“The likelihood that you’re going to have a book in kindergarten or third grade called ‘Critical Race Theory’ is extremely remote. That is not what happens.”

My appearance on Point of View with Chris Berg: “What happens is they take the concepts of Critical Race Theory, and they maybe call it something else …. But the concepts are the same, which is that the country, the nation is systemically racist.

Source: “The likelihood that you’re going to have a book in kindergarten or third grade called ‘Critical Race Theory’ is extremely remote. That is not what happens.”

Mandatory CRT-Based Program Coming to a School…

GET YOUR KIDS OUT OF PUBLIC INDOCTRINATION CENTERS: Mandatory CRT-Based Program Coming to a School Near You. Olly olly oxen free ! Also: Commies, leave the kids alone!

….

As I started to evangelize on this message, I realized that I would actually have to read the damn books if I wanted to have any credibility.  I couldn’t just read the snippets and sound-bites.  Just in the forward section of Critical Race Theory, an Introduction, was the most mind-blowing understanding of how racist this construct was:

“None of my professors talked about race or ethnicity; it was apparently irrelevant to the law. None of my professors in the first year talked about feminism or the concerns of women, either. These concerns were also, apparently, irrelevant. Nowhere, in fact, did the cases and materials we read address concerns of group inequality, sexual difference, or cultural identity. There was only one Law, a law that in its universal majesty applied to everyone without regard to race, color, gender, or creed.”

All I could think was “isn’t that what the Law SHOULD do???”

But no, CRT proponents seriously believe we need to parcel everyone out into little sub groups and attach a oppressor/victim status to each of them.  Which child is going to be better off for this kind of thinking?  It’s child abuse on either side!  The purpose of CRT learning is to inflict equity.  It is NOT about equality of opportunity.

Source: GET YOUR KIDS OUT OF PUBLIC INDOCTRINATION CENTERS: Mandatory CRT-Based Program Coming to a School…

“Rape-colored skin” — the newest lunacy from the BLM crew — Bookworm Room

Until American Blacks abandon learned trauma from events that occurred more than 156 or even 57 years ago, we will never have racial harmony. I never post on Facebook anymore but I do check it regularly because it allows me to see what the loony-leftists in my world think is important. The latest “oh. my.…

“Rape-colored skin” — the newest lunacy from the BLM crew — Bookworm Room

But you must admit “rape colored” does sound a lot more sinister than “canola colored”, even though rape and canola are the same plant.

First-Hand Experience is Less Biased Than News

When someone sets aside their first-hand experience, statisticians are hoping – perhaps even assuming – that they rely on random sampling instead.  In the real world, however, almost no one does this.  For the vast majority of human beings, the alternative to first-hand experience is not statistics, but news.  And compared to news, first-hand experience is ultra-reliable, for a long list of reasons.

1. Random error.  Since the news is a vast industry, this might seem like a minor problem.  Due to severe media herding, however, the problem remains severe.  Journalists are not independent draws, but echoes in a vast echo chamber.

2. Selection bias.  Journalists are far from average humans.  They are highly-educated and highly-left-wing.  Even more importantly, they are desperately trying to grab people’s attention with shocking anecdotes and images.  What’s more, they have impressive resources to hunt down these shocking anecdotes and images.  The upshot is that media selection bias is literally off the charts.  What they choose to show is outside the first-hand experience all humans on Earth.  By which I mean that zero humans have personally experienced all – or even a tiny sliver – of the horrors on the news.

3. Availability bias.  After filtering reality through the biases of their ideology and need to grab people’s attention, journalists take the distillate and run it through yet another filter: their own memories.  So when they bring up old stories, or provide context for new stories, they are piling bias on bias.

As you may have heard, when you see moonshine marked “XXX,” this means that the liquid has been filtered three times.  Each filtration raises the alcohol content.  This is a fine metaphor for the media.  Journalists filter their experience over and over until they have a final product strong enough to make you blind.

By comparison, then, first-hand experience is a fountain of truth.  If statisticians tell you to fear something you’ve never experienced during decades of life, you may want to consider the possibility that you’ve led a charmed life.  If the media tells you the same thing, however, the wise response is to roll your eyes and rely on your first-hand experience.  While you’re not an average human, your first-hand experience almost certainty tells you that racism is rare, serious crime is ultra-rare, that terrorism is basically non-existent, and that the vast majority of people in rich countries are materially prosperous.  The media are in no position to “correct” you  – or anyone, really.  Politics aside, they are practically the most biased source on Earth.

Source: Econlib.org

Dennis Prager likes to tell of the time he was due to give a talk some distance away from where he had spent the night in a hotel.

The news was full of warnings of a horrible blizzard on its way. The weather looked fine. He decided to drive to the location.

The weather stayed fine, and there was hardly any traffic. The blizzard never materialized, but everyone was staying off the road because of the news of the horrible blizzard. People were putting more faith in the news reports than their own eyes.

Hat tip: Some Non-Covid Links

African-Americans need a Great Awakening to repair their broken culture

I don’t think I’m being racist when I point to problems plaguing American blacks. According to Nate Silver:

From 2010 through 2012, the annual rate of homicide deaths among non-Hispanic white Americans was 2.5 per 100,000 persons, meaning that about one in every 40,000 white Americans is a homicide victim each year. By comparison, the rate of homicide deaths among non-Hispanic black Americans is 19.4 per 100,000 persons, or about 1 in 5,000 people per year.

Black Americans are almost eight times as likely as white ones to be homicide victims, in other words.

Take away black homicides, and America’s homicide rate is in line with Western Europe’s (at least, in line with Western Europe’s before the refugee influx). Moreover, it’s not whites or police who are killing blacks. It’s blacks who are killing blacks.

….

The Great Awakening, however, was something quite different, because it remade Western European culture in ways lasting well into the early 20th century. The Great Awakening changed Westerners’ concept of what constituted moral behavior within a person and as that person related to others. Religion was no longer a Sunday thing. It was a lifestyle.

With this rejiggered morality, the Great Awakening paved the way for abolition, the end of child labor, the 40 hour work week, and even women’s suffrage. Nor was this merely a period of mass religious hysteria. Instead, it was a catalyst for a sharp turn to humanism, not just among the thinkers, but at all levels of society.

….

Based upon the above premises, I’ve concluded to my own satisfaction that whites cannot save blacks; that pulling down offensive statutes cannot save blacks; that castigating everyone in the world as the “root cause” of black suffering (even if we accept this as true for argument’s sake) cannot save blacks; that politicians cannot save blacks; and that Democrats cannot save blacks (and, indeed, will continue to inflict practical and spiritual damage on them). Only blacks can save blacks.

Bookworm Room

Only Monopolists With Sinecures Can Get Away With Such Nonsense

Editor:

You rightly support parents who resist the poisoning by K-12 public schools of schoolchildren’s minds with Critical Race Theory (“The Teachers Unions Go Woke,” July 8). But of course such resistance would be much easier and more sure in a regime of school choice. In such a regime, each school’s funding would depend exclusively on its ability to attract parents.

No lawsuit or political campaign can be as effective as would genuine competition among schools at obliging teachers actually to teach rather than to indoctrinate.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics

Source: Only Monopolists With Sinecures Can Get Away With Such Nonsense

Hugh Hewitt pointed out, when stimulus payments had been authorized to parents in the amount of $250 per child, that amount would cover tuition at a large fraction of private schools, especially parochial ones. In effect, the Administration had passed a voucher program, if parents chose to use it that way.

I wonder how many parents have been able to use those payments that way.

NEWS YOU CAN USE: Manhattan Institute Offers Toolkit for Parents to Fight Back Against Woke Schools….

NEWS YOU CAN USE: Manhattan Institute Offers Toolkit for Parents to Fight Back Against Woke Schools.

Something peculiar is spreading throughout America’s schools. A public school system just outside the nation’s capital spent $20,000 to be lectured about making their schools less racist.[1]At a tony New York City prep school, a teacher was publicly denounced by the administration for questioning the idea that students should identify themselves in terms of their racial identity.[2] Educators in California are locked in pitched combat over a statewide model curriculum overflowing with terms like “hxrstories” and “cisheteropatriarchy.”[3]

Source: NEWS YOU CAN USE: Manhattan Institute Offers Toolkit for Parents to Fight Back Against Woke Schools….

Source: Woke Schooling: A Toolkit for Concerned Parents

The truth about CRT

Again, we need to distinguish between teaching about CRT and teaching in CRT

 Christopher Rufo:

Moderator Chris Wallace asked President Trump during Tuesday’s debate why he “directed federal agencies to end racial sensitivity training that addresses white privilege or critical race theory.” Mr. Trump answered: “I ended it because it’s racist.” Participants “were asked to do things that were absolutely insane,” he explained. “They were teaching people to hate our country.”

“Nobody’s doing that,” Joe Biden replied. He’s wrong.

My reporting on critical race theory in the federal government was the impetus for the president’s executive order, so I can say with confidence that these training sessions had nothing to do with developing “racial sensitivity.” As I documented in detailed reports for City Journal and the New York Post, critical race theory training sessions in public agencies have pushed a deeply ideological agenda that includes reducing people to a racial essence, segregating them, and judging them by their group identity rather than their individual merit.

The examples are instructive. At a series of events at the Treasury Department and federal financial agencies, diversity trainer Howard Ross taught employees that America was “built on the backs of people who were enslaved” and that all white Americans are complicit in the system of white supremacy “by automatic response to the ways [they’re] taught.” In accompanying documents, Ross argues that white employees can be reduced to the quality of “whiteness,” which is a form of inborn oppression, and must “struggle to own their racism.” He instructs “white managers” to conduct “listening sessions” in which black employees can explain “what it means to be Black” and be “seen in their pain,” with white employees instructed to “sit in their discomfort” and not “fill the silence” with their “own thoughts and feelings.” Black employees, Mr. Ross says, are not “obligated to like you, thank you, feel sorry for you, or forgive you.” For trainings like this, Mr. Ross and his firm have been paid $5 million over 15 years, according to federal disclosures.

At the Sandia National Laboratories, which develops technology for America’s nuclear arsenal, executives held a racially segregated training session for white male employees. The three-day event, which was led by a company called White Men As Full Diversity Partners, set the goal of examining “white male culture” and making the employees take responsibility for their “while privilege,” “male privilege” and “heterosexual privilege.” In one of the opening exercises, the instructors wrote on a whiteboard that “white male culture” can be associated with “white supremacists,” “KKK,” “Aryan Nation,” “MAGA hat” and “mass killings.” On the final day, the trainers asked the employees to write letters to women and people of color, with one participant apologizing for his privilege and another pledging to “be a better ally.”

At the Department of Homeland Security, diversity trainers held a session on “microaggressions,” based on the work of psychologist Derald Sue. In his academic work, Dr. Sue argues that white Americans have been “fed a racial curriculum based on falsehoods, unwarranted fears, and the belief in their own superiority,” and thus have been “socialized into oppressor roles.” Trainers taught Homeland Security employees that the “myth of meritocracy” and “color blindness” are foundations of racist “microaggressions” and “microinequities.” The trainers insisted that phrases such as “America is the land of opportunity,” “Everybody can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough,” and “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” are racist statements that harm people of color. They are merely code for “People of color are lazy and/or incompetent and need to work harder.” If a white employee disagrees, his or her point of view is dismissed as a “denial of individual racism” which the trainers deem another type of microaggression.

Source: The truth about CRT

The Reusable Bag Fairy Tale

First, mea culpa: I was a big believer in reusable bags, though I have the rip-stop nylon kind, not cotton. The entire 144-page paper, “Life Cycle Assessment of grocery carrier bags,” here . (See page 13 for “executive summary” in English.) This life cycle analysis by Denmark’s Environment Ministry compares plastic bags with alternatives. [ https://t.co/IRTGtP7alS ] It finds that you must reuse a shopping bag from Organic cotton 20,000 times if you want the environmental damage to be lower than that of 1 plastic bag. pic.twitter.com/zfg7XI9YIg — Max Roser (@MaxCRoser) July 4, 2021 The researchers’ take, ultimately:

Screen Shot 2021-07-04 at 9.21.45 PM.png

Source: The Reusable Bag Fairy Tale