Progressivism Destroys Intellectual Honesty

I. Introduction

The 1619 Project, which originated in the New York Times, is the most outrageous fraud on this nation in 100 years. It is nothing more than a race hustler’s post-modernist rewrite of American history, explicitly intended to stir racial resentment in this nation for political ends. That is evil.

II. Wilentz honestly challenges the 1619 Project’s accuracy.

According to Wilentz, the 1619 Project promotes “a narrow, highly ideological view of the American past, according to which white supremacy has been the nation’s core principle and chief mission ever since its founding.” He explains more in a recent article, The 1619 Project and Living in Truth:

III. Wilentz destroys his article’s integrity with his obsessive need to lob entirely false and dishonest attacks against conservatives who have made the same arguments he is making.

IV. As a general matter, Wilentz is either fatally naïve, completely blind, or dishonestly partisan when it comes to the left’s role in creating an intellectual mindset supporting and promoting the utterly fallacious, but very damaging, 1619 Project.

V. The Times’s response to the five historians’ letter is a perfect distillation of the historic dishonesty and modern political activism behind the 1619 Project and American leftism in general.

VI. In the end, when given a choice between wisdom and blind partisanship—the red pill or the blue—Wilentz chose the blue pill and the consolation of aligning himself with a political movement that exists to destroy America — and which ironically enough, also means destroying much of Wilentz’s life’s work.

Source: Bookworm Room

Kyle Rittenhouse Not Guilty via Rule-of-Law, Guilty; Guilty via Critical Race Theory

This correspondent has reported extensively on the Kyle Rittenhouse incident and trial in Kenosha, Wisconsin, for AmmoLand, with over two dozen articles in the last 14 months.

Very early on, this correspondent explained there was no murder case, no criminal reckless endangerment, no firearms charge which was consistent with the law.

Repeatedly, the prosecutor, ADA Binger, informed the court the firearms charge was based on what the prosecution believed the law had to be, rather than on what the law was.  It is a microcosm of the left. Decisions are made on what the left believes reality *should be* rather than what reality *is*.

The firearms charge was important to lend the air of illegality to what was obviously legal and ethical self defense.

The case should never have been brought. The performance of the prosecutors during the trial confirmed the prosecution was done for political purposes rather than to bring justice.

The job of a prosecutor is to pursue justice. It is not to obtain successful prosecutions.

The decision not to charge is every bit as important as the decision to charge a suspect.

Six charges were brought against Kyle Rittenhouse less than 48 hours after the self defense shootings occurred. Wisconsin does not require indictments by a grand jury. Charges are commonly brought exclusively by prosecutors.

Kyle Rittenhouse  tried to turn himself in to the police within minutes of the events. He had successfully turned himself in to police about an hour after the events. This was characterized in the media as “being arrested” or “being taken into custody” rather than the factual “turning himself in to police”.

A seventh charge, of violating curfew, was added to the first six charges, in late December, 2020, months after the events in August. The prosecutors botched this late, attempted pile-on. It was later determined no lawful order about the curfew had been entered on August 25.

The next strategy was to hold Kyle in jail with exorbitantly high bail, in order to prevent a good defense, to push him to accept a plea bargain. It is a common, and despicable, prosecution tactic.

In a self defense case where the defendant turned himself in quickly, where voluminous evidence of self defense existed, Kyle should have been released on signature bond, or, at most a few thousand dollars bail.  Kyle’s bail was set at $2 million. This is more evidence of a political persecution, instead of a criminal prosecution.

Source: Kyle Rittenhouse Not Guilty via Rule-of-Law, Guilty; Guilty via Critical Race Theory

No, Seriously, What if Kyle Rittenhouse Had Been Black?

One of the questions that arose during the trial, thanks to CNN’s legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, was related to how this situation would have played out if Kyle Rittenhouse was black. Of course, the insinuation is that he would have been treated much more harshly. Hard leftists on Twitter also made this claim, arguing that a black Rittenhouse would not have been acquitted.

Redstate.com

The Lies About Rittenhouse Are Not Innocent Mistakes

Corporate media outlets are not fanning the flames of racial division for ratings or relevance. The goal is revolution, the rewriting of our Constitution and the dismantling of Western civilization.

“Rittenhouse crossed state lines!”

That rallying cry was no accident. That’s a talking point handed to the useful idiots working inside corporate media. It’s propaganda. So was presidential candidate Joe Biden’s insinuation that Rittenhouse is a white supremacist.

Corporate media’s fixation on defining every human encounter in racial terms is a tactic, not a virtue-signal born of white guilt. It’s a strategy that characterizes America’s 400-year narrative arc as racial conflict rather than a moral, societal evolution.

….

“Well, if Rittenhouse was black, the police would have shot him on sight, and the jury would have convicted him of murder.”

Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, fired the first shot, striking a Louisville police officer. Walker was never charged with shooting a cop. He’s viewed as a victim and a hero. On the same day Rittenhouse was acquitted, Andrew Coffee was acquitted of murder and attempted murder charges surrounding his shootout with police in Florida. Coffee is black. He’s a felon. He illegally possessed a firearm.

These lies aren’t being told for ratings and relevance. They’re not told out of guilt. The lies camouflage the agenda. They create the illusion that revolutionaries are really just well-intentioned anti-racists. Anyone who objects is a racist or supports white supremacy.

Source: The Lies About Rittenhouse Are Not Innocent Mistakes

The Myth of White Privilege

Throughout academia, the corporate world, and government, leaders are pushing the notion that American society advantages whites and disadvantages blacks. The notion of white privilege, though, is mistaken, thereby rendering worthless much of the teaching and underlying research.

In 1989, Wellesley College’s Peggy McIntosh published her influential article, “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” This article tied in with a group she founded, Seeking Educational Equity & Diversity (SEED). Since 1986, SEED has trained 2,200 teachers and professors in more than 40 countries. As a result, her work has influenced and will continue to influence millions of students.

….

There is little reason to believe that racial injustice caused the lion’s share of white-black differences. Racial groups differ in their cultural environment. According to the Center for Equal Opportunity, in 2018 40% of births in the United States were out of wedlock. The particular out-of-wedlock birth rates were 11.7% for Asians, 69% for blacks, 52% for Hispanics, 68% for Native Americans, and 28% for whites. According to the Brooking Institution’s Isabel Sawhill, children raised by single mothers are less likely to graduate, do worse in school, have more physical and psychological problems, are more likely to be involved in crime, and so on. The out-of-wedlock birth rates in the black community have been skyrocketing over the decades even as alleged racism has been plummeting. In addition, the general ordering of out-of-wedlock birth rates likely tracks the countries from which people came. Hence, it is unlikely that racism explains most, let alone all, of these differences.

Next, consider intelligence. Since 1970, Oxford University’s Nathan Cofnas points out that if we exclude children, the black-white IQ gap has remained roughly constant, at approximately one standard deviation. This is a big gap. IQ matters because it correlates with crime, education, jobs, marriage, out-of-wedlock childbearing, and so on. There is a heated debate as to whether genetics cause some of the gap. It is worth noting that anonymous surveys indicate that a significant percentage of experts in intelligence think this is so. See, for example, Heiner Rindermann and colleagues’ 2016 and 2020 studies. Even if the gap is 100% environmental, it does not follow that racism alone explains it.

The white privilege proponents might claim that these differences result from, and only from, racism, whether past or present. However, this claim rests on the notion that we can compare the role of racism to other causes such as blameworthy choices, non-racist cultural differences, and genetics. If these causes cannot be factored out, and neither proponents nor others have done so, their claim is purely speculative.

Even if there were white privilege, it would not matter morally. As philosopher Spencer Case points out, the mere fact that one group is doing better than a second is morally irrelevant. Attractive people likely have advantages in datingemploymentincomesex, etc. when compared to their unattractive competitors. The same is true for tall people. Attractive and tall people should not feel guilty about their advantages, try to nullify them, or pay compensation for them. This is because they did not violate their competitors’ rights or commit other types of injustice.

Source: The Myth of White Privilege

CRT Article of Faith: Blacks Are Picked On By Police

The high rates of arrest, conviction, and imprisonment of black people, are part of systemic racism.

Race and Ethnicity of Violent Crime Offenders and Arrestees, 2018 compares race of offenders from Uniform Crime Reports and victim reports from NCVS to see if police charge blacks disproportionately to their involvement in violent crimes.  The answer is that Hispanics seem to be disproportionately arrested but white and black offenders are charged at rates comparable to victim reporting.  Table 3.

Source: Clayton Cramer

Book Review: ‘Woke Racism’ by John McWhorter

This eloquent manifesto is Mr. McWhorter’s 22nd book, a majority of those on the subject of linguistics. His is a split personality: A linguist in his day job as a professor at Columbia University (specializing in creoles, particularly the Saramaccan language in Suriname), he’s also an outspoken commentator on race whenever the national mood requires it. As Mr. McWhorter’s thinking on race is in conflict with that of the black American political mainstream, he’s often miscast as a black conservative by glib taxonomists. But he’s careful to point out that he wasn’t “thinking of right-wing America as my audience,” even as he acknowledges that many liberal readers will think him “traitorous” for writing this book.

Wall Street Journal

Mr. McWhorter’s targets in “Woke Racism” are antiracist crusaders whom he calls the Elect—borrowing a term used by the essayist Joseph Bottum in his book “An Anxious Age” (2014). Mr. McWhorter chooses not to call these people Social Justice Warriors or Inquisitors, deeming those labels “unsuitably dismissive” and “mean,” respectively. He’s not the first to trace the “rootstock” of their ideology to critical race theory. This is a once-fringe belief, now muscling its way into mainstream thought, that every individual’s fate is determined by racial “hierarchy” and power. The theory contends, writes Mr. McWhorter, that a nonwhite in America is “akin to the captive oarsman slave straining belowdecks in chains.

”The Elect, Mr. McWhorter notes, pursue a proselytizing brand of antiracism that has had a particularly harmful effect on academic inquiry, “sometimes strangling it like kudzu.” Bestselling books like Robin DiAngelo’s “White Fragility”—which flagellates white people for their incurable racism—and Ibram X. Kendi’s “How to Be an Antiracist” are the gospels of the antiracist left.

The Elect have a weapon in their arsenal that lends them outsize power. As a result of the “genuine and invaluable change” that has occurred in the modern white American since the Civil Rights movement, “being called a racist is all but equivalent to being called a pedophile.” Those who police our minds for racism believe that Americans who don’t fight to overturn “the systemic pervasiveness of white supremacy” must be regarded as racist themselves. The world of the Elect is “Manichaean,” its fervor “absolutist.”

The book finishes with a robust marine metaphor. Mr. McWhorter suggests that the woke be dealt with the way some swimmers deal with sharks. “You can make a shark approaching you go away by bopping it on the nose,” he writes. The Elect are like sharks. They need to be bopped on the nose.

Thomas Sowell vs. Critical Race Theory

Long before the new generation of race hucksters came along, Thomas Sowell offered pre-buttals to their arguments.

Intellectuals give people who have the handicap of poverty the further handicap of a sense of victimhood,” wrote Thomas Sowell, who himself grew up in poverty and was orphaned in early childhood. Continuing the thought in Intellectuals and Society (2010), he reflected on the damage done by our supposedly smartest thinkers

Source: Thomas Sowell vs. Critical Race Theory