that Islam will “ return to power.
” In Chapter 2 , Dutton summarizes the interplay between intelligence and religiosity .
Overall , there exists a weak negative correlation between IQ and religiosity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the creed , the lower the average IQ of its adepts .
That might seem trivial , as professors of science or engineers are rarely ardent believers , but two existential threats arise from the association of IQ and religiousness and their effect on fertility .
A positive correlation between religiousness and fertility is dysgenic in terms of IQ ; i.e.
, • more intelligent but less religious people have fewer children ; • less intelligent and more religious people have more children .
Dutton describes at length the negative consequences for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the real import of that fact : More religious and less intelligent neighboring nations will achieve a demographic advantage over more intelligent states .
This is abundantly clear from the “ world ’ s most important graph.
” We see the consequences even now all around us .
Which brings us back to Churchill ’ s evaluation of Islam and Muslims .
Those “ retrograde ” nations or region where Islam dominates have consistently lower average IQs than racially-similar non-Muslim neighbors , with significant negative correlations found between the number of Muslims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Islamic religious and cultural practices are the explanation .
Although the effects of environment on IQ are thought to be relatively small , the hypothesis is plausible .
Data from different age groups support his hypothesis .
Dutton provides a brief history of religion , from the veneration of spirits in primitive , hunter-gatherer tribes to the necessarily universal moral God in crowded city-based civilizations .
Then he lays out the history of Islam , with an emphasis on its earliest founding events .
The simplicity which he explains Islam ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elegance with which he explains the power hierarchies in different Islamic sects , reveals the pen of a true master .
But what is it about Islam that depresses the intelligence of its adherents ?
Dutton explains in Chapter 4 : “ The Five Pillars of Islam ...
Faith , Prayer , Charity , Fasting , and making a pilgrimage to Mecca ” do indeed induce stupidity .
Intellectual achievement can hardly be expected from those trained to believe illogical and unsubstantiated dogmas , and the chronic stress linked to Islam ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducive to abstract thinking .
While Dutton tends to think that most of the “ pillars ” decrease intelligence , the reader will probably be more persuaded by the contribution of other important traditions explored in Chapter 5 .
Dutton suggests that the grisly practice of female genital mutilation ( FGM ) , to which nearly 100 percent of women are subject in countries such as Somalia , is a traumatic childhood event that lowers not only the IQ of a woman , because trauma harms intelligence , but also the IQ of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intellectual stimulation she provides .
Yet Dutton sees substantial societal advantages in FGM .
It decreases female sexual drive and thus infidelity and cuckoldry , which in turn elevates trust and greater cooperation among men .
Traditional Islamic female veiling also helps on that count .
Dutton touches on polygamy , which he suggests is concomitantly eugenic and dysgenic : Women like high status men , and high status is achieved by intelligence .
But the associated woman-shortage for lower status males leads to widespread pederasty , which traumatizes and dumbs down boys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between cousins .
While strongly suppressing IQ , the resulting , tightly-knit ethnocentric groups tend to be effective competitors for societal domination .
All this means that several aspects of Islam might contribute to the lower intelligence of Muslims .
A detailed regional analysis of IQ , cousin marriage , and the strictness of religious practice should allow researchers to find out how genetic and environment affects intelligence in Islamic nations .
Hopefully , we will see it done in the future .
Fortunately , Dutton ’ s book does not entirely live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not sure that Dutton proves that Islam will indeed “ conquer the world.
” Yes , a young , fecund , masculine , and cohesive yet largely stupid civilization is invading and seems to be supplanting an old , intelligent , de-masculinized , hedonistic , and apathetic one .
The outcome seems to be certain .
Or is it ?
The West has faced worse before .
It ’ s not yet over .
Vasili Tyorkin [ Email him ] is a pen name of a Russian neuroscientist living in Europe .

Edward Dutton’s new book, Why Islam Makes You Stupid … But Also Means You’ll Conquer the World [Washington Summit Publishers, 2020], offers a frightening if interesting theory: Though rigorous adherence to Islam suppresses intelligence, the advantages conferred by ethnocentrism and fertility are so great that, in the everlasting conflict between the Islam and formerly Christian Europe, the former will triumph despite the intellectual and technological advantages of the latter.
Dutton, in his usual resolute and confident style, packs his exploration of Islam with information and original insights to reveal how the religion affects the IQ not only of Muslims but also the Europeans whose lands Mohammed’s disciples are colonizing.
Chapter 1 introduces modern research on intelligence in the context of human biodiversity and group selection: You pass on your genes by having children, by investing in your kind, or by investing in your group.
Chapter 6 closes the book with Dutton’s reflections of Western man’s future in light of the general deterioration of Western civilizational strength, the declining average intelligence of Europeans, and the accelerating immigration into the European heartlands of aliens in general and Muslims in particular.
But Dutton, originally educated as a theologian, is at his strongest in the middle when dealing with Islam’s stultifying effects on IQ—which will not, he predicts, thwart its triumph over the West.
Dutton reiterates Winston Churchill’s grim evaluation of Islam in his 1899 book on the Reconquest of Sudan, The River War:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die: but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome. [The River War, 1st edition, v. 2, p. 248]
And in some sense even reprises Hilaire Belloc’s warning in The Great Heresies that Islam will “return to power.”
In Chapter 2, Dutton summarizes the interplay between intelligence and religiosity. Overall, there exists a weak negative correlation between IQ and religiosity, and the harsher and more fundamentalist the creed, the lower the average IQ of its adepts.
That might seem trivial, as professors of science or engineers are rarely ardent believers, but two existential threats arise from the association of IQ and religiousness and their effect on fertility. A positive correlation between religiousness and fertility is dysgenic in terms of IQ; i.e.,
more intelligent but less religious people have fewer children;
less intelligent and more religious people have more children.
Dutton describes at length the negative consequences for the economy and technological development of Islam. But the real import of that fact: More religious and less intelligent neighboring nations will achieve a demographic advantage over more intelligent states. This is abundantly clear from the “world’s most important graph.”
We see the consequences even now all around us.
Which brings us back to Churchill’s evaluation of Islam and Muslims. Those “retrograde” nations or region where Islam dominates have consistently lower average IQs than racially-similar non-Muslim neighbors, with significant negative correlations found between the number of Muslims and the average IQ. Dutton hypothesizes that Islamic religious and cultural practices are the explanation. Although the effects of environment on IQ are thought to be relatively small, the hypothesis is plausible. Data from different age groups support his hypothesis.
Dutton provides a brief history of religion, from the veneration of spirits in primitive, hunter-gatherer tribes to the necessarily universal moral God in crowded city-based civilizations. Then he lays out the history of Islam, with an emphasis on its earliest founding events. The simplicity which he explains Islam’s internecine and intertribal warfare, and the elegance with which he explains the power hierarchies in different Islamic sects, reveals the pen of a true master.
But what is it about Islam that depresses the intelligence of its adherents?
Dutton explains in Chapter 4: “The Five Pillars of Islam ... Faith, Prayer, Charity, Fasting, and making a pilgrimage to Mecca” do indeed induce stupidity. Intellectual achievement can hardly be expected from those trained to believe illogical and unsubstantiated dogmas, and the chronic stress linked to Islam’s difficult prayer and fasting regimes is not conducive to abstract thinking.
While Dutton tends to think that most of the “pillars” decrease intelligence, the reader will probably be more persuaded by the contribution of other important traditions explored in Chapter 5. Dutton suggests that the grisly practice of female genital mutilation (FGM), to which nearly 100 percent of women are subject in countries such as Somalia, is a traumatic childhood event that lowers not only the IQ of a woman, because trauma harms intelligence, but also the IQ of her children by reducing the level of intellectual stimulation she provides.
Yet Dutton sees substantial societal advantages in FGM. It decreases female sexual drive and thus infidelity and cuckoldry, which in turn elevates trust and greater cooperation among men. Traditional Islamic female veiling also helps on that count.
Dutton touches on polygamy, which he suggests is concomitantly eugenic and dysgenic: Women like high status men, and high status is achieved by intelligence. But the associated woman-shortage for lower status males leads to widespread pederasty, which traumatizes and dumbs down boys.
The last-but-certainly-not-least factor is widespread marriage between cousins. While strongly suppressing IQ, the resulting, tightly knit ethnocentric groups tend to be effective competitors for societal domination.
All this means that several aspects of Islam might contribute to the lower intelligence of Muslims. A detailed regional analysis of IQ, cousin marriage, and the strictness of religious practice should allow researchers to find out how genetic and environment affects intelligence in Islamic nations. Hopefully, we will see it done in the future.
Fortunately, Dutton’s book does not entirely live up to its provocative title—I’m not sure that Dutton proves that Islam will indeed “conquer the world.”
Yes, a young, fecund, masculine, and cohesive yet largely stupid civilization is invading and seems to be supplanting an old, intelligent, de-masculinized, hedonistic, and apathetic one.
The outcome seems to be certain.
Or is it? The West has faced worse before. It’s not yet over.
Vasily Tyorkin [Email him] is a pen name of a Russian neuroscientist living in Europe.


vdare--2020-02-21--Are California Courts Trying To Start A Civil War?

Earlier by Peter Brimelow : '' It Will Come To Blood '' —Reflections On The Left 's Anti-Trump Inauguration Tantrum I ’ ve said ( on my deleted-by-Google former blog ) that a shootout between Federal agents and local cops would start over the arrest of an illegal alien in a courtroom .
It now looks like that is going to come true .
California has passed laws attempting to limit the authority of Federal agents to make immigration arrests .
California has no such authority , and is on course to a violent conflict with Federal agents , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but all Federal law enforcement agencies .
And , as I predicted , the violence is coming , and it will start between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Removal Operations ( ICE ERO ) agents making an arrest in a court and crazed local politicians ordering their investigators , deputy sheriffs , and police officers to use violence to protect illegal aliens .
And Civil War II almost got a start like Fort Sumter in a Sonoma County Superior Court .
U.S. immigration agents have arrested two people at a Northern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a hallway on his way to a hearing , flouting a new state law requiring a judicial warrant to make immigration arrests inside such facilities .
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents made the arrests Tuesday at Sonoma County Superior Court , prompting an outcry from criminal justice and court officials who said the action undermines local authority and deters immigrants who are in the country illegally from participating in the U.S. justice system .
ICE said in a statement that California ’ s law doesn ’ t supersede federal law and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers acting pursuant to duly enacted laws passed by Congress that provide the authority to make administrative arrests of removable aliens inside the United States.
” [ ICE Flouts State Law In Arresting Two People At Northern California Courthouse , AP/LAT , February 19 , 2020 ] Not surprisingly , a shyster from the Sonoma County Public Defender ’ s Office ( SCPDO ) , and an investigator , presumably from the SCPDO as well , attempted to interfere with the arrest by ICE ERO agents .
That an attorney and a law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with another law enforcement agency is strange , that they would have any interest in a plainclothes officer “ leading ” someone to an unmarked law enforcement vehicle is even stranger .
Plainclothes officers and detectives are routine in all courts , as are unmarked “ law enforcement vehicles.
” That they would describe the vehicle as law enforcement clearly shows that they knew what they were doing .
They must have know that the officer was ICE and they were planning to interfere with the arrest , otherwise they would have ignored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ house .
This is evidence of mens rea , intent , to commit the crime of interfering with a Federal law enforcement officer , Title 18 United States Code Section 111 , Assaulting , Resisting , or Impeding Certain Officers Or Employees .
It is time for Based Bill Barr to order prosecution of those two from the Public Defender ’ s Office who attempted to interfere with the ICE arrest .
If nothing is done , things will get worse .
Nip this in the bud .
Make an example to prevent @ @ @ @ @

Earlier by Peter Brimelow: "It Will Come To Blood"—Reflections On The Left's Anti-Trump Inauguration Tantrum
I’ve said (on my deleted-by-Google former blog) that a shootout between Federal agents and local cops would start over the arrest of an illegal alien in a courtroom. It now looks like that is going to come true.
California has passed laws attempting to limit the authority of Federal agents to make immigration arrests. California has no such authority, and is on course to a violent conflict with Federal agents, not just the agencies that enforce immigration law, but all Federal law enforcement agencies.
And, as I predicted, the violence is coming, and it will start between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE ERO) agents making an arrest in a court and crazed local politicians ordering their investigators, deputy sheriffs, and police officers to use violence to protect illegal aliens.
When ICE shows up at sensitive locations like schools, courthouses, churches, and hospitals, it doesn't make us safer―it incites fear in immigrant communities. This is not who we are. https://t.co/r6s47jmdFH — Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) February 21, 2020
And Civil War II almost got a start like Fort Sumter in a Sonoma County Superior Court.
U.S. immigration agents have arrested two people at a Northern California courthouse, including a man detained in a hallway on his way to a hearing, flouting a new state law requiring a judicial warrant to make immigration arrests inside such facilities.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents made the arrests Tuesday at Sonoma County Superior Court, prompting an outcry from criminal justice and court officials who said the action undermines local authority and deters immigrants who are in the country illegally from participating in the U.S. justice system. ICE said in a statement that California’s law doesn’t supersede federal law and “will not govern the conduct of federal officers acting pursuant to duly enacted laws passed by Congress that provide the authority to make administrative arrests of removable aliens inside the United States.” [ICE Flouts State Law In Arresting Two People At Northern California Courthouse, AP/LAT, February 19, 2020]
Not surprisingly, a shyster from the Sonoma County Public Defender’s Office (SCPDO), and an investigator, presumably from the SCPDO as well, attempted to interfere with the arrest by ICE ERO agents.
In one of the arrests, a Sonoma County public defender and an investigator confronted an ICE agent leading a 37-year-old man to an unmarked law enforcement vehicle, demanding information about the affiliation of the agent, who wore no uniform, and the name of the man being taken away, Pozzi said. The man was detained in a second-floor hallway of the courthouse before he could attend his court hearing, she said.
That an attorney and a law enforcement agency investigator would attempt to interfere with another law enforcement agency is strange, that they would have any interest in a plainclothes officer “leading” someone to an unmarked law enforcement vehicle is even stranger.
Plainclothes officers and detectives are routine in all courts, as are unmarked “law enforcement vehicles.” That they would describe the vehicle as law enforcement clearly shows that they knew what they were doing. They must have known that the officer was ICE and they were planning to interfere with the arrest, otherwise they would have ignored such a routine sight in a court house. This is evidence of mens rea, intent, to commit the crime of interfering with a Federal law enforcement officer, Title 18 United States Code Section 111, Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers Or Employees.
It is time for Based Bill Barr to order prosecution of those two from the Public Defender’s Office who attempted to interfere with the ICE arrest. If nothing is done, things will get worse. Nip this in the bud. Make an example to prevent the next Civil War.


vdare--2020-02-21--A Reader Notes One More Example Of Automation Making Immigration Obsolete

Please see the link below for Brenda Walker input regarding automation .
It is a report on a John Deere @ @ @ @ @ Deere s new autonomous tractor concept is a very compact electric drive unit .
The @ @ @ @ @ of 500kW , HorsepowerOnline , February 13 , 2020 .
No need for Big Ag @ @ @ @ @ No need , in fact , for any other kind of immigration .
The robots @ @ @ @ @ work !
By the way , the `` This Day In VDARE.com History '' articles @ @ @ @ @ like the new graphics too .
A tremendous scope and depth of useful info in @ @ @ @ @ , thanks !
See earlier letters from the same reader .

From: A West Texas Reader [Email him]
Please see the link below for Brenda Walker input regarding automation. It is a report on a John Deere autonomous electric tractor.
John Deere s new autonomous tractor concept is a very compact electric drive unit. The tractor has a total output of 500kW, HorsepowerOnline, February 13, 2020.
No need for Big Ag to import unskilled labor. No need, in fact, for any other kind of immigration. The robots are coming to do the work!
By the way, the "This Day In VDARE.com History" articles are very informative. I like the new graphics too.
A tremendous scope and depth of useful info in the "VDARE Vault", thanks!
See earlier letters from the same reader.


vdare--2020-02-21--The Debate, Prospects For Trump,  And China, End Of The Good Times, Etc.

02m14s Correlation of forces .
( Prospects for Trump in November . )
08m53s Beware the Bloombergshchina .
( Not @ @ @ @ @ oligarch . )
18m20s Debatable Trump .
( When he took on Mrs Clinton .
@ @ @ @ @ of the good times .
( Into a zone of instability . )
35m17s Boy @ @ @ @ @ Score one for social justice . )

02m14s Correlation of forces. (Prospects for Trump in November.)
08m53s Beware the Bloombergshchina. (Not just a politician, an oligarch.)
18m20s Debatable Trump. (When he took on Mrs Clinton.)
25m41s China: end of the good times. (Into a zone of instability.)
30m42s Trump's 2016 position paper on immigration. (Remember, Mr President?)
32m54s Transatlantic boat people? (Canaries in the coal mine.)
35m17s Boy Scouts go bankrupt. (Score one for social justice.)
37m49s Signoff. (The case for mustaches.)
01 — Intro. And Radio Derb is on the air! Greetings, listeners, from your empirically genial host John Derbyshire, here with commentary on the passing scene.
This week's big talking point was of course Wednesday night's televised debate from Las Vegas, featuring the six leading Democratic Party candidates for President.
I normally report on these events in world-weary mode, telling you how much I hate them and what a struggle I had to keep awake. This one was different. I watched the whole thing — all two hours — with fascinated attention.
The nation at large agreed with me. Almost twenty million people tuned in to Wednesday's debate, making it the most-watched Democratic candidates' debate ever, according to NBC.
(If you're a Republican you can take consolation from the fact that even Wednesday's night's twenty million was way short of the twenty-four million that Fox News pulled in back in August 2015 for the first GOP debate that year featuring Donald Trump.)
So, what did Radio Derb think of the event? I have two full segments on it. First, though, by way of introducing those segments, let me just revisit my comments of a few months ago about President Trump's chances of re-election.
[Permalink]
02 — Correlation of forces (cont.) When the 2020 election campaign first got seriously under way, back in June last year, I did a summary of the correlation of forces as things stood then, and concluded that Donald Trump would likely lose his bid for a second term.
That little bit of commentary turned out to be one of those that sticks in people's minds. Ever since, around once a week, someone has asked me whether I've seen any reason to change my opinion. Short answer: no. Long answer: this segment and the next two.
Before proceeding, though, I'll just digress, not for the first time, with some words about about how some people find empirical thinking to be unnatural.
In that prediction last June I made it as clear as I knew how to make it that my conclusion — that Trump will lose in 2020 — was unwelcome to me. I'm a Trump voter. I didn't and don't want him to lose. It just looked to me, on the evidence of the time, as best I could weigh it, that he would.
That brought in some emails yelling at me for being anti-Trump. A lot of people can't distinguish thought from feeling. If I think X is the case, I must wish it to be the case.
I don't know what to say to responses like that, so I ignore them. And I hasten to say there there weren't all that many; not enough to tip me over into the level of misanthropy expressed by Jonathan Swift, the guy who said, quote:
The bulk of mankind is as well qualified for flying as thinking.
End quote.
I will, though, take the opportunity to restate the wise words from Chapter Seven of my tremendous 2009 bestseller We Are Doomed. Yes, here it is: The Empiricist's Lament, quote:
The ordinary modes of human thinking are magical, religious, social, and personal. We want our wishes to come true; we want the universe to care about us; we want the approval of those around us; we want to get even with that s.o.b. who insulted us at the last tribal council. For most people, wanting to know the cold truth about the world is way, way down the list.
End quote.
End of digression. So I was a Trump voter last June when I predicted he'd lose the 2020 race, and I am still a Trump voter.
Let me just review my reasons for thinking, eight months ago, that Trump will lose.
I noted that:
He won 2016 by the merest whisker, taking a handful of key states — Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin — by margins of less than one percent.
The demographic drift is away from Trumpism. Trump does well among older white people. There are proportionally fewer of those every election cycle.
His rise was so swift and unexpected, the media, who are of course anti-Trump, didn't take him seriously until too late. And …
He enjoyed the advantage of facing an exceptionally lackluster opponent, Mrs Clinton.
OK, forward four years. What does the polling look like? Yesterday Quinnipiac University published a poll of those three critical states, the polling done just before Wednesday's debate.
Executive summary: In Wisconsin, Trump polled ahead of all the Democratic candidates by seven to eleven points, but in Michigan and Pennsylvania he trailed them all by as much as six to eight points, or in a few cases tied them within the margin of error. For a sitting President, that's not very good.
On the second point, the demographic drift continues, thanks to the population policies of the last several administrations under Presidents of both parties.
On the third point, about the media not taking Trump seriously in 2016 until it was too late, that won't be an issue this year. The media, and their allies in the academy, the courts, the bureaucracy, and social media, are well-coordinated and acting in concert. They will do everything they can to swing the result against Trump.
And then there's the quality of the opposition. That's what was on display for us this Wednesday evening.
[Permalink]
03 — Beware the Bloombergshchina! The pundits' consensus on Wednesday's debate was that Michael Bloomberg lost bigly. My Thursday New York Post put a picture of Bloomberg on the cover page with Band-Aids all over his face. Tucker Carlson on Thursday was crowing and chuckling over what he called Bloomberg's "humiliation."
I'm sorry, but I think there is some serious wishful thinking going on there. I watched the whole debate with keen attention, and I didn't think Bloomberg came out of it too badly.
Perhaps I'm judging on a different metric from Tucker and the New York Post subs. My basic metric is: craziness. Measured thus, the only two candidates up there on Wednesday night who struck me as non-crazy — as reasonably normal people, not hires in from Clowns-R-Us — were Bloomberg and Klobuchar.
Unfortunately today's Democratic Party is not a safe space for normal people. This is especially true in matters related to race and sex. That's where Bloomberg got into trouble. On race and sex, he wasn't crazy enough, and couldn't convincingly fake being crazy enough.
So he had to do an unconvincing walk-back of his 2015 remarks about crime in New York City. Back then he had noted the thing we all know: that to a good first approximation, all violent crime in New York — or any other city — is committed by Sun People, which is to say blacks and Latinos. Stopping suspicious-looking young male Sun People and frisking them for illegal weapons is an excellent crime-prevention strategy. It worked really well.
That of course is total heresy nowadays. Not just in the Democratic Party, either: I'm not holding my breath waiting for Tucker Carlson to speak frankly about race and crime. For Democrats, though, it is super-heresy, and Bloomberg had to do his best to recant. His best wasn't very good.
And then there are those non-disclosure agreements between Bloomberg and various women he had offended in some way. Here we are back with the weird moral hysteria of the MeToo movement, which is basically a lawyers' ramp — a very successful scheme by the Trial Lawyers' Associations to monetize bad manners.
Most of the events covered by those non-disclosure agreements probably don't even rise to the level of bad manners. Most were likely just office banter, of the kind that was common thirty or forty years ago.
I can speak from experience here, having worked in much the same milieu as the younger Bloomberg. My boss at First Boston, which I joined in the mid-1980s, was Wally Fekula, who had worked with Bloomberg at Salomon Brothers until they let Bloomberg go in 1981. Wally liked to boast that he had been the last Salomon employee to give Bloomberg's hand a farewell shake as he headed out to the elevator.
We went to work every day in that environment — the back offices of a Wall Street firm — all through the eighties and nineties. I know the kind of guy-gal talk that went on, in office hours and at Christmas parties and other let-your-hair-down events. It was loose, often ribald, but perfectly harmless, and not taken amiss by anyone so far as I can recall. The women gave as good as they got.
Nowadays, though, banter of that sort would get a guy fired on the spot, with a big fat harassment lawsuit to follow.
That's not Bloomberg's fault. It's just a change in our times — a change for the worse, if you want my opinion. God damn to hell the Trial Lawyers' Associations! Bloomberg, with those non-disclosure agreements, is just taking the sensible precautions a guy with deep pockets has to take in a world gone mad.
Listening to myself there, I sound sympathetic to Bloomberg. Again, though, I'm just trying to record facts. No way am I a Bloomberg voter. I want an immigration moratorium; Bloomberg wants wide-open borders. I'm an NRA life member; Bloomberg wants to repeal the Second Amendment.
And I share some of the fears expressed by Gregory Hood over at American Renaissance. There has been much head-shaking and eye-rolling at the prospect of both big-party tickets putting forward a self-financing billionaire Presidential candidate in November. As Gregory points out, however, Bloomberg and Trump are two very different guys.
Trump is lazy, inattentive, and easily swayed by the last authority figure that spoke to him, as we saw in those disastrous televised events of early 2018. So far as he has any ideas at all, he is mostly on our side; but he hasn't sufficiently mastered the machinery of executive politics, or perhaps just isn't interested enough, to actually do very much on our behalf.
Bloomberg is much more driven and able to concentrate. A Bloomberg White House would be busy 24/7 doing all sorts of things, all of them destructive of our liberties. Let me quote from Gregory Hood, edited quote:
He's not just a politician, but an oligarch who commands a vast financial and media empire. He would have almost unimaginable power if he were President, and everything in his past suggests he will use it … We know he would go after mostly white gun owners, and I have little doubt he'd pursue "white nationalists" too.
Bernie Sanders is the most extreme candidate, but Michael Bloomberg is probably the most dangerous. It's a good thing he doesn't know how to debate.
End quote.
Permit me, please to recycle my favorite quote from Boris Unbegaun's Russian Grammar, quote:
The suffix -ina … is extremely productive in the extended forms -shchina and -ovshchina to denote unfavourably a state of mind or a political, social or artistic movement or trend.
End quote.
And now let this be the first place you were warned of the looming threat of a Bloombergshchina, in which all the executive and judicial powers of the centralized state are used energetically and ruthlessly to crush all dissent from politically correct orthodoxy.
[Permalink]
04 — Debatable Trump. Just a footnote to the foregoing.
Gregory Hood wrote that it's a good thing Bloomberg doesn't know how to debate. Other commentators took the same conclusion from Wednesday night's event.
Fair enough; but how good a debater is Donald Trump one-on-one? Presumably he will be expected to debate whoever the Democrats nominate for this fall's election.
My vague recollection of him on the debate stage in 2016 is that he wasn't very good; but I thought I'd check back on my commentary at the time to see what I said.
Now I'm wishing I hadn't.
At this point I'm going to exercise podcaster's privilege and just splice in some Radio Derb commentary from four years ago. This was October 21st 2016 (so I guess three and a half years ago). I'd been watching a one-on-one debate, Donald Trump versus Mrs Clinton. Over to 2016:
[Pips.]
Trump has at least put forward sensible, patriotic proposals to re-orient our immigration policies towards the interests of Americans. The trouble is, he doesn't seem to remember having done so.
I stood up ready to cheer when the moderator asked about immigration. I thought Trump would just smack Clinton across her face with that speech to Brazilian bankers that's been leaked, the one where she told them that her dream is of open borders.
Instead Trump offered a long ramble about drugs pouring across the border, quote, "destroying our youth." Further quote, actual quote:
The single biggest problem is heroin that pours across our southern borders. End quote.
For goodness' sake! The single biggest problem? I don't think so. Nobody cares about drugs coming in, other than church ladies in the ghetto who won't vote for Trump anyway. People care about worker displacement, sanctuary cities, terrorism, lawlessness, Latin-style corruption, immigrants taking welfare, the handing out of U.S. citizenship like candy. Nobody cares about drugs.
Piling blunder on blunder, Trump then said that President Obama has deported millions of people. In the first place, as anyone who's spent ten minutes looking at immigration issues knows, Obama's done no such thing; he has only performed an accounting trick to make it look as though he has. Obama has actually admitted this himself. And in the second place, if Obama had deported millions, wouldn't that have been a good Trumpish thing for him to have done? Why advertise the Trumpish virtues of the other party?
It was left to Chris Wallace, the moderator, to bring up Mrs Clinton's open borders dreaming. When he did so, Trump thanked him. Like: "Thank you for reminding me of the ace card I've been holding but forgot to play when it mattered."
It was the same when Mrs Clinton railed against Vladimir Putin's Russia. That should have been Trump's cue to bring up the fact that Russia now owns half of America's uranium, as a result of a sleazy deal made by Bill Clinton and approved by Mrs Clinton's State Department. Instead he just riffed on how Putin is smarter than Mrs Clinton. Yes, I bet he is, Donald: but why play a seven when you're holding an ace?
And this was still supposed to be the immigration segment of the debate, Trump's signature issue. Mrs Clinton twisted it to be about Putin, and Trump dumbly went along. "We're a long way away from immigration," said Chris Wallace. Yes we were. Mrs Clinton led us that long way, and Trump followed.
It never got much better than that. Trump was such an easy mark, Mrs Clinton even dared to bring up the Venezuelan beauty queen again, confident that Trump would not think to remind viewers that the woman is a low-grade slut who hangs out with gangsters and should never have been given U.S. citizenship. That's the Venezuelan woman, not Mrs Clinton … whose confidence was not misplaced.
Donald Trump is a decent person, a patriot. A Trump Presidency would be far better for the U.S.A. than another Clinton Presidency. There's no avoiding the fact, though, that Trump is a simply terrible candidate. My strong advice to him, when he comes up for re-election in 2020, is not to engage in any televised debates.
[Pips.]
OK, we're back here in 2020. Bear in mind please that the disastrous debate performance I was reporting on there was against Mrs Clinton. That lady did not rise to national prominence by winning debate championships. She rose to national prominence by being Bill Clinton's wife. She's not smart or quick-witted, not much of a debater; yet she ran circles round Trump there.
So how do I guess Trump would fare one-on-one against Michael Bloomberg or Amy Klobuchar? Don't ask.
My advice to the President is the same today as four years ago: Do not engage in any televised debates, Sir.
[Permalink]
05 — China: end of the good times. The coronavirus panic in China is having serious effects on that country's economy. Quote from ZeroHedge, February 19th:
As China's economic output remains literally frozen, a new report suggests that many Chinese companies — which never factored for this type of calamity — don't have enough capital to cover wages, or have delayed or stopped paying workers, suggesting that the [coronavirus] outbreak has left businesses on the brink of disaster.
End quote.
Untold numbers of Chinese people are basically under house arrest. My wife was just on WeChat with an old classmate who lives near Chongqing in southwest China, six hundred miles from Wuhan. The classmate says only one member of the household is allowed out at a time, on a prescribed schedule, to do food shopping.
As ZeroHedge points out, the ripple effect on international businesses could be dire. If people aren't getting to work, they're not getting paid. If they're not getting paid, they're not spending on smartphones, on Starbucks coffee, on Tesla cars.
You hear people say that a totalitarian government like China's is just what you need to deal with a major internal crisis like this. "They can just do what needs doing," people say, "without fussing about legalities."
I don't believe it. Yes, the ChiComs can impose draconian rules on people's movements, drag disobedient citizens from their homes and throw them in trucks, seal off whole districts, and put up makeshift hospitals in a matter of days. The downside is that the arbitrary brutality and economic disruption makes the nature of the regime plain to see, where previously people didn't have to think about it too much.
This past twenty-odd years, as China has barreled forward in a continuous economic boom, Chinese people have been able to put out of their minds the fact that their country is ruled by brutality, fear, and official lying. When times are so good, you just shrug and get on with life. When I was there in September last year people seemed laid-back and happy, with very little of the grumbling and cynicism I remember from the 1980s. The place was stable.
Coronavirus has pushed China towards a zone of instability. The ChiComs will likely respond by ramping up the lies and brutality. Probably it'll work; but it won't get them back to the cheerful good order I saw last year.
And this is just to speak of metropolitan China, the Chinese homeland. Who knows what effect the coronavirus panic is having in the occupied territories of Tibet and East Turkestan? What if there is some sudden secondary crisis out there — the death of the Dalai Lama, perhaps (he is 84)?
The first two decades of this century were a great time to be Chinese. Hundreds of millions were pulled up from poverty. For the urban Chinese middle classes, each year was better than the year before.
That's not likely to continue. My guess is, the 2020s will not be a great time to be Chinese.
On the upside, as one of the commenters at ZeroHedge points out, all that enforced idleness under house arrest might do wonders for China's cratering fertility rate …
[Permalink]
06 — Miscellany. And now, our closing miscellany of brief items.
Imprimis: In that segment back there on Trump's dismal debating skills, I mentioned the immigration plan he put forward for the 2016 campaign. That plan makes depressing reading now, four years later.
Nationwide e-verify … Mandatory return of all criminal aliens … Defund sanctuary cities … Criminal penalties for overstaying a visa … End birthright citizenship … Put American workers first … Remember that plan of yours, Mr President? Any of it?
And now we read in the Washington Post, February 20th, that acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney told a private gathering in England that the administration wants more immigrants. The Post quotes Mulvaney as saying, quote:
We are desperate — desperate — for more people. We are running out of people to fuel the economic growth that we've had in our nation over the last four years. We need more immigrants."
End quote.
That is totally contrary to the spirit and the wording of Trump's 2016 plan, as Daniel Horowitz spelled out in withering detail at Conservative Review today.
Will Mulvaney continue in his job as acting White House chief of staff? Or will he be summarily fired for expressing ideas so utterly at odds with the President's signature 2016 campaign proposal, probably the one thing more than any other that got Trump elected?
[Permalink]
Item: A hardy perennial here at Radio Derb is the prospect of transatlantic boat people: people-smugglers in Africa packing their customers in boats and sending them over to us. With GPS and modern navigation systems, the Atlantic is not such a formidable barrier.
I've been sounding the alarm on this for years, pointing out that the U.S.A. has already received its first African boat people, when fourteen illegals from Senegal were rescued off Cape Cod back in February 2007.
All right, it hasn't actually become a pressing issue yet, but there are reasons to think it will. Here is one of those reasons.
A hundred and fifty miles off the coast of West Africa are the Canary Isles, which belong to Spain. Here's what Associated Press had to say about that, February 19th, quote:
The deadly Atlantic route from northwest Africa to the Canary Islands has become increasingly popular among migrants desperate to reach European soil following an increase in migrant controls in western Mediterranean routes between Morocco and mainland Spain further north.
More than 1,000 migrants reached the Canary Islands from Jan. 1 to Feb. 15, compared to 66 in the same period last year, according to Spain's Interior Ministry.
End quote.
So last year, 66; this year, same period, over a thousand. Yes, they're a mere one-twentieth of the way from Africa to North America, but it'll only be a matter of time before the people-smugglers figure out a way for them to just keep going.
[Permalink]
Item: I've noticed before how social justice activism has a way of producing more problems than it solves — more, and usually worse problems. The classic case is the pressure on banks to make it easier for poor minorities to get home loans. The banks buckled; the poor minorities got their loans; then, when the economy took a downturn, they couldn't finance them and ended up homeless.
Latest in this sorry catalog of not leaving well enough alone is the Boy Scouts of America. Overwhelmed by child-abuse lawsuits, the BSA has filed for Chapter 11.
This was the perfectly predictable end result of activists pushing for BSA to admit homosexual scoutmasters. Scouting has been a magnet for adult perverts since its founding: Robert Baden-Powell, who got the whole movement started with his unfortunately-titled book Scouting for Boys back in 1908, was plagued with them.
The relentless pressure to loosen the prohibition on homosexual scoutmasters led to a weakening of the ban, with a formal lifting of it in 2015, somewhat qualified. At the same time, the BSA's long rearguard action to keep the prohibition caused massive loss of public, church, and corporate sponsorship. Result: more sex abuse lawsuits, less money to fight them.
Ann Coulter tells the dismal tale in her February 19th column. As a follow-up to my commentary on Wednesday's candidates' debate, I just wanted to add an item Ann missed. Michael Bloomberg, according to Wikipedia, was an Eagle Scout.
[Permalink]
07 — Signoff. And there you have it, ladies and gents. Thank you for listening, and let's all look forward with eager anticipation to next Tuesday's candidates' debate in Charleston, SC — followed, of course, one week later, by Super Tuesday.
Let's have a song to play us out. I started off my January Diary with a long segment on mustaches. After reading that, my VDARE.com colleague Barton Cockey directed my attention to a song from the 2014 Seth MacFarlane movie A Million Ways to Die in the West. Barton notes that the song is adapted from an 1864 Stephen Foster original. I hadn't seen the movie and didn't know the original. I'm glad to get acquainted with both. Thank you, Barton!
There will be more from Radio Derb next week!
[Permalink]
[Music clip: "If You've Only Got a Moustache."]


vdare--2020-02-22--Foreign Propaganda Interference Done Right: Brits in 1940s U.S.

Bernie Sanders briefed by U.S. officials that Russia is trying to help his presidential campaign By Shane Harris , Ellen Nakashima , Michael Scherer and Sean Sullivan Feb. 21 , 2020 at 1:16 p.m. PST U.S. officials have told Sen. Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to help his presidential campaign as part of an effort to interfere with the Democratic contest , according to people familiar with the matter .
President Trump and lawmakers on Capitol Hill also have been informed about the Russian assistance to the Vermont senator , those people said , speaking on the condition of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken .
So … that clears that up !
Let me guess , though : I bet some Russian … trolls … are posting … memes !
On the other hand , if you want an example of Foreign Interference done right , consider the 1941 Hollywood movie That Hamilton Woman starring Vivien Leigh as Emma Hamilton and Laurence Olivier as Admiral Horatio Nelson , victor over Napoleon ’ s navy at Trafalgar .
From Wikipedia : The film was a critical and financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plot is both a war story and a romance set in Napoleonic times , it was also intended to function as a deliberately pro-British film that would portray Britain positively within the context of World War II which was being fought at that time .
At the time the film was released France , Belgium , the Netherlands , Norway , Poland and Denmark had all surrendered to the Nazis and the Soviet Union was still officially allied to them , correspondingly the British were fighting against the Nazis alone and felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both boost their own morale , and also portray them sympathetically to the foreign world , and in particular , to the United States .
… Shot in the United States during September and October 1940 , [ 10 ] That Hamilton Woman defines Britain ’ s struggle against Napoleon in terms of resistance to a dictator who seeks to dominate the world .
[ 11 ] The film was intended to parallel the current situation in Europe and was intended as propaganda at a time before the attack on Pearl Harbor when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
… Stars Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier were newlyweds at the time of filming and were considered a “ dream couple.
” … While That Hamilton Woman was marketed as historical romance , its subtext falls into the “ war propaganda ” category .
[ 16 ] In July 1941 , the isolationist group America First Committee ( AFC ) targeted That Hamilton Woman and three other major Hollywood feature films ( The Great Dictator , Chaplin/United Artists , 1940 ; Foreign Correspondent , Wanger/United Artists , 1940 ; The Mortal Storm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ seemed to be preparing Americans for war.
” … Critical sources usually point out that That Hamilton Woman was Winston Churchill ’ s favorite film .
[ 19 ] [ Note 1 ] In her research on the subject , film historian Professor Stacey Olster reveals that at the time the film was made , Alexander Korda ’ s New York offices were “ supplying cover to MI-5 agents gathering intelligence on both German activities in the United States and isolationist sentiments among makers of American foreign policy.
” [ 20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s biographer , That Hamilton Woman “ became Exhibit A in a case brought against Korda by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee .
The Committee had accused him of operating an espionage and propaganda center for Britain in the United States—a charge Korda only escaped by virtue of the fact that his scheduled appearance before the committee on December 12 , 1941 was preempted by the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor five days earlier ” .
In one scene , whose significance was lost on no one who saw the film , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make peace with dictators .
You have to destroy them.
” Korda always claimed that Churchill had written that line .
More pro-British films poured out of Hollywood that year , among them A Yank in the R.A.F.
, starring Tyrone Power as an American flier who fights in the Battle of Britain , and a raft of melodramatic spy movies depicting sinister Nazi agents at work to undermine America .
The level of talent of British propagandists operating in America in the 1940s — e.g.
, besides movie stars like Olivier , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were also Isaiah Berlin , C.S .
Forester , Roald Dahl , Alfred Duff Cooper , Ian Fleming , and ad man David Ogilvy — was substantially higher than whatever Russia , Saudi Arabia , or China can muster today .
For example , from Wikipedia : In late March 1942 , while in London , [ fighter pilot Roald Dahl ] met the Under-Secretary of State for Air , Major Harold Balfour , at his club .
Impressed by Dahl ’ s war record and conversational abilities , Balfour appointed the young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British Embassy in Washington , D.C. … As part of his duties as assistant air attaché , Dahl was to help neutralise the isolationist views still held by many Americans by giving pro-British speeches and discussing his war service ; the United States had entered the war only the previous December , following the attack on Pearl Harbor .
[ 58 ] At this time [ Roald ] Dahl met the noted British novelist C. S. Forester [ Horatio Hornblower , The African Queen ] , who was also working to aid the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the British Ministry of Information and was writing propaganda for the Allied cause , mainly for American consumption .
The Saturday Evening Post had asked Forester to write a story based on Dahl ’ s flying experiences ; Forester asked Dahl to write down some RAF anecdotes so that he could shape them into a story .
After Forester read what Dahl had given him , he decided to publish the story exactly as Dahl had written it .
.. Later he worked with such other well-known British officers as Ian Fleming ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series ) and David Ogilvy [ future author of Confessions of an Advertising Man ] , promoting Britain ’ s interests and message in the US and combating the “ America First ” movement .

From the Washington Post:
Bernie Sanders briefed by U.S. officials that Russia is trying to help his presidential campaign By Shane Harris, Ellen Nakashima, Michael Scherer and Sean Sullivan
Feb. 21, 2020 at 1:16 p.m. PST U.S. officials have told Sen. Bernie Sanders that Russia is attempting to help his presidential campaign as part of an effort to interfere with the Democratic contest, according to people familiar with the matter. President Trump and lawmakers on Capitol Hill also have been informed about the Russian assistance to the Vermont senator, those people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence. It is not clear what form that Russian assistance has taken.
So … that clears that up!
Let me guess, though: I bet some Russian … trolls … are posting … memes!
For example, here’s a high quality 2016 Russian interference effort:
On the other hand, if you want an example of Foreign Interference done right, consider the 1941 Hollywood movie That Hamilton Woman starring Vivien Leigh as Emma Hamilton and Laurence Olivier as Admiral Horatio Nelson, victor over Napoleon’s navy at Trafalgar. From Wikipedia:
The film was a critical and financial success, and while on the surface the plot is both a war story and a romance set in Napoleonic times, it was also intended to function as a deliberately pro-British film that would portray Britain positively within the context of World War II which was being fought at that time. At the time the film was released France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland and Denmark had all surrendered to the Nazis and the Soviet Union was still officially allied to them, correspondingly the British were fighting against the Nazis alone and felt the need to produce films that would both boost their own morale, and also portray them sympathetically to the foreign world, and in particular, to the United States. … Shot in the United States during September and October 1940,[10] That Hamilton Woman defines Britain’s struggle against Napoleon in terms of resistance to a dictator who seeks to dominate the world.[11] The film was intended to parallel the current situation in Europe and was intended as propaganda at a time before the attack on Pearl Harbor when the United States was still formally neutral. … Stars Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier were newlyweds at the time of filming and were considered a “dream couple.” … While That Hamilton Woman was marketed as historical romance, its subtext falls into the “war propaganda” category.[16] In July 1941, the isolationist group America First Committee (AFC) targeted That Hamilton Woman and three other major Hollywood feature films (The Great Dictator, Chaplin/United Artists, 1940; Foreign Correspondent, Wanger/United Artists, 1940; The Mortal Storm, MGM, 1940) as productions that “seemed to be preparing Americans for war.” … Critical sources usually point out that That Hamilton Woman was Winston Churchill’s favorite film.[19][Note 1] In her research on the subject, film historian Professor Stacey Olster reveals that at the time the film was made, Alexander Korda’s New York offices were “supplying cover to MI-5 agents gathering intelligence on both German activities in the United States and isolationist sentiments among makers of American foreign policy.”[20] According to Anthony Holden, Olivier’s biographer, That Hamilton Woman “became Exhibit A in a case brought against Korda by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Committee had accused him of operating an espionage and propaganda center for Britain in the United States—a charge Korda only escaped by virtue of the fact that his scheduled appearance before the committee on December 12, 1941 was preempted by the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor five days earlier”.
From HistoryNet:
In one scene, whose significance was lost on no one who saw the film, Nelson declares, “You cannot make peace with dictators. You have to destroy them.” Korda always claimed that Churchill had written that line. More pro-British films poured out of Hollywood that year, among them A Yank in the R.A.F., starring Tyrone Power as an American flier who fights in the Battle of Britain, and a raft of melodramatic spy movies depicting sinister Nazi agents at work to undermine America.
The level of talent of British propagandists operating in America in the 1940s — e.g., besides movie stars like Olivier, Leigh, and Cary Grant, there were also Isaiah Berlin, C.S. Forester, Roald Dahl, Alfred Duff Cooper, Ian Fleming, and ad man David Ogilvy — was substantially higher than whatever Russia, Saudi Arabia, or China can muster today. For example, from Wikipedia:


vdare--2020-02-22--NYT: Becky(s) and Karen(s) Are Causing Anorexia in Girls of Color

From the New York Times opinion page : Why a Black Girl Might Want to Shrink We have to live in a world that tells us our bodies are all wrong .
With the deluge of imagery that associates beauty with whiteness , girls of color are primed not only to developing eating disorders , but also to see these disorders go untreated .
By Mikki Kendall Ms. Kendall is the author of “ Hood Feminism ” When I was in high school , I had an eating disorder , and nobody noticed .
Sure , I ’ d always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loss was undetectable at first .
I just wanted to mention upfront that I ’ m naturally skinny .
… But moreover : I was black .
The societal narratives that position the curviness of black girls ’ bodies as a warning sign of future obesity mean that as young women , we ’ re often congratulated for watching our weight when our food restriction might actually be the symptom of a real mental health problem .
That ’ s why the lingering cultural myth that eating disorders are the province of white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It also keeps us from addressing the uniquely insidious factors that can cause black women to hate their bodies .
For women who are developing bodies that will most likely never assimilate into the mythical monochrome of Middle America , there ’ s very little validation available in the media or anywhere else .
Reading all these NYT opeds by black women about how there ’ s very little validation available in the media for black women , I ’ m reminded of anorexia , a psychological disorder where women stare in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see only fatness .
Similarly , a lot of black women are convinced that the media are out to promote whiteness .
Although conventional wisdom says most eating disorders develop at the onset of puberty , for black girls I think the seeds are actually laid much earlier .
By the time I was 8 years old , I remember noticing that television shows rarely included girls that looked like me — and if they did , they were never the ones who were heroes or love interests .
Those roles were largely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black actresses who were depicted as happy , successful and loved tended to be lighter-skinned with straighter hair and narrow noses — something that ’ s still largely true today .
Like many other black girls , I learned early that when it comes to white-centric , unreasonable standards of beauty , I didn ’ t measure up .
… When you are constantly bombarded with messages that tell you again and again that your body is simply wrong , it can make you desperate to control and change it .
… We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trappings of black culture on white bodies but not on the bodies of those who created these looks .
When the singer Ciara ’ s faux locs are criticized , but the same hairstyle is received as edgy and inventive when one of the Kardashians sports it , what message is being sent to young girls of color ?
Similarly , fatphobia is an issue for everyone , but race impacts who is most likely to be supported by the general public when rightly challenging it .
Black women notice when the white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shrill ” is celebrated as an icon of body positivity , while every appearance by the artist Lizzo is accompanied by relentless attacks that focus on her size and shape .
It ’ s easy to understand why any black woman might think — as I once did — that the problem could be solved by disappearing .
There are no statistics in this oped .
The only ones I ’ ve found are in line with what the world looks like : Bulimia is less uncommon in black women and binge-eating is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ common among upper middle class white girls .

From the New York Times opinion page:
Why a Black Girl Might Want to Shrink
We have to live in a world that tells us our bodies are all wrong. With the deluge of imagery that associates beauty with whiteness, girls of color are primed not only to developing eating disorders, but also to see these disorders go untreated. By Mikki Kendall
Ms. Kendall is the author of “Hood Feminism” Feb. 21, 2020 When I was in high school, I had an eating disorder, and nobody noticed. Sure, I’d always been skinny, so perhaps my weight loss was undetectable at first.
I just wanted to mention upfront that I’m naturally skinny.
… But moreover: I was black. The societal narratives that position the curviness of black girls’ bodies as a warning sign of future obesity mean that as young women, we’re often congratulated for watching our weight when our food restriction might actually be the symptom of a real mental health problem. That’s why the lingering cultural myth that eating disorders are the province of white women isn’t just misleading: It also keeps us from addressing the uniquely insidious factors that can cause black women to hate their bodies. For women who are developing bodies that will most likely never assimilate into the mythical monochrome of Middle America, there’s very little validation available in the media or anywhere else.
Reading all these NYT opeds by black women about how there’s very little validation available in the media for black women, I’m reminded of anorexia, a psychological disorder where women stare in the mirror at their 80 pound bodies and see only fatness. Similarly, a lot of black women are convinced that the media are out to promote whiteness.
Add the deluge of imagery that associates beauty with whiteness, and girls of color are primed not only to developing eating disorders, but also to see these disorders go untreated.
Although conventional wisdom says most eating disorders develop at the onset of puberty, for black girls I think the seeds are actually laid much earlier. By the time I was 8 years old, I remember noticing that television shows rarely included girls that looked like me — and if they did, they were never the ones who were heroes or love interests. Those roles were largely reserved for white girls. Even the black actresses who were depicted as happy, successful and loved tended to be lighter-skinned with straighter hair and narrow noses — something that’s still largely true today. Like many other black girls, I learned early that when it comes to white-centric, unreasonable standards of beauty, I didn’t measure up. … When you are constantly bombarded with messages that tell you again and again that your body is simply wrong, it can make you desperate to control and change it. … We live in a country that loves the trappings of black culture on white bodies but not on the bodies of those who created these looks. When the singer Ciara’s faux locs are criticized, but the same hairstyle is received as edgy and inventive when one of the Kardashians sports it, what message is being sent to young girls of color? Similarly, fatphobia is an issue for everyone, but race impacts who is most likely to be supported by the general public when rightly challenging it. Black women notice when the white main character in the Hulu series “Shrill” is celebrated as an icon of body positivity, while every appearance by the artist Lizzo is accompanied by relentless attacks that focus on her size and shape. It’s easy to understand why any black woman might think — as I once did — that the problem could be solved by disappearing.
There are no statistics in this oped. The only ones I’ve found are in line with what the world looks like:
Findings from this study are consistent with previous research that shows that AN [anorexia nervosa] is uncommon among African Americans.
Bulimia is less uncommon in black women and binge-eating is common.
Basically, anorexia is most common among upper middle class white girls.
[Comment at Unz.com]


vdare--2020-02-22--Boris Johnson's Home Office Refuses To Release Report On Demographics Of Pakistani Grooming Gangs, S

Boris Johnson's Home Office Refuses To Release Report On Demographics Of Pakistani Grooming Gangs, Saying It Needs A "Safe Space"

From The Independent of the UK : Grooming gang review kept secret as Home Office claims releasing findings ‘ not in public interest ’ Exclusive : Freedom of Information request refused so ministers have ‘ safe space ’ to discuss policy The government is refusing to release official research on the characteristics of grooming gangs , claiming it is not in the “ public interest ” .
Survivors accused ministers of making “ empty promises ” , while a man who prosecuted abusers in Rochdale called for the Home Office to “ show some courage and publish ” its findings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that almost 19,000 suspected child sexual exploitation victims were identified by local authorities in just one year , sparking renewed calls for prevention efforts .
Sajid Javid promised the review as home secretary in July 2018 , pledging that there would be “ no no-go areas of inquiry ” .
“ I will not let cultural or political sensitivities get in the way of understanding the problem and doing something about it , ” he said at the time .
“ I ’ ve instructed my officials to explore the particular contexts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But the government has made no further announcements on the review following Mr Javid ’ s move to the Treasury last year .
It has , however , said it will soon publish a national strategy that will set out a “ whole system response to all forms of child sexual abuse ” .
In December , The Independent was told that the work had been completed but would only be used for internal policy-making and would not be publicly released .
In response to a freedom of information ( FOI ) request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any reports drawn up as a result , the Home Office confirmed it held the information but would not release it .
In a letter to The Independent , officials said they had applied a “ public interest test ” but the information was exempt from the act because it concerned the development of government policy .
“ One of the main purposes of the exemption is to protect the ‘ safe space ’ necessary for ministers and officials to consider policy options in private without risk of premature disclosure , ” it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisions still to be made by ministers .
In addition , the information could be misleading if made public and used out of context .
”

From The Independent of the UK:
Grooming gang review kept secret as Home Office claims releasing findings ‘not in public interest’
Exclusive: Freedom of Information request refused so ministers have ‘safe space’ to discuss policy
Lizzie Dearden Home Affairs Correspondent @lizziedearden
13 hours ago
The government is refusing to release official research on the characteristics of grooming gangs, claiming it is not in the “public interest”.
Survivors accused ministers of making “empty promises”, while a man who prosecuted abusers in Rochdale called for the Home Office to “show some courage and publish” its findings.
It comes after The Independent revealed that almost 19,000 suspected child sexual exploitation victims were identified by local authorities in just one year, sparking renewed calls for prevention efforts.
Sajid Javid promised the review as home secretary in July 2018, pledging that there would be “no no-go areas of inquiry”.
“I will not let cultural or political sensitivities get in the way of understanding the problem and doing something about it,” he said at the time.
“I’ve instructed my officials to explore the particular contexts and characteristics of these types of gangs.”
But the government has made no further announcements on the review following Mr Javid’s move to the Treasury last year. It has, however, said it will soon publish a national strategy that will set out a “whole system response to all forms of child sexual abuse”.
In December, The Independent was told that the work had been completed but would only be used for internal policy-making and would not be publicly released.
In response to a freedom of information (FOI) request asking for the research carried out and any reports drawn up as a result, the Home Office confirmed it held the information but would not release it.
In a letter to The Independent, officials said they had applied a “public interest test” but the information was exempt from the act because it concerned the development of government policy.
“One of the main purposes of the exemption is to protect the ‘safe space’ necessary for ministers and officials to consider policy options in private without risk of premature disclosure,” it added.
“Disclosure would risk pre-empting decisions still to be made by ministers. In addition, the information could be misleading if made public and used out of context.”


vdare--2020-02-22--"English Learners"—California Students Win $53 Million in Lawsuit over Poor Reading Scores

Friday ’ s Los Angeles Times included a front-page article titled , “ See Dick and Jane read poorly .
See them win a lawsuit ” that focused on the dysfunction of state schools that had worsened to the point that students had to sue the state to get attention .
California did pony up $ 53 million which may help somewhat , but doesn ’ t solve the core problem of excessive immigration taking attention away from American kids .
The official California Department of Education page includes the rather challenging language statistics for Fall 2018 : ● The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the total enrollment in California public schools .
● A total of 2,587,609 students ( English Learners and Fluent English Proficient ) speak a language other than English in their homes .
This number represents about 41.8 percent of the state ’ s public school enrollment .
● The majority of English learners ( 70.2 percent ) are enrolled in the elementary grades , kindergarten through grade six .
The rest ( 29.8 percent ) are enrolled in the secondary grades , seven through twelve , and in the ungraded category .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the failure of California public education , driving students to sue the state .
Citizen students stuck in diverse schools are really getting the short end of the stick in environments where diversity is more valued than excellence and achievement .
To give the Times its due , it did mention some of the diversity details which I ’ ve highlighted in the text following : California students sued because they were such poor readers .
They just won $ 53 million to help them , Los Angeles Times , February 21 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a group of students and their teachers sued the state of California for doing a poor job teaching kids how to read — 53 % of California third-graders did not meet state test standards that year , and scores have increased only incrementally since .
On Thursday they won $ 53 million so that the state ’ s lowest-performing schools have the resources to do better .
Under the settlement with the state , most of the funding will be awarded over three years to 75 public elementary schools , including charters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in California over the last two years .
The agreement comes after the novel lawsuit contended that the students ’ low literacy levels violated California ’ s constitutional mandate to provide all children with equal access to an education , said attorney Mark Rosenbaum at the pro bono law firm Public Counsel .
“ We shouldn ’ t have to be filing lawsuits to establish a right to read , ” Rosenbaum said .
The plaintiffs included current or former students and educators at La Salle Avenue Elementary School in Los Angeles ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the charter school Children of Promise Preparatory Academy in Inglewood .
La Salle and Van Buren will be among the schools that receive funding , Rosenbaum said , but not all the recipient schools have been identified .
“ We know that literacy is the foundation for all learning , and it ’ s an essential part of participating in democracy .
People who can ’ t read and write are often uninformed , are more easily manipulated and less likely to vote , ” said Pedro Noguera , a professor of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Los Angeles .
This settlement is “ just a step , and I think we shouldn ’ t exaggerate how big a step.
” A Los Angeles Times analysis of the 75 lowest-performing schools on the state ’ s English language arts test , based on California ’ s Common Core standards , illustrates the depth of the reading problem .
Seven out of 10 third-graders in these schools did not meet the standards , according to state data from 2018 and 2019 .
The schools have about double the English learners of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 90 % of students at those schools qualify for free or reduced-price lunch — a poverty indicator .
The schools with the lowest test scores also tend to enroll higher percentages of homeless students and foster students , Noguera said .
The settlement money to improve learning will exclude hundreds of elementary schools whose students are also struggling to meet reading standards .
In more than 500 of the state ’ s approximately 6,000 elementary schools , the majority of third-grade students scored Level 1 — the lowest — in English tests , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 80 % of the schools ’ population are black and Latino , higher than the state average of 60 % .
The scenario is also troubling in the fourth grade , with California students lagging behind the national averages in reading on the 2019 National Assessment of Education Progress , a standardized test taken across the country .
( Continues )

Friday’s Los Angeles Times included a front-page article titled, “See Dick and Jane read poorly. See them win a lawsuit” that focused on the dysfunction of state schools that had worsened to the point that students had to sue the state to get attention. California did pony up $53 million which may help somewhat, but doesn’t solve the core problem of excessive immigration taking attention away from American kids.
The official California Department of Education page includes the rather challenging language statistics for Fall 2018:
● The 1,195,988 English learners constitute 19.3 percent of the total enrollment in California public schools. ● A total of 2,587,609 students (English Learners and Fluent English Proficient) speak a language other than English in their homes. This number represents about 41.8 percent of the state’s public school enrollment. ● The majority of English learners (70.2 percent) are enrolled in the elementary grades, kindergarten through grade six. The rest (29.8 percent) are enrolled in the secondary grades, seven through twelve, and in the ungraded category.
This is the larger background that contributes to the failure of California public education, driving students to sue the state. Citizen students stuck in diverse schools are really getting the short end of the stick in environments where diversity is more valued than excellence and achievement.
To give the Times its due, it did mention some of the diversity details which I’ve highlighted in the text following:


vdare--2020-02-22--Kris Kobach Agrees “New Way Forward” Bill Is Monstrous

Before the Tea Party and Donald Trump , the elites of the Deep State had a pretty tight grip on the little citizens , or so they thought .
But the rebelliousness in recent years against the globalist rulers has angered them , and the response has been a rather shocking level of contempt and outright hatred toward the citizens elites oversee .
One expression is the “ New Way Forward ” bill ( HR 5383 ) which shows extreme favoritism to illegal aliens and disdain for actual Americans — the ones who obey the laws and built the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elite liberals who support the legislation , “ This is the kind of thing you do to a country you hate and clearly they do.
” On Thursday , the longtime friend of American sovereignty Kris Kobach joined Tucker to discuss the threat of the New Way Forward legislation , starting at around 1:40 in the video below : TUCKER CARLSON : Kris Kobach is a former Kansas Secretary of State .
He ’ s running for Senate in that state .
We ’ re happy to have him tonight — Kris , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So I can ’ t get past this talking point which I ’ ve heard again and again recently which is illegal aliens , undocumented immigrants , are more American than you are , Mr. and Mrs. American .
What do you make of that ?
KRIS KOBACH : It is really disturbing , Tucker , and it also echoes the New Way Forward bill , which you have laid out very clearly for viewers to see .
Because the New Way Forward bill says that aliens have a , quote , right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a right to come home .
Home .
And so if they ’ re as American as we are and they have a right to come home , this is a disturbing view of what they think it is to be an American .
They think that America is just a place on a map , and if you stand on American soil ever so briefly , suddenly you ’ re an American .
But of course that ’ s contrary to centuries of American history .
They reject assimilation , they reject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to adopt .
And they want to break that down because the parts of the American creed , things like capitalism and the rule of law , are things that the Democrats no longer accept .
So I found it really really shocking how they have adopted this mantra that illegal aliens are as American as we are .
CARLSON : Well , it sends a pretty clear message .
If I said to my children , you know , the kid down the street , the one who ’ s always breaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and gives us the finger when we drive to church , he ’ s every bit as much my child as you are .
In fact , maybe even a little more .
The message to the kids would be really clear , I hate you .
Wouldn ’ t it be ?
KOBACH : Yeah , yeah , exactly and the message sent by the New Way Forward bill , you mentioned many of the problems in it .
On top of what you mentioned , Tucker , there ’ s another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in America into a Sanctuary City .
Local police would be forbidden from helping ICE in any way , and so just imagine , thousands of Americans would lose their lives , would be injured , and if you ’ re one of those victims of someone who ’ s been brought back into the United States , you ’ ve been injured by the illegal alien , and you ’ ve been betrayed by your country — in the name of what ?
It ’ s insane .
CARLSON : Yeah , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they get elected on this ?
Is there popular support for these ideas ?
KOBACH : Thank goodness , no .
I don ’ t think so .
Certainly not among Republicans and the vast majority of Independents don ’ t embrace this idea , and I think even a lot of Democrats too are rejecting how the leadership of their party has gone so far to the left .
So much for embracing illegality in this country , and as you pointed out , embracing illegal alien criminals so much that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States after they ’ ve been deported .
I can ’ t see how that makes sense to most voters , and including Democrats .
CARLSON : It ’ s scary as hell .
Kris Kobach , thanks so much for coming on .
Good to see you .

Before the Tea Party and Donald Trump, the elites of the Deep State had a pretty tight grip on the little citizens, or so they thought. But the rebelliousness in recent years against the globalist rulers has angered them, and the response has been a rather shocking level of contempt and outright hatred toward the citizens elites oversee.
Below, Boston Tea Party members rally in 2010.
One expression is the “New Way Forward” bill (HR 5383) which shows extreme favoritism to illegal aliens and disdain for actual Americans — the ones who obey the laws and built the country.
As Tucker Carlson remarked recently of elite liberals who support the legislation, “This is the kind of thing you do to a country you hate and clearly they do.”
On Thursday, the longtime friend of American sovereignty Kris Kobach joined Tucker to discuss the threat of the New Way Forward legislation, starting at around 1:40 in the video below:
(Spare video here)
TUCKER CARLSON: Kris Kobach is a former Kansas Secretary of State. He’s running for Senate in that state. We’re happy to have him tonight — Kris, thanks so much for coming on.
So I can’t get past this talking point which I’ve heard again and again recently which is illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants, are more American than you are, Mr. and Mrs. American. What do you make of that?
KRIS KOBACH: It is really disturbing, Tucker, and it also echoes the New Way Forward bill, which you have laid out very clearly for viewers to see. Because the New Way Forward bill says that aliens have a, quote, right to come home, criminal aliens have a right to come home. Home.
And so if they’re as American as we are and they have a right to come home, this is a disturbing view of what they think it is to be an American. They think that America is just a place on a map, and if you stand on American soil ever so briefly, suddenly you’re an American.
But of course that’s contrary to centuries of American history. They reject assimilation, they reject an American creed that all immigrants come to adopt. And they want to break that down because the parts of the American creed, things like capitalism and the rule of law, are things that the Democrats no longer accept. So I found it really really shocking how they have adopted this mantra that illegal aliens are as American as we are.
CARLSON: Well, it sends a pretty clear message. If I said to my children, you know, the kid down the street, the one who’s always breaking into houses and never goes to school and gives us the finger when we drive to church, he’s every bit as much my child as you are. In fact, maybe even a little more. The message to the kids would be really clear, I hate you. Wouldn’t it be?
KOBACH: Yeah, yeah, exactly and the message sent by the New Way Forward bill, you mentioned many of the problems in it. On top of what you mentioned, Tucker, there’s another problem: it would turn every city in America into a Sanctuary City.
Local police would be forbidden from helping ICE in any way, and so just imagine, thousands of Americans would lose their lives, would be injured, and if you’re one of those victims of someone who’s been brought back into the United States, you’ve been injured by the illegal alien, and you’ve been betrayed by your country — in the name of what? It’s insane.
CARLSON: Yeah, in the name of what. Can they get elected on this? Is there popular support for these ideas?
KOBACH: Thank goodness, no. I don’t think so. Certainly not among Republicans and the vast majority of Independents don’t embrace this idea, and I think even a lot of Democrats too are rejecting how the leadership of their party has gone so far to the left. So much for embracing illegality in this country, and as you pointed out, embracing illegal alien criminals so much that they want to fly them back to the United States after they’ve been deported. I can’t see how that makes sense to most voters, and including Democrats.
CARLSON: It’s scary as hell. Kris Kobach, thanks so much for coming on. Good to see you.


vdare--2020-02-22--Racism: None Dare Call It Conspiracy Theory

How Democrats can talk about race and win A new project reveals that combining race and class can be a winning message for Democrats in November and beyond .
… Roge Karma : One of the narratives you tested was a “ racial fear ” message based on the talking points of Donald Trump .
What was this message , and how successful was it ?
Ian Haney López : Here ’ s one example of the racial fear message we tested : Our leaders must prioritize keeping us safe and ensuring that hardworking Americans have the freedom to prosper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming from terrorist countries who wish us harm or at people from places overrun with drugs and criminal gangs is just common sense .
And so is curbing illegal immigration , so our communities are no longer flooded with people who refuse to follow our laws .
We need to make sure we take care of our own people first .
We asked people in a nationally representative sample of 2,000 whether they agreed with it using a 1-to-100 dial .
Unsurprisingly , 72 percent of Republicans found this message convincing [ rated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] .
But we found that 52 percent of Democrats found this message convincing as well .
Roge Karma The proportion of Democrats who found that narrative compelling is interesting in its own right .
But what I found even more shocking was how people of color responded to the racial fear message .
Ian Haney López Yes .
Sixty percent of Latinos and 54 percent of African Americans found it convincing , which isn ’ t much lower than the 61 percent of whites who did .
Roge Karma That finding seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presuppositions about how racism operates in politics .
Why was this Trumpian narrative so compelling to everyone , including people of color ?
The overwhelming majority of the people who respond positively to Trump ’ s racial messages do not hear them as expressions or endorsements of white superiority in the way that many progressives charge .
That ’ s because Trump ’ s language is a form of racial dog whistling — using code to interject race into political conversations and trigger racist fears .
It ’ s very important to understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tradition .
Dog whistling starts in the 1960s with language that is transparently supportive of segregation masked in the language of states ’ rights .
Later it becomes a way of talking about criminals versus the innocent , about lazy welfare cheats versus hardworking people , and citizens versus illegals .
Underlying all of that rhetoric is a basic racist story that becomes widely accepted as a form of political common sense , even among many Democrats and people of color [ Dog whistles ] have become such a basic part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer operate like a “ secret handshake ” [ as they did in the 1960s ] in which Donald Trump says something racist and his supporters know he means something racist but publicly deny it .
Dog whistling today is like a used-car fraud .
Donald Trump is peddling a story that he pretends is about common sense and patriotism and taking care of deserving people .
And people don ’ t know that what they ’ re buying into is a racist story .

In Vox, Ian Haney Lopez presents the progressive conventional wisdom’s favorite Conspiracy Theory:
How Democrats can talk about race and win
A new project reveals that combining race and class can be a winning message for Democrats in November and beyond.
By Roge Karma Feb 18, 2020, 10:00am EST
… Roge Karma: One of the narratives you tested was a “racial fear” message based on the talking points of Donald Trump. What was this message, and how successful was it?
Ian Haney López: Here’s one example of the racial fear message we tested:
Our leaders must prioritize keeping us safe and ensuring that hardworking Americans have the freedom to prosper. Taking a second look at people coming from terrorist countries who wish us harm or at people from places overrun with drugs and criminal gangs is just common sense. And so is curbing illegal immigration, so our communities are no longer flooded with people who refuse to follow our laws. We need to make sure we take care of our own people first.
We asked people in a nationally representative sample of 2,000 whether they agreed with it using a 1-to-100 dial. Unsurprisingly, 72 percent of Republicans found this message convincing [rated it 51 or higher out of 100]. But we found that 52 percent of Democrats found this message convincing as well.
Roge Karma
The proportion of Democrats who found that narrative compelling is interesting in its own right. But what I found even more shocking was how people of color responded to the racial fear message.
Ian Haney López
Yes. Sixty percent of Latinos and 54 percent of African Americans found it convincing, which isn’t much lower than the 61 percent of whites who did.
Roge Karma
That finding seems to go against a lot of our presuppositions about how racism operates in politics. Why was this Trumpian narrative so compelling to everyone, including people of color?
Ian Haney López
The overwhelming majority of the people who respond positively to Trump’s racial messages do not hear them as expressions or endorsements of white superiority in the way that many progressives charge. That’s because Trump’s language is a form of racial dog whistling — using code to interject race into political conversations and trigger racist fears.
It’s very important to understand that Trump is building on a 50-year tradition. Dog whistling starts in the 1960s with language that is transparently supportive of segregation masked in the language of states’ rights. Later it becomes a way of talking about criminals versus the innocent, about lazy welfare cheats versus hardworking people, and citizens versus illegals. Underlying all of that rhetoric is a basic racist story that becomes widely accepted as a form of political common sense, even among many Democrats and people of color
[Dog whistles] have become such a basic part of the American political and cultural fabric that they no longer operate like a “secret handshake” [as they did in the 1960s] in which Donald Trump says something racist and his supporters know he means something racist but publicly deny it. Dog whistling today is like a used-car fraud. Donald Trump is peddling a story that he pretends is about common sense and patriotism and taking care of deserving people. And people don’t know that what they’re buying into is a racist story.