Matt Walsh is very rational, and good on him for thinking his opponents actually mean what they say and want to have clear and consistent beliefs. But they don't. And he isn't funny. He's the blandest man alive.
I think that the most egregious examples of "antiracist" special pleading are refuted upon examination, when it's found that the "racial disparities" in question are statistically insignificant, or nonexistent. There's no need to offer an alternative hypothesis in those cases.
I also find an unfortunate tendency for both antiblack racists (who exist) and antiracists to dwell on negative behaviors that are the exception, not the rule. To put in in shorthand, the fact that percentage disproportions exist in regard to the race of homicide victims focuses on a marginal statistic, not a normative behavior. In any population. The vast majority of black people behave in ways that fall well within the norm for people in general. Especially if they can make it through their teens and early twenties without doing anything that derails their live path. Which is also the case with any other population, particularly for those of us who are male.
Another mistake of the activists is focusing on the series-of-one case. Because it's Media Friendly. And it has "symbolic value." How, exactly? For who? Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't dream of critiquing Media Hypnosis to the newshounds of Instagram, TikTok, et. al. But I don't think anyone gets to complain that the attention to their cause is prioritized unproductively if they support a tactical emphasis of leaning on one incident because it's television/video-friendly. How effective is this tactic, exactly? For who?
The biggest mistake made by the social justice activists--and nearly everyone else--is the insistence on foregrounding "race" as the chief contributor to American social problems. The biggest exacerbating influence on most of the social problems that continue to afflict the US is not Race. It is the 100-year Drug Prohibition War. If anyone would bother to consult that history:
Just deleted my comment because it was inaccurate. The 'more likely to be incarcerated than employed ' stat is for young black high school dropouts, not all young black men.
About 1 in 55 black men is in prison compared to a 60% labor force participation rate for black men aged 16-24.
I don't see how you have an explanation at all, it sounds like you just want to stop talking about it.
" don't see how you have an explanation at all, it sounds like you just want to stop talking about it."
I have no interest in tail-chasing nonsense. I've been hearing the same tired tropes--at both extremes--since before you were born. Ironic that I was initially directing my criticisms at the social justice warrior types, and now I find that you also object to the conclusion that summed up my original post.
It sounds to me as if you "just want to stop talking about" the possibility that I just raised: that it's really all about the Illicit Drugs Economy.
I'm skeptical that you've read any of the books on my reading list. Some of that 100% Nonfiction Book selection includes material about the effect of our Large, Healthy, Prospering Illicit Drug Economy and its corrosive social effects. Over 50 years of crime paying as economic power, particularly in neighborhoods where it's become endemic--on the quality of school environments, social trust, decreased participation in community institutions and prosocial group endeavors, early exposure to criminality and the rewards of crime, teenage entry-level job experience retailing illicit substances, punitive policing, militarization of police, the history of the escalation of the firearms trade beginning in the 1980s, the massive gains in illicit enrichment that have entrenched gangs both outside of US prisons and within, crimes and violent offenses directly related to involvement in the illicit trade, police and CO corruption, declining police recruitment...
I could list more. It's a lot of history. haven't even gotten to the effects on Immigration.
Haven't mentioned an explicitly "racial" aspect yet. Black people have gotten the worst of it for around the last 40 years, but many of the same Drug war-spawned problems afflict other ethnic groups, including native-born whites.
As you've provided your CV here, I note that you're an Econ major. If you read some of the books on my list, I'd like to think you'd gain some appreciation of the clout that the illicit drug economy has, both stateside and globally. Socially and culturally. As an economic force with political impacts- including corruption, from the 'hood to the country, and from the prisons to the headquarters of banks, from sidewalk sellers of fenced goods to the chartering and regulation loopholes written to protect shell banks and corporations in the halls of Congress, including those of wealthy foreign criminals in the property markets.
See, this research has already been done. In detail, comprehensively. Not in po-mo academic jargon, either.
But apparently you prefer tail-chasing Woke opponents to reviewing the documented history that led me to assert my heretic opinion.
"Just deleted my comment because it was inaccurate. The 'more likely to be incarcerated than employed ' stat is for young black high school dropouts, not all young black men."
Whew. That was a close one, eh? As one researcher to another, I know how you feel. I've made a few blunders like that. The longer a mistake goes uncorrected, the worse it looks on the Great Ledger.
Great review. I agree with the observations, with one exception. IQ is not a real thing. It is an invention of psychologists to give at least some indication of how well an individual can process information. There are different IQ tests, and they measure somewhat different things. Cultural background will affect a person's results on the test.
In a very general way, IQ test scores are useful. But don't take them too seriously.
Studies always show that groups of people who have higher IQs always end up on the top. As far as different parameters such as money, or success, or education, Asians always come in first, then Whites, then Hispanic, then black.
True. But don't forget that those overall demographics are no measure of individual results. There are Asians who are failures, and blacks who are huge successes. As my pseudonym suggests, I'd rather make it about individuals, not demographics. That's not just philosophical; no black person sdhould ever think to himself, "I'm black and blacks don't succeed, so I won't make the effort." And no one else should ever SAY that to him. It becomes self-fulfilling prophesy.
As for IQ, the people who make the tests can be expected to be unavoidably biased. They measure IQ in terms of what they perceive to be intelligence. But there's all kinds of smart.
Excellent movie!
I saw the trailer and immediately thought it was going to be hilarious. Glad I won't be disappointed.
Matt Walsh is very rational, and good on him for thinking his opponents actually mean what they say and want to have clear and consistent beliefs. But they don't. And he isn't funny. He's the blandest man alive.
I think that the most egregious examples of "antiracist" special pleading are refuted upon examination, when it's found that the "racial disparities" in question are statistically insignificant, or nonexistent. There's no need to offer an alternative hypothesis in those cases.
I also find an unfortunate tendency for both antiblack racists (who exist) and antiracists to dwell on negative behaviors that are the exception, not the rule. To put in in shorthand, the fact that percentage disproportions exist in regard to the race of homicide victims focuses on a marginal statistic, not a normative behavior. In any population. The vast majority of black people behave in ways that fall well within the norm for people in general. Especially if they can make it through their teens and early twenties without doing anything that derails their live path. Which is also the case with any other population, particularly for those of us who are male.
Another mistake of the activists is focusing on the series-of-one case. Because it's Media Friendly. And it has "symbolic value." How, exactly? For who? Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't dream of critiquing Media Hypnosis to the newshounds of Instagram, TikTok, et. al. But I don't think anyone gets to complain that the attention to their cause is prioritized unproductively if they support a tactical emphasis of leaning on one incident because it's television/video-friendly. How effective is this tactic, exactly? For who?
The biggest mistake made by the social justice activists--and nearly everyone else--is the insistence on foregrounding "race" as the chief contributor to American social problems. The biggest exacerbating influence on most of the social problems that continue to afflict the US is not Race. It is the 100-year Drug Prohibition War. If anyone would bother to consult that history:
https://adwjeditor.substack.com/p/book-list-of-mexican-drug-war-history
https://adwjeditor.substack.com/p/book-list-of-mexican-drug-war-history
Herd mentalities can ignore that reality all they want, but it won't go away. And I'm not about to stop pointing it out, either.
I gave you most of the explanation.
Just deleted my comment because it was inaccurate. The 'more likely to be incarcerated than employed ' stat is for young black high school dropouts, not all young black men.
About 1 in 55 black men is in prison compared to a 60% labor force participation rate for black men aged 16-24.
I don't see how you have an explanation at all, it sounds like you just want to stop talking about it.
" don't see how you have an explanation at all, it sounds like you just want to stop talking about it."
I have no interest in tail-chasing nonsense. I've been hearing the same tired tropes--at both extremes--since before you were born. Ironic that I was initially directing my criticisms at the social justice warrior types, and now I find that you also object to the conclusion that summed up my original post.
It sounds to me as if you "just want to stop talking about" the possibility that I just raised: that it's really all about the Illicit Drugs Economy.
I'm skeptical that you've read any of the books on my reading list. Some of that 100% Nonfiction Book selection includes material about the effect of our Large, Healthy, Prospering Illicit Drug Economy and its corrosive social effects. Over 50 years of crime paying as economic power, particularly in neighborhoods where it's become endemic--on the quality of school environments, social trust, decreased participation in community institutions and prosocial group endeavors, early exposure to criminality and the rewards of crime, teenage entry-level job experience retailing illicit substances, punitive policing, militarization of police, the history of the escalation of the firearms trade beginning in the 1980s, the massive gains in illicit enrichment that have entrenched gangs both outside of US prisons and within, crimes and violent offenses directly related to involvement in the illicit trade, police and CO corruption, declining police recruitment...
I could list more. It's a lot of history. haven't even gotten to the effects on Immigration.
Haven't mentioned an explicitly "racial" aspect yet. Black people have gotten the worst of it for around the last 40 years, but many of the same Drug war-spawned problems afflict other ethnic groups, including native-born whites.
As you've provided your CV here, I note that you're an Econ major. If you read some of the books on my list, I'd like to think you'd gain some appreciation of the clout that the illicit drug economy has, both stateside and globally. Socially and culturally. As an economic force with political impacts- including corruption, from the 'hood to the country, and from the prisons to the headquarters of banks, from sidewalk sellers of fenced goods to the chartering and regulation loopholes written to protect shell banks and corporations in the halls of Congress, including those of wealthy foreign criminals in the property markets.
See, this research has already been done. In detail, comprehensively. Not in po-mo academic jargon, either.
But apparently you prefer tail-chasing Woke opponents to reviewing the documented history that led me to assert my heretic opinion.
"Just deleted my comment because it was inaccurate. The 'more likely to be incarcerated than employed ' stat is for young black high school dropouts, not all young black men."
Whew. That was a close one, eh? As one researcher to another, I know how you feel. I've made a few blunders like that. The longer a mistake goes uncorrected, the worse it looks on the Great Ledger.
Great review. I agree with the observations, with one exception. IQ is not a real thing. It is an invention of psychologists to give at least some indication of how well an individual can process information. There are different IQ tests, and they measure somewhat different things. Cultural background will affect a person's results on the test.
In a very general way, IQ test scores are useful. But don't take them too seriously.
Studies always show that groups of people who have higher IQs always end up on the top. As far as different parameters such as money, or success, or education, Asians always come in first, then Whites, then Hispanic, then black.
True. But don't forget that those overall demographics are no measure of individual results. There are Asians who are failures, and blacks who are huge successes. As my pseudonym suggests, I'd rather make it about individuals, not demographics. That's not just philosophical; no black person sdhould ever think to himself, "I'm black and blacks don't succeed, so I won't make the effort." And no one else should ever SAY that to him. It becomes self-fulfilling prophesy.
As for IQ, the people who make the tests can be expected to be unavoidably biased. They measure IQ in terms of what they perceive to be intelligence. But there's all kinds of smart.