Zone1 The Truth About Anti-White Discrimination

[IM2]

I think we've had enough baseless opinions.

The Truth About Anti-White Discrimination​

Many white Americans feel that discrimination against whites is on the rise. Experiments suggests otherwise
By Keith Payne on July 18, 2019

A friend complained to me recently that his son wasn’t getting into Ivy League colleges because it’s so hard for a middle-class white kid to be admitted, even with straight A’s. I asked if the advantages of being a middle-class white kid might be part of the reason his son had become a straight-A student in the first place. It got awkward.

As our politics have fractured increasingly around race, there seems to be more and more confusion about who’s discriminating against whom. For example, a national survey reported that both blacks and whites believed that discrimination against blacks had declined over the past few decades, but whites believed that discrimination against whites was now more common than discrimination against blacks.

The reason, say the study’s authors Michael Norton and Sam Sommers, is that whites see discrimination as a zero-sum game. The more they thought discrimination against blacks was decreasing, the more they felt discrimination against whites was increasing. That’s consistent with other studies showing that if you remind whites that the American population is becoming more diverse and that whites will soon be less that half of the population, their concern about anti-white discrimination increases. Whites tend to view increasing diversity as anti-white bias.

These kinds of data capture an important snapshot of public opinion, but that is the problem—surveys treat the question as a matter of opinion, like which basketball team you like most. But the question of whether discrimination disadvantages whites or blacks is not really a matter of opinion. It is a factual question that can be answered by science. In fact, it has been.

News stories are full of statistical evidence for disparities between black and whites, such as the fact that the average black family earns about half as much as the average white family, or that the unemployment rate for blacks is twice that for whites, or that the wealth of the average white family is ten times the wealth of the average black family. But this kind of evidence is like a political Rorschach test that looks very different to liberals and conservatives. What looks to liberals like evidence of discrimination looks to conservatives like evidence of racial disparities in hard work and responsible behavior.

This dynamic was captured in a New York Times readers forum about a study showing large racial disparities in economic mobility, especially for black boys. A reader named Michael wrote, “Why is racism the only explanation for this phenomenon? Perhaps something happens to black boys while they are growing up that makes them less capable of succeeding in the U.S. economy… So, why do the authors take the easy way out and blame amorphous racism?” Professor Ibram Kendi responded, “Actually, the easy way out is to say there must be something wrong with these black boys. It is the easy way out that Americans have historically taken in trying to explain racial disparities in our society…Racist ideas of black inferiority is the easy way out.”

The Truth about Anti-White Discrimination

Many white Americans feel that discrimination against whites is on the rise. Experiments suggests otherwise

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[Couchpotato]

I think we've had enough baseless opinions.

The Truth About Anti-White Discrimination​

Many white Americans feel that discrimination against whites is on the rise. Experiments suggests otherwise
By Keith Payne on July 18, 2019

A friend complained to me recently that his son wasn’t getting into Ivy League colleges because it’s so hard for a middle-class white kid to be admitted, even with straight A’s. I asked if the advantages of being a middle-class white kid might be part of the reason his son had become a straight-A student in the first place. It got awkward.

As our politics have fractured increasingly around race, there seems to be more and more confusion about who’s discriminating against whom. For example, a national survey reported that both blacks and whites believed that discrimination against blacks had declined over the past few decades, but whites believed that discrimination against whites was now more common than discrimination against blacks.

The reason, say the study’s authors Michael Norton and Sam Sommers, is that whites see discrimination as a zero-sum game. The more they thought discrimination against blacks was decreasing, the more they felt discrimination against whites was increasing. That’s consistent with other studies showing that if you remind whites that the American population is becoming more diverse and that whites will soon be less that half of the population, their concern about anti-white discrimination increases. Whites tend to view increasing diversity as anti-white bias.

These kinds of data capture an important snapshot of public opinion, but that is the problem—surveys treat the question as a matter of opinion, like which basketball team you like most. But the question of whether discrimination disadvantages whites or blacks is not really a matter of opinion. It is a factual question that can be answered by science. In fact, it has been.

News stories are full of statistical evidence for disparities between black and whites, such as the fact that the average black family earns about half as much as the average white family, or that the unemployment rate for blacks is twice that for whites, or that the wealth of the average white family is ten times the wealth of the average black family. But this kind of evidence is like a political Rorschach test that looks very different to liberals and conservatives. What looks to liberals like evidence of discrimination looks to conservatives like evidence of racial disparities in hard work and responsible behavior.

This dynamic was captured in a New York Times readers forum about a study showing large racial disparities in economic mobility, especially for black boys. A reader named Michael wrote, “Why is racism the only explanation for this phenomenon? Perhaps something happens to black boys while they are growing up that makes them less capable of succeeding in the U.S. economy… So, why do the authors take the easy way out and blame amorphous racism?” Professor Ibram Kendi responded, “Actually, the easy way out is to say there must be something wrong with these black boys. It is the easy way out that Americans have historically taken in trying to explain racial disparities in our society…Racist ideas of black inferiority is the easy way out.”

The Truth about Anti-White Discrimination

Many white Americans feel that discrimination against whites is on the rise. Experiments suggests otherwise

www.scientificamerican.com

The only problem is Ivy League schools do in fact discriminate against white applicants for admission, though not nearly as much as they do against Asian applicants.

Justice Dept. Accuses Yale of Discrimination in Application Process (Published 2020)

The Trump administration said the university discriminated against Asian-American and white applicants. Yale defended its practices and vowed to maintain them.

www.nytimes.com

They openly admit it

 

[IM2]

The only problem is Ivy League schools do in fact discriminate against white applicants for admission, though not nearly as much as they do against Asian applicants.

Justice Dept. Accuses Yale of Discrimination in Application Process (Published 2020)

The Trump administration said the university discriminated against Asian-American and white applicants. Yale defended its practices and vowed to maintain them.

www.nytimes.com

They openly admit it

The only problem with your comment is that it's wrong.

 

[MarathonMike]

The only problem is Ivy League schools do in fact discriminate against white applicants for admission, though not nearly as much as they do against Asian applicants.

Justice Dept. Accuses Yale of Discrimination in Application Process (Published 2020)

The Trump administration said the university discriminated against Asian-American and white applicants. Yale defended its practices and vowed to maintain them.

www.nytimes.com

They openly admit it

It's not just the Ivy League schools most of the major Universities are under DEI pressure to admit a higher percentage of Black and/or Hispanics. Asians are not part of that equation.
That is not a "baseless opinion" it is an indisputable fact.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I think we've had enough baseless opinions.

That's not 14 words.

The Truth About Anti-White Discrimination​

Many white Americans feel that discrimination against whites is on the rise. Experiments suggests otherwise
By Keith Payne on July 18, 2019

A friend complained to me recently that his son wasn’t getting into Ivy League colleges because it’s so hard for a middle-class white kid to be admitted, even with straight A’s. I asked if the advantages of being a middle-class white kid might be part of the reason his son had become a straight-A student in the first place. It got awkward.

As our politics have fractured increasingly around race, there seems to be more and more confusion about who’s discriminating against whom. For example, a national survey reported that both blacks and whites believed that discrimination against blacks had declined over the past few decades, but whites believed that discrimination against whites was now more common than discrimination against blacks.

The reason, say the study’s authors Michael Norton and Sam Sommers, is that whites see discrimination as a zero-sum game. The more they thought discrimination against blacks was decreasing, the more they felt discrimination against whites was increasing. That’s consistent with other studies showing that if you remind whites that the American population is becoming more diverse and that whites will soon be less that half of the population, their concern about anti-white discrimination increases. Whites tend to view increasing diversity as anti-white bias.

These kinds of data capture an important snapshot of public opinion, but that is the problem—surveys treat the question as a matter of opinion, like which basketball team you like most. But the question of whether discrimination disadvantages whites or blacks is not really a matter of opinion. It is a factual question that can be answered by science. In fact, it has been.

News stories are full of statistical evidence for disparities between black and whites, such as the fact that the average black family earns about half as much as the average white family, or that the unemployment rate for blacks is twice that for whites, or that the wealth of the average white family is ten times the wealth of the average black family. But this kind of evidence is like a political Rorschach test that looks very different to liberals and conservatives. What looks to liberals like evidence of discrimination looks to conservatives like evidence of racial disparities in hard work and responsible behavior.

This dynamic was captured in a New York Times readers forum about a study showing large racial disparities in economic mobility, especially for black boys. A reader named Michael wrote, “Why is racism the only explanation for this phenomenon? Perhaps something happens to black boys while they are growing up that makes them less capable of succeeding in the U.S. economy… So, why do the authors take the easy way out and blame amorphous racism?” Professor Ibram Kendi responded, “Actually, the easy way out is to say there must be something wrong with these black boys. It is the easy way out that Americans have historically taken in trying to explain racial disparities in our society…Racist ideas of black inferiority is the easy way out.”

The Truth about Anti-White Discrimination

Many white Americans feel that discrimination against whites is on the rise. Experiments suggests otherwise

www.scientificamerican.com

This is all copypasta.

Just pointing that out.

Proceed....

 

[Lisa558]

It's not just the Ivy League schools most of the major Universities are under DEI pressure to admit a higher percentage of Black and/or Hispanics. Asians are not part of that equation.
That is not a "baseless opinion" it is an indisputable fact.

Same with grad schools.

 

[The Irish Ram]

I think we've had enough baseless opinions.

And yet...

 

[flacaltenn]

A friend complained to me recently that his son wasn’t getting into Ivy League colleges because it’s so hard for a middle-class white kid to be admitted, even with straight A’s. I asked if the advantages of being a middle-class white kid might be part of the reason his son had become a straight-A student in the first place. It got awkward.

This is where I stopped reading. Getting straight A's isn't a middle class White thing. It a family structure and values thing. AND a PERSONAL COMMITMENT from the STUDENT.

It's NOT "a privilege" that Blacks DO NOT have. It's also not a GOAL high on the priorities of folks living in neighborhoods where SURVIVAL in the streets and keeping your kids out of gangs -- just sort of -- reduces the emphasis on "doing white things" like VALUING EDUCATION.

Now you can argue WHY these people have to SURVIVE first and worry about CAREERS second -- but it aint a privilege to live in neighborhoods where "staying alive" and keeping your kids UNARMED and off the streets is NOT your biggest family issue. It's a CHOICE.

 

[White 6]

That's not 14 words.



This is all copypasta.

Just pointing that out.

Proceed....

Hey, Nat. Keith Payne is a heck of a writer. Too bad he is not on the board.

 

[protectionist]

What would it matter if discrimination against whites is on the rise or not, when it has been sky high for 58 years, and still is every bit as much as during all those 58 years.

The key thing is that it be stopped, and have reparations paid to all the victims, to compensate for all the losses$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Hey, Nat. Keith Payne is a heck of a writer. Too bad he is not on the board.

Yeah, I know who he is. I've seen his TED Talks pitching the psychology of ''income inequality''

 

[White 6]

Yeah, I know who he is. I've seen his TED Talks pitching the psychology of ''income inequality''

Hmmm. Have not seen his Ted Talks, but that was a compelling article the OP dug up. I'm impressed by well written, researched articles backed up by numbers and studies. I am not one of the white discrimination fear guys. I guess I just never felt threatened by increasing diversity, as it never affected me personally, and at my age, not vying for a position, probably won't.

 

[Failzero]

Twilight of White Privilege

 

[Natural Citizen]

Hmmm. Have not seen his Ted Talks, but that was a compelling article the OP dug up. I'm impressed by well written, researched articles backed up by numbers and studies. I am not one of the white discrimination fear guys. I guess I just never felt threatened by increasing diversity, as it never affected me personally, and at my age, not vying for a position, probably won't.

Applicably speaking, diversity is just a useful catch phrase by those with a vested political interest in encouraging Americans to adopt the idea that human beings should only be viewed as members of groups rather than as Individuals.

In doing so, these advocates for so-called ''diversity'' perpetuate racism. The insistance on group thinking only promotes racism. Racism itself being just a nasty form of collectivism whereas Individuals who share physical characteristics are viewed only as members of a group by their model and never as an Individual.

It's not until that practice is actually realized, understood for what it actually is, and accepted as what is actually going on that it becomes apparent that any political action that evolves from it is solely targeted for the purpose of establishing a precedent that the role of government is to placate group claims rather than protecting Individual liberty as the Framers intended.

What these people want is to change the Constitution itself. The role of government itself.

It's not about being fearful of some useful catch phrase, no matter how it gets framed by political opportunists to play on the emotion of those whom they only see and use as a utility in their endeavor. It's about defending and preserving the Republic, the proper role of government and the concept of Individual liberty itself. It's about encouraging Individual responsibility and a feeling of self-worth as well as the value of Individual achievement as opposed to encouraging a group victim mentality.

Unfortunately, the minorities who are used to promote the agenda really have no real idea of their role in the coercion. And largely know nothing at all of its consequence. Once the diversity hustlers (mostly woke white socialists, cultural Marxists and products of the long march through the institutions, not surprisingly) succeed in infiltrating and transitioning government to a more socialist entity, they'll throw the loud minorities under the bus first, gare awn teed. History is rife with example. They're just useful idiots in it all. They don't care about them. Not one bit. They're just a utility.

 

[flacaltenn]

The reason, say the study’s authors Michael Norton and Sam Sommers, is that whites see discrimination as a zero-sum game. The more they thought discrimination against blacks was decreasing, the more they felt discrimination against whites was increasing. That’s consistent with other studies showing that if you remind whites that the American population is becoming more diverse and that whites will soon be less that half of the population, their concern about anti-white discrimination increases. Whites tend to view increasing diversity as anti-white bias.

These "authors" are not using "zero sum game" in the proper context. The number of ADMISSIONS to any college IS a ZERO sum game. It's a FIXED NUMBER. And when you inspect the realities of getting Blacks into Harvard -- the BIAS just shifts BECAUSE IT IS -- a zero sum game.

BTW -- SO ARE the number of jobs allocated per year in any ONE -- govt or private industry organization. Those numbers ARE zero sum as well.

Hate when that happens with writers that dont understand their own theories.

And ANYWAYS -- the focus shouldn't be ON HARVARD. Because the RESULT of these elite schools getting aggressive on shifting bias is to THE DETRIMENT of many of the black students they accept. Because those students were talented enough to thrive in a LOT OF Universities, but the DROP-OUT rates in these "shoe-horned" acceptances are high and statistically significant for Black students.

Students should choose schools for the cost/benefit and their approach to learning. Not everyone does well taking classes in huge auditoriums with less interaction with the lecturers.

 

[gipper]

Applicably speaking, diversity is just a useful catch phrase by those with a vested political interest in encouraging Americans to adopt the idea that human beings should only be viewed as members of groups rather than as Individuals.

In doing so, these advocates for so-called ''diversity'' perpetuate racism. The insistance on group thinking only promotes racism. Racism itself being just a nasty form of collectivism whereas Individuals who share physical characteristics are viewed only as members of a group by their model and never as an Individual.

It's not until that practice is actually realized, understood for what it actually is, and accepted as what is actually going on that it becomes apparent that any political action that evolves from it is solely targeted for the purpose of establishing a precedent that the role of government is to placate group claims rather than protecting Individual liberty as the Framers intended.

What these people want is to change the Constitution itself. The role of government itself.

It's not about being fearful of some useful catch phrase, no matter how it gets framed by political opportunists to play on the emotion of those whom they only see and use as a utility in their endeavor. It's about defending and preserving the Republic, the proper role of government and the concept of Individual liberty itself. It's about encouraging Individual responsibility and a feeling of self-worth as well as the value of Individual achievement as opposed to encouraging a group victim mentality.

Unfortunately, the minorities who are used to promote the agenda really have no real idea of their role in the coercion. And largely know nothing at all of its consequence. Once the diversity hustlers (mostly woke white socialists, cultural Marxists and products of the long march through the institutions, not surprisingly) succeed in infiltrating and transitioning government to a more socialist entity, they'll throw the loud minorities under the bus first, gare awn teed. History is rife with example. They're just useful idiots in it all. They don't care about them. Not one bit. They're just a utility.

I tend to believe they’ve already succeeded.

 

[Couchpotato]

The only problem with your comment is that it's wrong.

Link? I provided one that says they are. In fact THEY say they are in the link and are fighting in court to continue to do so. Feel free to post one that shows they are lying.

 

[MarathonMike]

The only problem with your comment is that it's wrong.

You can't refute anything, you are so weak as a debater. Your responses are always "You're wrong, You're opinion is baseless, You're a racist". FAIL

 

[White 6]

Applicably speaking, diversity is just a useful catch phrase by those with a vested political interest in encouraging Americans to adopt the idea that human beings should only be viewed as members of groups rather than as Individuals.

In doing so, these advocates for so-called ''diversity'' perpetuate racism. The insistance on group thinking only promotes racism. Racism itself being just a nasty form of collectivism whereas Individuals who share physical characteristics are viewed only as members of a group by their model and never as an Individual.

It's not until that practice is actually realized, understood for what it actually is, and accepted as what is actually going on that it becomes apparent that any political action that evolves from it is solely targeted for the purpose of establishing a precedent that the role of government is to placate group claims rather than protecting Individual liberty as the Framers intended.

What these people want is to change the Constitution itself. The role of government itself.

It's not about being fearful of some useful catch phrase, no matter how it gets framed by political opportunists to play on the emotion of those whom they only see and use as a utility in their endeavor. It's about defending and preserving the Republic, the proper role of government and the concept of Individual liberty itself. It's about encouraging Individual responsibility and a feeling of self-worth as well as the value of Individual achievement as opposed to encouraging a group victim mentality.

Unfortunately, the minorities who are used to promote the agenda really have no real idea of their role in the coercion. And largely know nothing at all of its consequence. Once the diversity hustlers (mostly woke white socialists, cultural Marxists and products of the long march through the institutions, not surprisingly) succeed in infiltrating and transitioning government to a more socialist entity, they'll throw the loud minorities under the bus first, gare awn teed. History is rife with example. They're just useful idiots in it all. They don't care about them. Not one bit. They're just a utility.

Not bad. I think my Comp teacher would have liked you better. She said one time, my writing talents were more toward writing manuals and all I got from here was a lousy "B", still pissing me off forty-something years later.

 

[protectionist]

Applicably speaking, diversity is just a useful catch phrase by those with a vested political interest in encouraging Americans to adopt the idea that human beings should only be viewed as members of groups rather than as Individuals.

In doing so, these advocates for so-called ''diversity'' perpetuate racism. The insistance on group thinking only promotes racism. Racism itself being just a nasty form of collectivism whereas Individuals who share physical characteristics are viewed only as members of a group by their model and never as an Individual.

It's not until that practice is actually realized, understood for what it actually is, and accepted as what is actually going on that it becomes apparent that any political action that evolves from it is solely targeted for the purpose of establishing a precedent that the role of government is to placate group claims rather than protecting Individual liberty as the Framers intended.

What these people want is to change the Constitution itself. The role of government itself.

It's not about being fearful of some useful catch phrase, no matter how it gets framed by political opportunists to play on the emotion of those whom they only see and use as a utility in their endeavor. It's about defending and preserving the Republic, the proper role of government and the concept of Individual liberty itself. It's about encouraging Individual responsibility and a feeling of self-worth as well as the value of Individual achievement as opposed to encouraging a group victim mentality.

Unfortunately, the minorities who are used to promote the agenda really have no real idea of their role in the coercion. And largely know nothing at all of its consequence. Once the diversity hustlers (mostly woke white socialists, cultural Marxists and products of the long march through the institutions, not surprisingly) succeed in infiltrating and transitioning government to a more socialist entity, they'll throw the loud minorities under the bus first, gare awn teed. History is rife with example. They're just useful idiots in it all. They don't care about them. Not one bit. They're just a utility.

As evidenced by the refusal of the wokies in Martha's Vineyard & Chicago, to accept the diversity when it rubs up against THEM.