Reddit mentions: The best discrimination & racism books

> Rather, they see that the social safety net is actively harmful, and often, believe that federal assistance is the worst way to effect benevolence unto the poor.

I'm British and a socialist, so while I can't speak to the efficacy of your specific social safety net I can say that desiring to see all such safety nets totally removed sounds pretty heartless to me. The assumption that the market fixes everything is demonstrably untrue and leaving the unfortunate at the mercy of a handful of benevolent philanthropists sounds highly unreliable. It could also be a smokescreen for "I don't care about them - I just want to pay less tax".

> If it weren't for partisanship, we'd realize that both the liberals and the conservatives stated goals have merit, and are equally noble

Can't speak for your American equivalents but here in Britain the noble sentiments of our political parties are much less interesting that the things they've actually done. Noble intentions are meaningless. Of course we'd all like to see an end to poverty, better schooling for everyone, etc, etc, but if your way of achieving those ends turns out to be suspiciously close to "letting the rich get richer while the poor get shafted" then I'm going to call shenanigans on your noble intent.

> This book might help understand their view: http://www.amazon.com/Please-Stop-Helping-Us-Liberals/dp/1594037256

Huh. So if American businesses could pay their workers at Chinese sweat shop levels then more black people would be employed? Forgive me for failing to see the altruism at work in that line of thinking. Alternatively you could all contribute a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of your wages to pay for a better state education system that would help to enable a true meritocracy to exist.

>extremely flawed

Explain Stanford's discrepancies.

Asians make up 17.6% of USC's population. Explain that - LA is one of the highest density Asian places in the United States.

You don't think students who apply to UCLA are going to also send in an application to USC?

Asians make up 10% of Claremont McKenna, 20% of Harvey Mudd,12.9% of Pomona, 18.3% of Scripps. Explain that.

Asians make up 11% of Pepperdine's population. Explain that.

The only private institution that does not discriminate against Asians is Caltech. Caltech prides itself as a merit based, race blind school, and does not practice affirmative action.

And we see in Caltech a 42% Asian student makeup.

Need more evidence?

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1594035822/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=pragmom-20&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1594035822&adid=1EQANJJ2S3CHT99N027E&

Published by a Princeton professor.

It's incredibly misleading when people try to justify affirmative action by suggesting Asians only make up 5% of the population but are 20% representation in school. Well, they also make up something like 30-40% of the applicant pool.

>Additionally, the California schools are all public institutions, while most of the compared schools are private, which adds a whole new dimension of difference.

Right. The UCs are accountable to the public so they can't get away with bullshit so easily. That's why we see a REASONABLE number of Asians in the UCs (not too many; it's a proportionally fair amount), percentages very closely mirroring the applicant pool with differences of <5%, as obeying the laws of probability.

And everything I mention still ignores that on average Asian performance should be expected to be higher than other races given the average Asian household income is the greatest of all races in the United States ($14,000 per year higher than White Americans according to the US Census, which is a significant number - enough to buy you a world class tutor and plenty of college prep programs). Academic success and wealth are closely correlated (do I need to prove this? I'll let you google academics and wealth correlation and find out for yourself if you don't believe this) This is not even going into the speculative stuff, like the type of discipline and cultural values Eastern Asians hold in education.

The ONLY thing you can truly do is stop making being a victim 'cool'. Hear me out:

White privilege exists in the same way sexism does: A very small microcosm of the total world. But, it is used as an excuse constantly.


When you create programs to help one type of person over another it just reaffirms this position and perception bends that way. Instead of people chanting that African American communities are more likely to be poor, and have higher unemployment because of white privilege, we need to instill the concept that if you work hard, and have motivation, that regardless of the street you live on, or if your parents are still together you CAN succeed! But freebies and assistance reaffirm that they NEED the help and can't help themselves.

this book "Please stop helping us" (written by a black man) is really an interesting read on the subject.

> Feminism, at least on here, seems to completely ignore those factors and jump straight for 'social construct' with no evidence, no reasoning, and no discussion.

This is a false assertion on your part. There is a lot of very powerful evidence that gender is in fact the product of social forces and has very little to do with biology. This evidence emerges from decades of intensive research by sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists and even biologists - who will often point out that while humans are a sexually dimorphic species, the extent of that dimorphism is fairly small.

One of the reasons you might not be seeing this evidence in discussions of gender online is because, frankly, having to stop a discussion to provide links to this exhaustive mountain of evidence every time someone with little knowledge of the material demands to see it is frustrating and tiresome. There are hundreds - thousands - of introductory textbooks from sociology, anthropology, gender studies, and psychology that talk about the social construction of gender; if you want to see the evidence, then look there. Most feminists accept the academic consensus that gender is primarily the product of culture, and because that consensus is grounded in the best possible empirical research, you should accept it too.

Or don't. I'm not your boss. But if you don't accept it, then you should accept that in rejecting the social construction of gender, you're also rejecting the preponderance of evidence, which might not be the best place to plant your flag.

>I think saying it's 100% socially constructed is probably wrong too...

Good thing that's not what most people are saying. Bodies exist. They are the things onto which we inscribe our cultural values. But they are also incredibly malleable and so they are shaped and reshaped by the dictates of culture.

Why do children raised in poverty have poorer health outcomes than those raised in middle class or rich environments? Because poverty correlates with poorer diets, fewer calories consumed per day, and a lack of regular access to gyms or after-school fitness programs. Poor bodies are shaped in different ways than rich bodies because of culture. I mean, hell, the foundation of epidemiology is the recognition that cultural forces have enormous impact on bodies.

Why are men bigger and stronger than women? Biology? Perhaps, but we also cannot overlook the fact that in our society - and in many others - men are expected to consume an average of 300-400 additional calories per day than women. Is this because men are "naturally" bigger and stronger than women, or are men bigger and stronger than women because they've historically had access to higher calorie diets (which we know result in bigger, stronger people)? Do men have more muscle mass because testosterone, or do they have more muscle mass because they are incentivized to be more muscled than women - who are treated worse if their own muscle mass begins to impact their perceived femininity? Men are supposed to be big and strong; women are supposed to be petite and "trim" or "fit but not overly muscled". Men know this and women know this, and our recognition of these normative standards will pressure us to sculpt our bodies in different ways.

What I'm saying is that the cliches of "men are strong because biology, men like blue because culture" is reductionist to the point of being useless. The reality is far, far more complicated than this, but in the end, in light of decades of research into the question of nature v. nurture, the broad consensus is "a little bit of biology, and a whole boatload of culture".

I'm not a conservative, but "cutting holes in the social safety net" isn't the goal of the conservatives. Rather, they see that the social safety net is actively harmful, and often, believe that federal assistance is the worst way to effect benevolence unto the poor.

If it weren't for partisanship, we'd realize that both the liberals and the conservatives stated goals have merit, and are equally noble. Similarly, in practice, both are equally ignoble, and equally meritless.

That said, that conservatives have a different way of helping the poor than the one you prefer doesn't make them heartless.

This book might help understand their view:
http://www.amazon.com/Please-Stop-Helping-Us-Liberals/dp/1594037256

You're right to not trust Ferguson. He's the media face of popular perceptions of the British Empire. Big publishers like Routledge have their own guides to the British Empire/the fall of the British Empire that are good. There's tons of historians who have been writing critically about Empire, race, and Britain since the 1980s. Have a look for things written by Peter Fryer, Colin Holmes, Shompa Lahiri, Rozina Visram, Mary Chamberlain, Panikos Panayi, Bill Schwarz, Avtah Brah, Barbara Bush, Diane Frost, Kathleen Paul, Wendy Webster. David Olusoga's writes great public history books on the topic that are backed up by solid research and the views of people mentioned above; his documentaries on Forgotten Black British History and Britain's Forgotten Slave Owners are also fantastic and available on iplayer and youtube. I've recently picked this up and it's about the similar points that I discuss in my comment above https://www.amazon.co.uk/Education-Empire-Brexit-Sally-Tomlinson/dp/1447345843

Please Stop Helping Us is a great book on this subject, and a pretty easy and entertaining read.

This is not an article; it is an excerpt from a book by Heather Mac Donald out today called The Division Delusion. There are a number of reviews of her book by other authors, scholars, and professors on that amazon page. Her work seems to focus on things that make protesters of her work call her mean things with little substance, like racist.

So with that knowledge out of the way: no, facts are not racist.

>If you do a little bit of research, you'll find that black and Hispanic families often can't afford to send their children to good schools,

It varies state to state, but in California you go to the school based on your home address, that is how you are assigned by the school system in your city. This can vary, and sometimes you get lucky and there is a charter school nearby, but at the end of the day most parents send their kid to public or charter schools, which they do not pay for. You may pay for books, and lunch, and some other classroom things required, but no parents largely aren't paying to send their children to school. Everyone can afford public school, and the largest ethnicity taking advantage of this system in California is, GASP IT'S THE FUCKING LATINOS!

>and many teachers give those children less attention.

That is just an absolute lie. Teachers in America are, largely, liberal and actively participate and teach social justice. I have done work and a number of schools in LA and I can tell you right now Latino and Black students are given every opportunity to succeed. The simple fact of the matter in regards to Black students is that they come from largely single parent homes where they often do not have a male role model and so they act out far more often then their peers of any other race. Statewide, Black students are over-represented in suspensions. As said, Black children are acting out because, in America, Black children are largely (66%) growing up in single parent homes. Hey, look, Hispanics are at 42%! How weird! I wonder if this effects them mentally and limits their success in school?! HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

>Oh, but the article doesn't mention that at all. It only says that black and Hispanic people score lower, which seems to imply that they're just dumb.

This excerpt from the book does not mention this because it isn't relevant to this section of the book. Who gives a fuck why these ethnicities are failing to reach the same levels of the other ethnicities when the point of the book is to show that there is clear discrimination against Asians and Whites at the college level. Why some students are failing and others should not be a factor in their admission, only their merit should matter. Did Martin Luther King really die so that Black kids with lower grades could be given a pat on the head and a "there was an attempt" sticker, let into these bastions of higher education, and then fail to graduate because they can't keep up?

You know what, here's a fucking controversial statement: if a Black, Hispanic, White, Asian, or whatever the fuck race student doesn't meet the standard a college sets out, they should not be accepted. Case closed. If Whites and Asians become over-represented, we'd safety be able to say they met the standard the college laid out. We could then try and figure out why Blacks and Hispanics are having so much trouble in school and try to find ways to fix it.

>The article makes the vague claim of "racial disparities", without explaining what those are. Again, the article seems to be pointing to race, rather than education, being the reason for low test scores.

This excerpt from the book refers to his:

>In 2003, for example, John Moores Sr., who was the one remaining regent committed to color-blind meritocracy, disclosed that Berkeley had admitted 374 applicants in 2002 with SATs under 1000 — almost all of them “students of color” — while rejecting 3,218 applicants with scores above 1400. UCLA had similar admissions disparities. In a Forbes column, Moores, who had fought tooth and nail to get the data, accused Berkeley of continuing to discriminate against Asians and of admitting students who were unprepared for Berkeley’s rigors.

Which is pretty much what I already explained: the bar was lowered for "students of color", meaning non-White and non-Asian. It was lowered because people wanted to feel good about themselves when they jack off to those Black student admission rates. Such virtue, wow. Much justice.

To respond directly to your comment: yes it's about race. Hispanics and Blacks don't do well in school. It can be linked back to gangs, single parent households, and more. Clearly it is about race because clearly these races have problems in their communities that no one seems to want to fix and instead we'll just lower the bar for them and dilute universities down till they're meaningless.

>The two bolded groups really stand out to me. There's really no reason to be opposed to civil rights groups, unless you're opposed to civil rights.

First of all: this excerpt of the book is stating a fact regarding the groups that came together to oppose the professor that was against the discrimination taking place at his university. It is NOT an attack on these groups, but the author does object to their decision to back up these racist actions by the universities. Second of all: stares off into the distance while distant shouting is heard sorry was I writing something I just had a brain aneurysm. Yes you are completely right I can't think of any time anyone has used the guise of civil rights to actively harm anyone else. Civil rights groups stand up for civil rights. Couldn't agree mo- stares off into distance while explosions go off in distance lets just... move on...

>In conclusion: this article abuses vague language and subtle word choices to make the reader subconsciously accept racist ideas, while still being able to deflect criticism by claiming it's about how collages should be meritocracies. To people who can decode the language of the article, the true message becomes distressingly clear: "Brown people are stupid, white people are smart. Brown people shouldn't be given the chance to receive higher education, because they're not worthy". This article was written purely to push a white supremacist viewpoint onto impressionable people.

This claim is disproven very early on in this except of this book:

>Only in 1998 did the university’s admissions processes operate without either explicit racial preferences or stealthy surrogates for race. The results were telling: At Berkeley, the median SAT gap shrunk nearly in half, to 120 points; black and Hispanic admits logged an impressive 1280 on their combined SATs. The six-year graduation rates of this class would increase 6.5 percent for blacks and 4.9 percent for Hispanics, compared with the class admitted two years earlier.

This book is not racist; it is just the truth you do not want to hear.

American Blacks and Hispanics have as much freedom and choice as every other American. They use that freedom, largely, to make bad life decisions. These bad life decisions, largely, effect their children negatively. These children, largely, act out in class and gain less from the education system then their peers. In California, we have an increasing Hispanic population that continues to have these problems, and a shrinking White population that was having very few problems with the system. Public schools have a bad reputation, but you can't put them blame only on teachers or the system when there is clearly a third factor in play. Something interesting you'll note about both those links: Black people aren't doing so hot. It's almost as if the social programs and groups that had historically benefited them are shifting to Hispanic people, who are an ever growing Democrat voting block. But that's OK because we'll let them into universities when they don't earn it. That'll fix it.

They've been doing this since 1999 and these problems aren't going away. Affirmative action is not only racist, it's pointless.

Not a real textbook but a good read ain't no makin' it

I have used this one before berko

inequality reader

very big and probably more for a grad course but nonetheless a good resource grusky

Here are all the local Amazon links I could find:


amazon.co.uk

amazon.ca

amazon.com.au

amazon.in

amazon.com.mx

amazon.de

amazon.it

amazon.es

amazon.com.br

amazon.nl

amazon.co.jp

amazon.fr

Beep bloop. I'm a bot to convert Amazon ebook links to local Amazon sites.
I currently look here: amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.ca, amazon.com.au, amazon.in, amazon.com.mx, amazon.de, amazon.it, amazon.es, amazon.com.br, amazon.nl, amazon.co.jp, amazon.fr, if you would like your local version of Amazon adding please contact my creator.

Yeah, that one's definitely on my "to read" pile.

RIP Charb

EDIT: btw, you linked to the original book on amazon.fr, but its worth pointing out to anyone reading this that an English translation (titled simply "Open Letter") has been published as well. Amazon.com link, Amazon.co.uk link

EDIT AGAIN: oh, and /u/pink_ego_box, I'm guessing you're not a native English speaker, so just so you know, the translation of "islamophobie" is "Islamophobia", not "islamophoby" ;).

>Dude, when I worked at Barnes and Noble, a ton of old white dudes (always Republican/tea party types) would practically burst at the rim when coming up to the counter to buy Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter books to talk about any and all racial issues.

Omg, when I worked there, this one guy asked if we had this book in stock, which we didn't. I kept my facial expressions as flat as possible to dissuade him from trying to engage, because he was trying.

93% of blacks vote Democrat. 7% of a small minority of the total US population vote either Republican or 3rd party, mostly Republican. Blacks are well represented in the GOP all things considered.

Here are a few others.

Michael Steele, the first black leader of the RNC.

Jason Reilly, Wall Street Journal editorial board member and author of Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed

Allen West was a one term Congressman from Florida and the first black Republican Congressman from FL since Reconstruction. This man is hugely popular with the supposedly racist "tea party" wing of the party. For the record, I am not a tea partier.

I haven't read this book but it has been getting praise, "White Girl Bleed A Lot". I've also been seeing this too but I haven't read it either, "Please Stop Helping Us".

Can anyone here who has read these books give a quick review for these books?

"The Federal Housing Administration, or FHA, requires a credit score of at least 500 to buy a home with an FHA loan. A minimum of 580 is needed to make the minimum down payment of 3.5%. However, many lenders require a score of 620 to 640 to qualify"

So that means they still need established credit AND a down payment. In other words credit and at least a little wealth. As for adult schools, there are highly educated people working shitty low paying jobs because that's whats out there. This seems a lot like you want it to be a certain way, the by the boot straps, get educated, buy a house, etc. mantra, that's just not how it actually works. It is possible to be educated and hard working and to be stuck in poverty.

You're reducing a huge and complex issue into the Republican "Pull yourself up by your boot straps", they are just lazy explanation. Thing is, when you look at data and have also lived this shit first hand, you realize it is not so simple. You realize that there are plenty of educated hard working people that will never escape poverty, not because they don't try but because of how our society is structured and the various intersections of identities and social constructs. When exactly does a single parent raising 2 kids have time between their children's needs and their 2 jobs to go to school? These are the sorts of things people don't think about. What the reality is, not what they want it to be.

Americans want to believe that hard work will get you ahead in life, but we live in a oligarchy and it's about networking more so than skill sets and hard work. Hell corporate structure itself limits opportunity for promotion with its top down approach. 80 employees and 1 management spot, not a lot of opportunity. There's a multitude of influences playing out, and those influences affect one's ability to climb out of poverty. Also, those Adult School have been traditionally made for White people, most education opportunity throughout US History has been made to specifically assist Whites, not poor PoC.

The Meritocracy Myth - https://www.amazon.com/Meritocracy-Myth-Stephen-J-McNamee/dp/1442219823/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=0X1W94PHVX1MTDTXX4SF

Oligarchy Study - https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B

Capital in the 21st Century - https://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/1491591617

> consumers of pop culture don't care about black people. They want to be entertained by the idea of black people.

I was just reading a book and a part of it was talking about that exact premise in relation to Hip Hop. He was saying that of the current iteration of mainstream Hip Hop (n*ggas, cash, booty, thuglife) - 80% of it is purchased by young white people. The premise of the author's argument is just that - this Hip Hop fed to us on the radio waves is made for the entertainment of white people who are enthusiastic at the idea that that's what Black culture actually is.

Ok. There's various degrees too. You got the weebo nerd/blerd or whatevs who's still awkward and weird. Then you have the type that doesn't mind being "white washed" or not having to appeal to black stereotypes, doesn't mind having republican/conservative values (think Thomas Howell) or guys like Jason Riley or Tommy Sotomayor.

He has an awesome book too

Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed

Yeah, me too.

I just got the sample for Kindle.
Here's a link if you're interested:
https://www.amazon.com/Shortchanged-Height-Discrimination-Strategies-Social/dp/1512601438

Another book mentioned in this episode: 'Please Stop Helping Us' by Jason L. Riley http://www.amazon.com/Please-Stop-Helping-Us-Liberals/dp/1594037256

This is a very honest story on why this is.

http://www.amazon.com/Please-Stop-Helping-Us-Liberals/dp/1594037256/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Because you not coming to Niece's birthday OF COURSE HAS TO BE AAAAALL ABOUT HERRR. There can be nooo other reason why you wouldn't come! You don't have a life, and neither does DH! You exist at Hellmark's behest, a-fucking-pparently.

You should send her this book back. C'mon, you know it'd be funny.

I love the guy praising Riley's book to defend the "It's actually the government damaging the black community". Dismissing the system's endemic problems that disproportionately target black people — largely lead by motherfuckers saying the same thing as the OP — is more lazy libertarian reasoning; at any point, any societal problem can be solved by this mythical hands-off approach that just happens to favor maintaining the status quo.

All they need is the uniform and they're good to go. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Controversy-Black-Nazis-Powerwolf-Publications/dp/1483954072

Birthday gift?

http://www.amazon.com/Systemic-Racism-A-Theory-Oppression-ebook/dp/B00FDRB1Q2

Co-authored by David Horowitz. Here's another of his lol:
https://www.amazon.com/Progressive-Racism-David-Horowitz/dp/1594038597

This one looks promising.

Kauai has had issues with police corruption in the past as well

http://www.amazon.com/KPD-Blue-Political-Corruption-Department/dp/1439203466

I book I like is called "what white people who teach on the hood need to know" not exactly what your looking for but in the same lane.

https://www.amazon.com/White-Folks-Teach-Hood-Rest-ebook/dp/B00Z3E2LVO/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?keywords=what+white+folks+who+teach+in+the+hood&qid=1564178716&s=gateway&sr=8-3

Charb, the late director of Charlie Hebdo killed in the terrorist attack back in January, published the following:

Open Letter: On Blasphemy, Islamophobia, and the True Enemies of Free Expression

It's a truly remarkable book, and very short. I recommend it warmly.

PS to the mods: this isn't a referral link afaik

Institutes of learning will never admit their hate.

https://www.amazon.com/Campus-White-Men-Transformation-Indoctrination/dp/1944229620

Here is a book for you

>Shit dude...do your homework.

You first.

I looked it up - I'm slow on mobile - and his last name is Emdin. Here's the book http://www.amazon.com/White-Folks-Teach-Hood-Rest-ebook/dp/B00Z3E2LVO/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1455904288&sr=1-1&keywords=christopher+emdin I will give it a shot!

this is my personal best. (stole the pic, of course)

Also everyone should read this: https://www.amazon.com/Open-Letter-Blasphemy-Islamophobia-Expression/dp/0316311332

Have you read Jason Riley's new book yet?

Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed

Government is not magic, government is people who use force to offer substandard services and economically decimate whole populations.

There is nothing that government can offer that can't be more cheaply and efficiently offered on the free market. All without the unaccountable tax inertia for wars, police thuggery, torture, spying, corporate monopolies, etc..

Articles:

The Black Family: 40 Years of Lies
by Kay Hymowitz, City Journal, The Manhattan Institute

Liberalism Versus Blacks by Thomas Sowell, Creators Syndicated.

Books:

The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy by Thomas Sowell.


Race & Economics: How Much Can Be Blamed on Discrimination? by Walter Williams.

Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed by Jason Riley.

A book by one of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonist killed was published posthumously. I haven't read this, as it get out this week, but Sam said he got a copy. I think it touch the same subject:

http://www.amazon.ca/Open-Letter-Blasphemy-Islamophobia-Expression/dp/0316311332

And that is the erroneous argument that I am referring to. Have you ever listened to a black republican? Have you ever listened to a conservative explain their position? I'm not talking about who the liberal leaders, the so-called "main stream" media, and the typical black community want to point to. In all honesty, they are pointing you to the 1 to 2% fringe or twisting what people say. And don't get me started on when empirical facts are used and the person using it gets called racist.

Do yourself a favor. Look up Alfonzo Rachel. Look up the book "Please Stop Helping Us" and give it a read. With your argument, you honestly need your eyes opened to who you're labeling racist. If you actually listen to just the two men I just pointed you to have to say, it will start you on a journey that will tear down this facade that you have had built around you.

Ill be honest, none of the whole "gaming journalism" thing is why Im a KiA supporter. Ive always been a gamer, but Ive never followed any sort of gaming media or journalism aside from Thoorin's videos in League of Legends.

I dont buy triple-A titles outside of Blizzard games. I dont own a PS3, PS4, XBox 360, or Xbox One. I have a Wii because of Xenoblade (and I think I bought one of the Zeldas), Ill get a Wii U for the next Xeno game. None of the journalist shit affects me much because I already dont use their sites.

Its the censorship, the SJW post-modernist bullshit, the lying, the professional victims, the way it spills over into Wikipedia lacking neutrality. Its the way that I, just some random guy who goes to work, goes running, and plays video games, am blamed as a misogynist shitlord just for being a white cis male who is willing to discuss both sides of an issue. Its the way that white upper class people dictate to women and minorities about how they are doing all this FOR THEM, unless those women and minorities disagree in which case they are internalized misogynists (Please Stop helping Us). Its the way that being an egalitarian makes me a misogynist in their eyes, and a racist, and probably other things as well.

THATS the shit that pushes me to this "side".

Thomas Sowell and others debunk the claims that women and blacks earn less in the marketplace due to discrimination. When they are compared on equal footing, it is found they are not discriminated against, and in some cases even earn slightly more. For example, unmarried women without children tend to earn a bit more than their male counterparts. What is affecting the average woman? Having children, obviously. If you thought that women, on average, should be earning equal wages, you were clearly not using your brain effectively, as bearing children is such an obvious and enormous cost.

There is a cost to conducting irrational practices in the marketplace (racism, sexism in hiring and in customer discrimination are the examples we are concerned with in this discussion). For example, bus companies wanted to give equal treatment to Blacks during the era of segregation in the U.S., as Black Americans were their biggest customers. They were forced to conduct costly (in opportunity), racist practices in order to comply with government segregation laws. Most people simply are not willing to pay the cost if they are racist, but I also think that most people aren't racist.

If we look at Asian Americans and Irish Americans who's ancestors also experienced severe discrimination, as well as Irish in the UK who's ancestors experienced slavery, we find they don't have the same problems Black Americans face. Blacks immigrants do better on average than their American counterparts. It is clear it is not discrimination at the employer which is the problem. It is a culture of victimization that has been built around them by liberals attempting to "help" them through horrendous government policies--most notably education that amounts to nothing and subsidies of bad behavior--which has lead to alarming rates of single parenthood (usually mothers) which has destroyed the future of these young children. It really needs to stop.

This got a bit long, but I'm a bit passionate about the issue and it frustrates me that the very people who lament a problem are enabling it because they think they are being "good" and "nice" even though it causes more problems than it could fix.

Sorry, that's simply wrong. You should try to read the FBI's uniform crime statistics. You have no idea just how wrong you are. Just take a look, you'll find out that you have been made a fool all this time and have been eating that propaganda up hook, line, and sinker. All you have to do is look at the stats for things you really can't honestly believe can contain any real discrimination like violent assaults, murders, rape, robbery, burglary, etc. It's not like cops are going to say "oh, he's one of those white males we like to treat better. Carry on with your raping and robbing, white male. We don't see any problems here."

Don't worry. I don't judge you. Just have an open mind and be willing to accept reality. As someone who used to be on the center left and was part of both the '08 Clinton and Obama campaigns, I can tell you shit is really not what you've been led to believe even if it is done with good intent. But you know what is said about good intent, right? It paves the bleeding heart soaked path to hell.

You have to also try to remove that chip on your shoulder you were given to immediately knee-jerk to an assumption that reality will be used to justify racism. It's really the left that assumes racism that is making these topics racist and about race and perpetuating the racial divide that does not need to exist if we just solve the problems. It is actually quite thoroughly paternalistically racist to, e.g., say that we need different usually lower standards for blacks than other "races". Why don't blacks deserve to be measured by the same standards that are then not subject to diminishing their achievement? Why do we need to have lower standards for blacks that then leads to lower outcomes that then only contributes to negative and poor perceptions of blacks? It's the deepest kind of racism that really even still exists and liberals don't even know how to realize it, let alone comprehend it.

My perspective is that people on the left are doing exponentially more harm acting and lying to themselves and the world by ignoring, covering up, and just plain lying about reality. You simply cannot fix or change something you aren't even willing to be honest or truthful about acknowledging. It's like I'm dealing with a world or hoarders. Have you ever seen that show? Where the hoarder is like "What, I'm collecting take out food containers with samples of their fine cuisine in its natural setting and really really really like a lot of cats. This is perfectly fine!" and you are just watching it like. O__O

As long as the left wants to coddle, make excuses, and enable nothing will ever get solved just the way it has not been solved over decades now. But I guess when you just want a subset of dependent blacks you really don't have an interest in providing them the dignity of equal standards and expectations. Because just as the benevolent racists of yesteryear, blacks need to be helped, right? It causes so much damage and across generations.

Many problems in our country that liberals lament could have been solved if self-righteous, selfish liberals would simply stop trying to help all just so they can feel good about themselves. The black community has every right to be held to the same standards and expectations that you are held to, those include not ignoring or rationalizing away the reality that the black community has a crime problem that can only be solved if responsibility is accepted ... and not just blame some bullshit about cops arresting more blacks ... PRECISELY because the black community has a crime and violence problem you simply want to ignore and sweep under the rug.