Why You Appear To Be Racist. Yes, You.

The President was elected by 537 votes in the deciding state for electoral votes and stopped the manual recount that was to decide if he actually did win the election.  He was appointed to office by a U.S. Supreme Court decision.  He actually received 543,895 votes less than his opponent.

The President and Congress passed a bill that opened up ability for government surveillance, restricted rules on opening bank accounts or transferring money, gave the government more access to private information.  (Expanded government control over civil rights.)

The United States was attacked under the watch of this President.

This President ran on a platform of limited international involvement and less bi-partisanship.  The same  President went to war with a foreign nation on false pretenses.  Congress was actually lied to before approving the war.

This President said “Bring It On” to people who were trying to kill American soldiers.

This President that claimed to be “bi-partisan” in his campaign made statements such as “you are with us, or against us.”

Enron.

This President gave large tax breaks to the wealthy, claiming it would help invigorate the economy.

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the real GDP grew at an average annual rate of 2.5%.  (Lower than had been in the past 50 years.)  The DOW Jones Industrial Average dropped from 10,587 to 7,949.  “Adjusted for inflation, median household income dropped by $1,175 between 2000 and 2007, said Elizabeth Warren, professor at Harvard Law School, in written testimony before the Joint Economic Committee.“  (Resource)  In the last year of his office, the U.S. entered the longest post-war recession since WWII, due to a housing market bubble, mortgage crisis, and high oil prices.  (Reuters, Xinhua)

This President passed an educational bill known as the No Child Left Behind Act, which has so many criticisms, they cannot all fit in one passage, but included underfunding and increase in access for military recruitment, and most importantly, increased segregation in public schools.

(more…)

Tags: african-american, black, conservative, Constitution, discrimination, economy, equal rights, Glenn Beck, healthcare, liberals, neocon, racism, racist, sarah palin, Tea Party, United States, white dominance
Category Racism |

No Really, Epithets for Arizona

I haven’t had an entry in over a week.  I wish I could say it was because everything has filled me with a sense of futility, but the reality is that I haven’t budgeted my time very well.

While on hiatus, Arizona made the news again with the mural on a school in Prescott.  An article can be found on the Daily Courier, here. In a nutshell, they hired artists to paint a mural with the students of an elementary school, of the students of the elementary school.  The students were of multiple ethnicities, which prompted some shouting of racial epithets by passers-by for two months.  The artist contributes this hostility to City Councilman, Steve Blair.  On his radio show on KYCA, he stated:

“I am not a racist individual, but I will tell you depicting a black guy in the middle of that mural, based upon who’s president of the United States today and based upon the history of this community when I grew up, we had four black families – who I have been very good friends with for years – to depict the biggest picture on that building as a black person, I would have to ask the question, ‘Why?’”

Then the school decided to “lighten the mural” or, more specifically, lighten the faces of the students.  Then the school decided not to do this, because of the national outcry.

What I find is the real issue here is the attack on “pluralism” and the identification of “who is an American” with a specific image.  This is really fascist.  Not in an attempt to spread a slur around… it really is fascist.  It is a tenant of fascism.  The most notable case was the image of the “Aryan” – the blue eyed, blonde haired German that was the “only real German” according to Hitler’s Nazi Party.  Just like with anything else, there are varying degrees.  Would I equate this to the Nazi platform?  No, not really.  But is it fascism?  Yes, definitely.

This has been a rising tide since the election of the first Black American President.  This rallying cry of the New Right for what it means to “Be an American.”
(more…)

Tags: african-american, apartheid, Arizona, chicano, discrimination, equal rights, fascism, fascist, Glenn Beck, Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism, New Right, race, racism, sarah palin, Tea Party, United States
Category Neo-Fascism |

Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.

It is quite often claimed that Black Americans or Chicano Americans are more prone to be criminals in the United States.  Usually this claim is accompanied by statistics.  I often wonder if people really just pick and choose statistics to support what they “want” to prove, or if they look at statistics and make a conclusion from gathering the evidence.  I think we all know that the prior is much more common than the latter.

First, Let us look at the statistics.

From the US Census Bureau (2008):
The American population is 304,059,724.
257,116,111 people are not Hispanic or Latino.
199,491,458 people are White.
37,171,750 people are Black Americans/African Americans/Negro (was on the 2010 Census)
2,328,982 people are Native American
13,237,698 people are Asian
434,561 people are Hawaiian
4,451,662 people are “two or more races”
46,943,613 are Latino or Hispanic (and are broken up among various other races)

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics:  “In 2008, over 7.3 million people were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole at year-end — 3.2% of all U.S. adult residents or 1 in every 31 adults.” and “In 1997, 9% of the black population in the U.S. was under some form of correctional supervision compared to 2% of the white population and over 1% of other races. “

What does this say?  Well, it does say that Black Americans are disproportionally arrested in the United States. It doesn’t quite clearly say much else.  You can infer that it means that Black people are criminals.  You can also infer that it means a racist society will tend to prosecute those at the receiving end of the racism.

After a few hours of combing through statistics at the Bureau of Justice Statistics, I remembered again why I hate numbers.  They give me a headache.  I can reprint a ton of information, but I really don’t want to.  A bunch of it can be found here:  http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1743
It basically says that Whites are more often the victims of crimes, overwhelmingly.  What does that say?  Well, for once, it says that crimes are reported by whites much more frequently than by anyone else.  Does that mean they aren’t more often the victims of crimes?  Not at all.  Does it mean they are?  Not at all.  There are a lot of things you can infer from statistics, but it doesn’t always make them legitimate until you can correlate them and provide farther evidence.

So, yeah, I got really tired of those pages and pages of charts and numbers.  Then I found the National Crime Victimization Survey that was started under President Nixon.  “A key finding of the survey was the realization that many crimes were not reported to the police.”

The survey also found that ‘in the period 1992-2000, significantly less than half (43%) of all criminal acts reported through victimization surveys were also reported to police.‘  Hart & Rennison (2003:3)

So, when you look at the DOJ statistics, it states that 4,176,440 Whites were the victims of crimes in 2007 and 794,220 Blacks were the victims of crimes in the same year.  With a “rate per 1,000 persons age 12 and over” of 20.5 for Whites and 26.1 for Blacks.

Again, what do we conclude by this?  When 43% of crimes are not even reported, does this give an accurate picture?  The Uniform Crime Report has numbers very similar to the National Crime Victimization Survey, but the UCR is only reported by police.

I’m getting tired, so I’m just going to rip this line from Wikipedia, but it is a summary of the FBI Expanded Homicide Data – Crime in the United States 2008. Link here.

African Americans were arrested more than any other race for murder in 2008, making up 36% of all arrests. African Americans, constituting approximately 12% of the general population, were significantly overrepresented in the total arrests made. African Americans were also significantly overrepresented in victimization, representing 47% of all murder victims. White Americans and individuals of Other race were significantly underrepresented in cases of murder and non-negligible homicide in 2008. Murder in White American and African American populations were overwhelmingly intraracial, with 83% of all White victims and 90% of all Black victims having been murdered by individuals of the same race. The same was true, though to a lesser degree, for individuals of Other race, with 52% having been murdered by individuals also of Other race.

So, what did we learn? So far we learned that our prisons are filling up with Blacks more than Whites, that half of all crimes go unreported, and that most people are murdered by people with the same skin color as themselves.

Finally, I want to turn to a non-government source of information.  If you have never heard of the Innocence Project, it is a noble organization that does wonderful things.  Anyone who talks bad about them is an asshole.  And this is why: 254 EXONERATED

Here is information from the Innocence Project:

• Seventeen people had been sentenced to death before DNA proved their innocence and led to their release.
• The average sentence served by DNA exonerees has been 13 years.
• About 70 percent of those exonerated by DNA testing are members of minority groups.
• In almost 40 percent of the cases profiled here, the actual perpetrator has been identified by DNA testing.
• Exonerations have been won in 34 states and Washington, D.C.

HERE IS A BIG FAT LINK TO THE INNOCENCE PROJECT.

70 PERCENT OF THOSE EXONERATED BY DNA TESTING ARE MEMBERS OF MINORITY GROUPS!

Surprise!

Anyway.  This could really go on for quite a while.  There are so many moderating and intervening variables that need to be examined.  Even IF there was concrete evidence that Black Americans were 90 times more likely to commit a violent crime, you need to isolate that to provide proof that it is due to them being Black Americans and not the social environment, class situation, environment, nutrition, prenatal care, neonatal care, et cetera.  (There is a lot of evidence that people from low-income communities were more prone to violence in the past due to children ingesting large amounts of lead paint. We DO know that lead causes violent behavior.)  I still see no evidence at all that links skin color to violence or criminal behavior.  These tendencies  have not been proven to be clustered, or linked, to skin color in any way.

Oh, nevermind.  There are several books written about it.  Like America behind bars: trends in imprisonment, 1950 to 2000  by Rick Ruddell. (You can look it up on Google Books for free, or you can come back when I update this page and click on the link to buy it from Amazon and give me a percentage of the sale.)

I really don’t like maths.

And I really get tired of using statistics to prove a point in such detail.

I guess we could all just go to Lawrence Auster’s website and read the selected incidents and news articles that he has cherry picked to prove his point and avoid doing ANY actual research.  Hell, if Sarah Palin’s research involves having someone else write her biography and give a speech about the notes on her hand, and make $12 million a year, who needs to actually look up statistical data and analyze studies?  Compiling data?  Isn’t that for the Elite?  “We don’t need no book learnin’ and ‘rithmatic!”

Especially when 99% of all statistics are wrong.

“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.” – Homer Simpson

Tags: african-american, anti, black, Constitution, Department of Justice, discrimination, equal rights, incarceration, Innocence Project, latino, lawrence auster, parole, population, prison, race, racist, sarah palin, statistics, United States, US Census Bureau, White, white dominance
Category Definitions, Racism |

The Divided States of America.

The United States population has probable not been this divided since the Civil War.  There is truly a bi-polar split in the national psyche.  There are splits and fringes on both sides, but there is still a divide right down the middle.  I recall mentioning this before, but I don’t recall how much detail it was on this site.  What I’m really pondering today, is from a comment I received this morning.  I was asked why we don’t support secession for states like Arizona.

My initial response is: “Please.”  Unfortunately, it is not that simple.  Let’s just use Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico.  (Sorry, New Mexico, if we let you stay, my hypothetical becomes even more confusing.)  In the future, Arizona, Texas and New Mexico leave the United States to form the “New Republic of America.”  The first thing we need to consider, is if they allow everyone who wants to remain in the United States to leave.  If they do not do this, it would cause a lot of tension and end up like a North Korea/South Korea situation.

So, let’s assume it is amicable.  The New Republic resents Washington D.C. so much, they want to govern themselves.  The US says, “Ok.”  And anyone in these states leaves to enter the United States… (and the companies that are in those states have to pick a side, too… but now that the Supreme Court decided companies are people, we don’t have to argue specifics.) … and these states are now the new Southern border of the United States.

I’d assume they would all enact Arizona’s “Pass Laws” and end up with an Afrikaner Apartheid system.  But they have their own Constitution, so we cannot deride them for violating out Constitution.

What I cannot figure out, is what their economy is going to be based on.  I would guess agriculture and oil.  I’m sure they would also have to purchase weapons from the United States, to maintain their border system.

So, let’s jump forward ten years.  The “New Republic of America” has been exporting beef, wheat, other agricultural products and oil for ten years.  They have a secure border on both sides and pass laws, that anyone stopped by police has to provide proof they are Citizens of the New Republic.  The average wage is equivalent to US $30 a week.  The University students in America are growing weary of this Apartheid system on their border and protest for full divestment.  Within 2 more years, the United States will no longer sell weapons to the New Republic on humanitarian grounds, or trade with them for oil and agricultural products.  China offers, though, because they could honestly care less what is happening in the Western Hemisphere, as long as it cannot cross the Pacific.  They will need these weapons because, just putting a military zone between the New Republic and Mexico, the drug cartels have completely overrun Mexico.  As the violence from the drug lords escalates, multi-national corporations leave Mexico and go to South East Asia (and maybe the New Republic.)  So, you now have a country that makes Nicaragua look peaceful on the border, you are going to need good weapons.

Now we have Chinese weapons south of the American border, with a country trading almost exclusively with China, the biggest growing threat and competition to the American government and economy.  Of course, up here in America, we also have to deal with people escaping the “New Republic” – to gain wages higher than $30 a month, where we make $300 a month in McDonald’s here.  The New Republic knows not to aggravate the United States, as the US could just send in a few dozen drones and take out the entire government.

Anyway, I’d give the New Republic 20 years.  By the end of the second decade, they will either be begging to come back, or begging to be invaded by UN Peacekeepers.  So, no, I don’t support secession by other states, it would be a travesty.  The loss and suffering on both sides would hardly be justifiable.

One could argue that there are weapons manufacturers and tech companies in the South.  Plenty in Texas alone.  Well, how many would stay and give up contracts to the United States military?  Are the Southern states going to build their own military manufacturing plants?  What is the justification for an arms buildup on the US border?  You’d have to be careful, too much Nazi-esque talk about “enemies” ‘and needs to “weapons” and internment camps for minorities, and you’d have to deal with all of Europe and the United States.  (Or do you believe that England and France would take the side of the South?)

I really don’t see this as a win for anyone.  And this wasn’t an all inclusive example.  There is plenty of contribution from Southern states that the United States utilizes.  Any secession would be detrimental.  The whole world would feel it.  It may even be worse than I had explained.  What if drug cartels or terrorist organizations overran one of the states and launched the US into a century of warfare?  What if China got sick of all the bickering and just blew everything in North America up?  What if England just said, “We gave you a few centuries and you can’t get your shit straight… you are coming back home.” ?

** update **
As per requested, spelling of secession has been corrected.  May 5, 3:00 am PST.

Tags: agriculture, aliens, apartheid, Arizona, Constitution, discrimination, economy, New Mexico, response, sarah palin, secession, Texas, United States, white dominance
Category Main category |

Arizona – Part 2

F**k Arizona.

Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck, too.

Tags: aliens, anti, Burning Fence, discrimination, race, racism, racist, sarah palin, white dominance
Category news |