Blasting the recent ruling on school desegregation, Hillary Clinton said at last night's debate that the Supreme Court had "turned the clock back" on history. Actually, it's sometimes a good idea to turn the clock back.
C.S. Lewis once wrote, "We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive."
Hillary thinks that since things in the past used to be very, very bad, whatever we do to move away from that must be very, very good. Therefore since America used to discriminate against blacks, now it must discriminate in favor of blacks. Since the American South used to force blacks and whites apart, now it must force them together.
This is the craziness that passes for "civil rights" today, and this is the craziness that the Supreme Court is trying to stop. The solution to discrimination in jobs, government contracts, and university admissions is not more discrimination; it is to choose the best candidates based on merit. The solution to school segregation is not coerced integration or busing; it is to let children attend their neighborhood school. This is what Thurgood Marshall argued in the Brown case: let kids go to their local schools.
So if we have to discuss this in terms of clocks, I think we should turn ours back to the original vision of Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King. This is the idea of the race-neutral or color-blind society. Better, let's go beyond the whole framework of "going backward" and "going forward." As I argue in my book The End of Racism, we need a fresh debate on race that breaks free of old categories and gives up the pretense that any criticism of current policies is a return to the bad old days of the past.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 5)
46. "Yeah! We definitely need to rethink this Multicultural madness that has afflicted us for the last 40 years. And we need to do this now, because tomorrow can only bring more violent strife with the ILLEGALs now infesting this country."
that is the "jews" intention......they follow the same gameplan wherever they are permitted to fester......every jew a PEARL.
cuthean at 12:09PM on Jul 1st 2007
47. Excellent article Dinesh!
In fact, evidence of how right you are is contained in the comments against you. Notice how every comment here opposing the article is comprised of purely Ad Hominem attacks. Your argument is flawless, therefore the only way to argue it is to question the author's integrity by calling him a "Racist".
The true racists are the ones who support the anti-White social and political system we have now.
Striyzh at 12:48PM on Jul 1st 2007
48. Bushthwak... you are still copping out on finding or suggesting a real solution here, and all your name-calling is just a paper-thin disguise for your lack of intelligence and ingenuity on this topic. At least, it seems it could be... please prove me wrong.
And I never voiced total agreement with the idea (that D'Souza seems to suggest) of 100% merit-based achievement. I think in order to achieve that, that we first need to concentrate on mending families, and then schools. I do, however, agree with his suggestion of going in a different direction with this whole thing, because there are major flaws with the current system.
And to quote myself, "We need to concentrate on building better families, as a society, regardless of race." I don't see how I am arguing that this is simply a "black" problem, except for pointing out the obvious injustices to blacks that occurred many years ago, and when our society should have taken the opportunity to support them in reuniting families, not to mention forgo the system of segregation put into place. That's not making it a "black" problem. That's making it a societal problem, starting well over 100 years ago, when blacks were left with destroyed families and little means to correct that problem.
You agree with me to a certain point, but are unable to clarify where exactly you digress from my argument. I think it's because you are afraid to do so. Perhaps you feel uncomfortable admitting to something that could be perceived as a somewhat conservative stance: that the existence of the nuclear family is important to society. I'm giving you another chance here. Please explain, if you do agree with the premise that problems with "structure and cohesiveness of the family in our society" (to use your words) could be contributing to some of the achievement issues of our students, do you agree or disagree with the corresponding solution: focus on strengthening the family unit.
Please stop dancing around the topic, using name-calling as your main points. We've had enough of that in this country from both sides already. Answer the question.
eM at 1:42PM on Jul 1st 2007
49. eM - "You agree with me to a certain point, but are unable to clarify where exactly you digress from my argument. I think it's because you are afraid to do so."
I'm not sure what your problem is - I've simply pointed out the contradictions in your statements which make your argument nonsense.
In 30 you say "I tend to agree with Thomas Gassett."
I pointed out the problems with Gasset... And you dropped that argument.
You then say (30) - "I agree with D'Souza in the fact that we need to stop trying to prop up a broken system." and again in 33 - "D'Souza is right at least in the fact that it's time to find some real solutions, not just run around throwing our hands in the air and saying there's no solution, then yelling out "racist" at every other suggestion that comes along."
Until I point out what DD' is actually saying in 43 (There is no racism).
And you retreat in 47 with - "And I never voiced total agreement with the idea (that D'Souza seems to suggest) of 100% merit-based achievement."
Insofar as that "r" word you intermittently have problems with believing exists, we have the statements in 39, 40, 42, 44, and 45 to pretty much establish the prevalence of that in American society.
While it is certainly possible to buy into the "Motherhood and Apple Pie" adage of strengthening American families – until you can see your way clear of the sort of racist underpinnings of a Gasset or DD’…
There really is nothing to discuss.
In 47 you say – “Perhaps you feel uncomfortable admitting to something that could be perceived as a somewhat conservative stance: that the existence of the nuclear family is important to society.”
Preservation of the nuclear family has nothing to do with conservatism. It is developed from moral and religious underpinnings as part of the American Judeo-Christian shared value system. Perhaps if you didn’t confuse the two, your argument might gain some traction.
Conservatism is racism. Whether it’s the American Nazi ravings of cuthean’s tirade against Jews and blacks, walt’s KKK whine about white persecution, Gasset’s David Duke C of CC in suits, or DD’ and his soft-peddling racist contemporaries like Horowitz and Lawrence Auster…
Until you dig your way past supporting folks like that...
Geez... I've already said that!
Bushthwak at 3:14PM on Jul 1st 2007
50. "While it is certainly possible to buy into the "Motherhood and Apple Pie" adage of strengthening American families – until you can see your way clear of the sort of racist underpinnings of a Gasset or DD’…
There really is nothing to discuss."
So, in other words, you probably agree, but you refuse to discuss my main point. We need to support and build families, and that is one of the main problems with student achievement in this country, regardless of race. In fact, that would be the best way to achieve the "merit-based" system that D'Souza speaks of. But never mind, you're too busy distancing yourself from anything or anyone you've already labeled "racist" to actually take on this idea on its own terms, regardless of who (Gassett, D'Souza) might or might not support it.
Furthermore, your statements have less and less merit as long as you lump everyone who questions the legitimacy of the current approach to racial issues in academics into the "racist Nazis and KKK" boat. Stop leaning on that lazy form of argument. I'm sure even you know how ridiculous it sounds.
Lastly, you say: "Conservatism is racism."
As a moderate/ conservative who is married to someone of a different racial background than my own, I take serious offense at that. You have no idea who exactly you are speaking to; you are just throwing out hate speech yourself. I never, ever said racism doesn't exist. I've seen plenty of it. You are simply saying these things because a) you've found a way to draw attention to yourself and b) you are quite obviously bigoted in your own opinions. "The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of an eye: the more light is poured upon it, the more it contracts." -- I have this quote posted on my refrigerator to look at whenever I encounter any kind of racism or bigotry in this world. And, suddenly, it seems to fit this situation.
eM at 3:53PM on Jul 1st 2007
51. 32. em - Now that's really nice that you agree wih Gasset...
But he's another racist shithead and here's why...>>
So, I'm a racist shithead because 50% of marraiges end in divorce? Interesting concept.
With over 50% of white marraiges ending in divorce in this country, over 60% of all white children with be fatherless for some period of time during their childhood.>>
You pulled those 'facts' out of your ass. Your conclusion that 60% of whites kids are fatherless for some period is lunacy. You are stupid enough to say it, but we are not stupid enough to believe it. The number of divorces says nothing about the number of children you moron!
The fact is 60% of African American children are BORN in single parent families. The fact is most children born in single parent families fail ... no matter how much money you throw at them. If you can't see this as the biggest problem African Americans face ... you're a fool, with nothing to offer this or any debate.
Yet somehow to racist crapheads like Gasset and DD', the adolescent trauma of multiple familial breakdowns, and fatherlessness doesn't impact white kids as severly as "fatherlessness" impacts black kids.>>
Clearly this is the first racist comment I've read, and it was made by you.
Single parent families are two strikes against any kid, and it has nothing to do with the kids skin tone.
The fact that single parent families are the norm for African Americans is the difference.
Instead of calling everyone racist you might thinking before you spew, but then you wouldn't have anything to say.
Selective "colorblindness" is the stock in trade of the modern conservative racist pimp.>>>>
You say it with the certainty of a lunatic, and with nothing but your ugly liberal bias to back it up. Nothing new here. This is standard operating prceedure for liberals.
Thomas J Gassett at 4:42PM on Jul 1st 2007
52. Conservatism is racism. Whether it’s the American Nazi ravings of cuthean’s tirade against Jews and blacks, walt’s KKK whine about white persecution, Gasset’s David Duke C of CC in suits, or DD’ and his soft-peddling racist contemporaries like Horowitz and Lawrence Auster…
>>>
Clearly, liberalism is mental disease. This stupid liberal puke doesn't know me, but he sure feels comfortable linking me to David Duke. Why,because the only enemmy a liberal has are other Americans. He knows for a liberal fact that all conservatives are racist, and he's happy to tell you all about his bigotry. Clearly, this fool needs to get out of his mother's basement and start living in the real world.
Thomas J Gassett at 6:32PM on Jul 1st 2007
53. he's just displaying the effects of his underdeveloped frontal lobe and hence needs to appeal to emotion in the absence of facts.
cuthean at 10:49PM on Jul 1st 2007
54. eM tries - "We need to support and build families, and that is one of the main problems with student achievement in this country, regardless of race. In fact, that would be the best way to achieve the "merit-based" system that D'Souza speaks of. "
DD' isn't proposing a "merit-based System" in anything except rhetoric - so I'm not sure how you get from one to the other. And I didn't "lump" you with DD'...
You lumped yourself there.
em metriculates - "As a moderate/ conservative who is married to someone of a different racial background than my own, I take serious offense at that. You have no idea who exactly you are speaking to; you are just throwing out hate speech yourself. I never, ever said racism doesn't exist. I've seen plenty of it. "
That's nice. I find it interesting you don't take offense at DD'. A few DD' quotes are in order:
"Am I calling for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Actually, yes." (The End of Racism)
“...within the United States, black males have (you may be surprised to discover) the highest self-esteem of any group. Yet on academic measures black males score the lowest. The reason is that self-esteem in these cases is generated by factors unrelated to studies, such as the ability to beat up other students or a high estimation of one’s sexual prowess.” (Letter to a Young Conservative)
DD Argues that segregation was necessary because = ""...to assure that [Blacks], like the handicapped, would be...permitted to perform to the capacity of their arrested development."
DD' argues that black folks cause racism, because they are not as "civilized" as whites - "...blacks as a group can show that they are capable of performing competitively in schools and the work force...If blacks can close the civilization gap, the race problem in this country is likely to become insignificant."
Indeed, the two leading black conservative authors of the time Glen Loury, and Robert Woodson quit, rather than be even peripherally associated with it. Seems some folks know a pile of racist shit when they step in it.
And you take "serious offense" at my equation of conservatism being racism? Wow - that's really funny considering your exceedingly high tolerence level for racism amongst your fellows.
Now - to be fair to DD', I have no idea whether he personally believes this crap or not. Being the brown face for conservative racism is very profitable - and it's a lot easier than having to do real work at his level, especially because the audience isn't exactly made up of a group of the brightest lightbulbs in the pack.
Which brings us back to the moral issue. You claim to have seen racism (although it isn't clear whether you approve or dissaprove of it), and want to reclaim the Christian ethic of the family unit...
But readily break bread and make nice with racists, minimally in the form of supporting conservatism, a racist ideology.
Luke 6:44 " For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush.
Bushthwak at 7:08PM on Jul 1st 2007
55. Gasset blows a gasket with - "You say it with the certainty of a lunatic, and with nothing but your ugly liberal bias to back it up."
let's see how Liberal (Blue) states stack up to conservative (red) states in divorce. According to Divorce Magazine:
http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS2.shtml
And the 2004 Electoral Map
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.race2004.net/maps-2004/mapnader.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.race2004.net/&h=586&w=750&sz=69&tbnid=wA7nJCVj2AzZRM:&tbnh=110&tbnw=141&prev=/images%3Fq%3D2004%2Belectoral%2Bmap%26um%3D1&start=3&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=3
The ten states with the lowest divorce rates -
Massachusetts (Blue)
Connecticut (Blue)
New Jersey (Blue)
Rhode Island (Blue)
New York (Blue)
Pennsylvania (Blue)
Wisconsin (Blue)
North Dakota (Red)
Maryland (Blue)
Minnesota (Blue)
Ten states with the highest (best to worst)-
Florida (red)
New Mexico (red)
Idaho (red)
Alabama (red)
Indiana (red)
Wyoming (red)
Tennessee (red)
Oklahoma (red)
Arkansas (red)
Nevada (red)
Wow! That conservatism thing really works in "preserving those families"!
Gasket Screeches - "You pulled those 'facts' out of your ass. Your conclusion that 60% of whites kids are fatherless for some period is lunacy. You are stupid enough to say it, but we are not stupid enough to believe it."
As to the divorce rates -
41 percent of first marriages end in divorce.
60 percent of second marriages end in divorce.
73 percent of third marriages end in divorce.
http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200003/030_too_large.cfm
Percentage of first marriages that end in divorce in 1997: 50%
Percentage of remarriages that end in divorce in 1997: 60%
http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml
“Fifty percent of marriages end in divorce. Sixty-seven percent of all
second marriages end in divorce.”
http://www.mediate.com/articles/psych.cfm
As to their impact on children (Read it and weep) -
* One in two children will live in a single-parent family at some point in childhood. 3
* One in three children is born to unmarried parents. 3
* Between 1978 and 1996, the number of babies born to unmarried women per year quadrupled from 500,000 to more than two million. 4
* The number of single mothers increased from three million to 10 million between
1970 and 2000. 1
* More than half of Americans today have been, are or will be in one or more stepfamily situations. 6
http://www.womedia.org/taf_statistics.htm
"And recent estimates suggest that 54 percent of American children will spend some time living apart from one of their parents by the time they are 15. "
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/04/health/main539283.shtml
"Contrary to widespread belief, most single-parent families (63 percent) are white..."
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/extract/332/14/966
Whoop! There it is!
BT at 8:05PM on Jul 1st 2007
56. BT -- for that last statistic... you have to be careful when you try to Google this topic. Looking at all single-parent households and comparing percentages will not take into account the fact that blacks are a minority. The numbers you should look at to be honest in this discussion would be the percentage of single parents in white families and the percentage of single parents in black families, as well as percentage of single parents in Hispanic, Asian, American Indian families, etc.
So nice try, but anyone who knows statistics 101 knows where you hijacked this. Let's look at a report from the U.S. Census Bureau:
"Single parents accounted for almost two-thirds (65 percent) of all African American family groups with children present, compared with 35 percent among Hispanics and 25 percent among Whites."
Source: http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/cb95-186.html
And just in case you think the 1994 data no longer applies, here's a press release from the Census Bureau that says little has changed:
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/families_households/009842.html
There are several more detailed tables to look at on the Census Bureau's web site. Have fun over there -- and for future reference, let's use numbers that apply when we play with them during a discussion.
And Bushthwak -- there's no point in talking to you any longer. You still refuse to discuss my main point, and instead spend your time accusing people of being racist. I don't have time for such bigotry, nor do I want to close myself in to such a miserable and frustrating world as yours. Most people, despite their agreement or disagreement with the original blog, do know that your screams of "racist" even to those of us who clearly are NOT, weaken whatever point you are ultimately trying to make. At this point, I'm not sure what that point is, except for the fact that we're all racist if we don't agree with you (although I don't know enough about your actual viewpoint to know if I would agree or not... you refuse to discuss it).
eM at 9:50PM on Jul 1st 2007
57. eM tries - "The numbers you should look at to be honest in this discussion would be the percentage of single parents in white families and the percentage of single parents in black families, as well as percentage of single parents in Hispanic, Asian, American Indian families, etc. "
That depends on what you are tring to be "honest" about eM.
I've simply argued that the statistics indicate that a majority of children in the US, black or white - will wind up fatherless at some time in their youth. And as such reinforcing and rebuilding the family needs to be an American objective, providing benefits to everyone.
You are stuck on arguing it is a "black problem", based on how those children became fatherless (single mother/divorced).
That, is racist.
BT at 10:13AM on Jul 2nd 2007
58. First of all: “...within the United States, black males have (you may be surprised to discover) the highest self-esteem of any group. This does not make sense.
For any group to hold that they are both discriminated against and that feel a sense of high self-worth is contrary to the 'victim' mentality as we know it.
Yet on academic measures black males score the lowest. The reason is that self-esteem in these cases is generated by factors unrelated to studies, such as the ability to beat up other students or a high estimation of one’s sexual prowess.”
Any psychologist will tell you that excessive violence among men is often a way of over compensating for a diminished sense of self-worth. As is exaggerated over masculinization. This is true among all race groups as well.
Keith J. Mohrhoff at 10:40AM on Jul 2nd 2007
59. Zip! I can tell you got my point about your distortion of statistics, especially because I got called a racist again!!! It's what weak debaters do when they can't concede a point. Extraordinarily predictable. Your statement pulled from the web that said "Contrary to widespread belief, most single-parent families (63 percent) are white..." was mis-representing the facts of what we were discussing, and you know it.
And for the love of god, saying that fatherlessness/ the breakdown of families is a "black" problem is NOT what I am saying. You know this-- you're just trying to hide from real discourse by throwing this statement out constantly. It is a PROBLEM, period. Unfortunately it is, according to reliable statistics, a problem that is plaguing the black community more than other racial groups... at this time. I am not. making. these. facts. up. But the solution to the problem is the same, regardless of race, and the damage of the problem to the children is the same, regardless of race.
I propose that we should look into SOLVING the PROBLEM regarding the break-down of the family in our society, regardless of race.
How much longer will we just continue to ignore one of the biggest problems facing our young people today?
eM at 9:02PM on Jul 2nd 2007
60. eM Capitulates - "I propose that we should look into SOLVING the PROBLEM regarding the break-down of the family in our society, regardless of race. "
Very good!
Now - What exactly do you propose as a solution set to solve that problem?
Bushthwak at 10:20PM on Jul 2nd 2007