‘White Supremacy’ Doesn’t Explain Minorities Attacking Asian Americans

The Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino, released findings in March that showed a rise of 149% in reported anti-Asian American hate crimes from 2019 to 2020.

PolitiFact wrote: “The report doesn’t mention former President Donald Trump. However, it does show that Google searches found spikes for racist terms such as ‘China virus’ and ‘Kung Flu’ spiked throughout 2020.”

As to Trump calling the coronavirus the “Chinese virus” or the “Kung Flu,” Asian American Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., said: “It did not help the situation. And frankly, it’s appalling that it’s been allowed … to become this bad. … But we have a long way to go in this country. Asian Americans are still viewed as an ‘other.’”

In short, blame Trump.

But according to Voice of America News: “In New York City, where anti-Asian hate crime soared nearly nine-fold in 2020 over the year before, only two of the 20 people arrested last year in connection with these attacks were white, according to New York Police Department data analyzed by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism. Eleven were African Americans, six were white Hispanics, and one was a Black Hispanic.”

Daily Signal

But not to worry. Professor Jennifer Ho of the University of Colorado at Boulder offers a ready explanation for black hate crimes against Asian Americans: “white superiority.” In an article called “White Supremacy Is the Root of Race-Related Violence in the United States,” Ho writes:

Anti-Asian racism has the same source as anti-Black racism: white supremacy. So when a Black person attacks an Asian person, the encounter is fueled perhaps by racism, but very specifically by white supremacy. White supremacy does not require a white person to perpetuate it. … The dehumanization of Asian people by U.S. society is driven by white supremacy and not by any Black person who may or may not hate Asians.

Behold the power of white supremacy! It programs blacks, according to Ho, to commit hate crimes against Asian Americans. In recent years, there have been approximately 600,000 nonhomicide violent crimes annually between blacks and whites. In about 90% of the cases, it involves a black perpetrator and white victim.

Odd that these omnipotent white supremacists, like Trump, do not invoke their “white supremacy” to program blacks from attacking whites. And why haven’t these white supremacists programmed blacks to vote for Republicans? Maybe they’ll get around to it.

Harvard University and the Roots of Critical Race Theory

“Tracing the history of critical race theory reveals just how intimately connected it is with America’s most prestigious university.” The post first appeared on Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion .

We cover Critical Race Theory as it appears in schools today, but don’t often focus on the history behind it.

Kenny Xu of The Federalist writes about the beginnings of it all at Harvard.

Source: Harvard University and the Roots of Critical Race Theory

According to Furman University Professor of Education Dr. Michael Jennings, critical race theory “came directly out of law at Harvard, which Bell was a major part of.” In 1973, Bell authored a textbook entitled “Race, Racism, and American Law,” in which he contended the American legal system was implicitly racist and must be deconstructed to bring about racial equity. He used the textbook in his law classes, teaching race essentialism and an inchoate critical race theory to his Harvard law students for decades.

The Constitutional Vanguard: Are Emily and Greg Really More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal?

Or, for that matter, Cletus and Rufus?

Big Media has drilled into our heads that employers are racist. One way we “know” this to be true is by reviewing studies that send out resumes with distinctive black names, together with identical resumes with white-sounding names.

Source: The Constitutional Vanguard: Are Emily and Greg Really More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal?

In the 1960’s, Blacks and Whites chose relatively similar first names for their children. Over a short period of time in the early 1970’s, that pattern changed dramatically with most Blacks (particularly those living in racially isolated neighborhoods) adopting increasingly distinctive names, but a subset of Blacks actually moving toward more assimilating names. The patterns in the data appear most consistent with a model in which the rise of the Black Power movement influenced how Blacks perceived their identities. Among Blacks born in the last two decades, names provide a strong signal of socio-economic status, which was not previously the case. We find, however, no negative causal impact of having a distinctively Black name on life outcomes. Although that result is seemingly in conflict with previous audit studies involving resumes, we argue that the two sets of findings can be reconciled.

Source: The Causes and Consequence of Distinctively Black Names

ANDREW SULLIVAN: Removing The Bedrock Of Liberalism: What the “Critical Race Theory” debate is really about

As the origins of our current moral panic about “white supremacy” become more widely debated, we have an obvious problem: how to define the term “Critical Race Theory.” This was never going to be easy, since so much of the academic discourse behind the term is deliberately impenetrable, as it tries to disrupt and dismantle the Western concept of discourse itself. The sheer volume of jargon words, and their mutual relationships, along with the usual internal bitter controversies, all serve to sow confusion. . . .

In his forthcoming book, “The Constitution of Knowledge,” Jonathan Rauch lays out some core principles that liberal societies rely upon. These are not optional if liberal society is to survive. And they are not easy, which is why we have created many institutions and practices to keep them alive. Rauch lists some of them: fallibilism, the belief that anyone, especially you, can always be wrong; objectivity, a rejection of any theory that cannot be proven or disproven by reality; accountability, the openness to conceding and correcting error; and pluralism, the maintenance of intellectual diversity so we maximize our chances of finding the truth.

The only human civilization that has ever depended on these principles is the modern West since the Enlightenment. That’s a few hundred years as opposed to 200,000 or so of Homo sapiens’ history, when tribalism, creedalism, warfare, theocracy or totalitarianism reigned. . . .

My central problem with critical theory is that it takes precise aim at these very core principles and rejects them. By rejecting them, in the otherwise noble cause of helping the marginalized, it is a very seductive and potent threat to liberal civilization.

It’s not in a noble cause. It just pretends to be. It is in fact about gaining and retaining power through the deliberate employment of bigotry.

Source: ANDREW SULLIVAN: Removing The Bedrock Of Liberalism

EUGENE VOLOKH: Race and Violent Crime….

An article by a criminal law professor Thursday in the Columbus Dispatch included this assertion:

The reality is that Black-on-Black crime is a myth, and that Black and white people routinely commit crimes at similar rates, but Black people are overwhelmingly targeted for arrest.

Yet I think this is not the reality, at least as to violent crimes of the sort that are usually labeled “black-on-black” when committed by black criminals against black victims. (Blacks and whites do seem to commit drug possession and drug distribution crimes at relatively similar rates, but in this post I focus on violent crimes.) As best we can tell,

  • blacks appear to commit violent crimes at a substantially higher rate per capita than do whites;
  • there seems to be little aggregate disparity between the rate at which blacks commit violent crimes (especially when one focuses on crimes where the victims say they reported the crimes to the police) and the rate at which blacks are arrested for crimes; and
  • the black-on-black crime rate is especially high.

Of course, it’s always hard to measure what the actual crime rate is for any group (whether for purposes of claiming that the rates are similar or that they are different). Still, the most reliable data, to my knowledge, is generally the National Crime Victimization Survey, and the U.S. Justice Department Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that are based on that survey. Indeed, the link in the quoted sentence from the article goes to a source that relies on such data.

Because the NCVS surveys a large group of people about their experiences with crime victimization, it is not based on what is reported to the police and what the police do with it. (The Uniform Crime Reports is based on data from police departments, and is thus generally a less reliable measure of actual crime.) Naturally, there are possible sources of bias in victim reports. But the NCVS seems to be the best data we have, and I know of no better source that yields other results. (If you do know, please let me know.)

Here, then, is the data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ Race and Ethnicity of Violent Crime Offenders and Arrestees, 2018, with regard to “rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault“:

….

Blacks, which here means non-Hispanic blacks, were 12.5% of the U.S. population, and non-Hispanic whites were 60.4%. It thus appears from this data that the black per capita violent crime rate is roughly 2.3 to 2.8 times the rate for the country as a whole, while the white per capita violent crime rate is roughly 0.7 to 0.9 times the rate for the country as a whole.

It also appears that the arrest rates for violent crime are roughly comparable to the rates of offending, especially if one takes into account those offenses reported to the police (which is a choice of the victims, not of police departments). And the great bulk of such violent crime is intraracial.

The disparity is even more striking for murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, which the NCVS doesn’t measure (since the crime victim can’t respond to the survey), and which thus relies on the police department reports in the UCR…

Source: EUGENE VOLOKH: Race and Violent Crime….

The left’s ‘white supremacist’ lie

Timothy Furnish:

In 2019 I wrote in these very pages about the lie that “white supremacist terrorism” is the greatest threat to Americans. Back in those pre-plague days, it was mostly the media spreading this myth. But now, it’s the President of the United States. Last week Biden, in his de facto State of the Union speech, claimed that “white supremacists” are “the most lethal terrorist threat to the US.” In fact, Islam’s jihadists pale in comparison. And Biden even adduced the federal intelligence agencies to support this contention.

The problem: it’s not even remotely true.

First, the global picture. The US State Department has published, for decades, a list of foreign terrorist organizations. As of today it has 72 groups. Fifty-six of those, or 78%, are Islamic ones. It also includes two new ISIS affiliates (Democratic Republic of the Congo and Mozambique). These were recently added by the Biden Administration. Of the remaining 16, seven are nationalist-separatist. Seven are Marxist. One is Jewish. One is eclectically apocalyptic (Aum Shinrikyo). None is “white supremacist.”

(This is defined by the Department of Homeland Security. It includes “individuals who seek…through unlawful acts of force or violence, to support their belief in the intellectual and moral superiority of the white race over other races.” And the Democrats and media constantly conflate “white” with “right-wing.”)

Other country’s lists are similarly chock-full of Muslim organizations. The United Arab Emirates’ terrorist manifest contains 86 groups, 85 of which are Islamic. (That must make the UAE’s Muslim rulers Islamophobic, I suppose.) The UK proscribes 55 terrorist groups, 47 of which (85%) are Muslim. All the entities which Communist China deems terrorist are Islamic (“East Turkestani”) ones. And so it goes. And anyone who thinks “foreign” terrorism can’t hit America has been asleep, or hiding in his basement, far too long.

No “White Supremacists” on Domestic Terrorist Lists

Then there’s the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorists” directory. Ninety-two percent of folks there (23/25) are Muslim. The two exceptions? A white vegan/animal rights extremist, and a black female cop-killer. The Bureau also puts up a “Domestic Terrorism” subpage. As you might guess, none of the perps is wearing a MAGA hat or a Heil Hydra QAnon shirt. Four of them are black — three men, one woman. One of the former is Muslim, and all the males hijacked planes way back when Three Dog Night was big.

The black female helped rob a Brinks truck, killing some cops, then fled to Cuba. Another four are white women. But none are Baptist home schooling moms. Two are Communists, one an Animal Liberation Front fanatic, and one — I kid you not — a Black Panther. All engaged in violence of some sort. Three of these wanted domestic terrorists are Hispanics: one a Puerto Rican separatist and bomb-maker, the other two plane hijackers.

Yes, there is ONE white male herein. But he’s a Leftist who helped bomb the University of Wisconsin years ago. So it’s doubtful he’s pining for another Trump term.

There is more.

This appears to explain the lack of “white supremacist” crime.  I Think Biden and the Democrats would like to classify Trump supporters regardless of race as “white supremacist.”  That is why they are eager to call black criminals attacking Asians as “white supremacists.”  It has become an all-purpose insult of people they do not like having nothing whatsoever to do with white supremacists.

Source: The left’s ‘white supremacist’ lie

ILYA SHAPIRO: The voter suppression lie. The voting wars have flared up again, though they’ve …

ILYA SHAPIRO: The voter suppression lie. The voting wars have flared up again, though they’ve never really been far from the national political debate since Donald Trump was elected in 2016, or the Supreme Court decided Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 — or really Bush v. Gore in 2000.

….

Sorting out fact from fiction is not only important for this particular law, the fallout from which has already reached Major League Baseball and some Hollywood productions, but to understand the general debate over election regulation in America.

The Georgia law limits ballot drop boxes to places they can’t be tampered with (such as early voting sites), standardizes weekend voting hours, and asks people to write a driver’s license or Social Security number on absentee ballot envelopes.

….

SB 202 does indeed improve voting access for most Georgians, entrenching the new opportunities to vote early and absentee (by mail and drop-off) introduced during the pandemic. For example, during a generous, at least compared to blue states such as New York and the president’s own home state of Delaware, 17 days of in-person early voting, voting locations have to be open at least eight hours, with county officials given leeway to adjust the times to suit their constituents. Election Day voting hours are even longer. The window for requesting absentee ballots, which can be done online, is reduced to a “mere” 67 days, starting 11 weeks and closing 11 days before an election, to allow time for the ballot to be mailed out and returned. . . .

Attempts by progressive groups and Democratic politicians to tie SB 202 to the era of segregation and systemic racial disenfranchisement are thus remarkably dishonest. Even the bizarre attack on the provision purportedly limiting the distribution of water to voters waiting in line is all wet. Many states have similar anti-electioneering (or anti-vote-buying) rules, which, as colorfully detailed by Dan McLaughlin in National Review, make it illegal to send “people in National Rifle Association t-shirts and MAGA hats to hand out free Koch-brothers-financed, Federalist Society-branded pizza to voters.” To again pick on the Empire State, New York explicitly prohibits giving voters “meat, drink, tobacco, refreshment or provision” unless the sustenance is worth less than a dollar and the person providing it isn’t identified. To be perfectly clear, under the new Georgia law, poll workers can still provide water to voters, and anyone can donate food and drink for election workers to set out for those waiting in line.

As for voter ID, SB 202 simply adds a requirement that voters provide the number of their driver’s license or (free) state identification card to apply for a ballot, the same as California, New Jersey, and Virginia, and one of those (or the last four digits of a Social Security number) when returning it. Surely, applying a numerical voter-verification requirement to absentee or mailed ballots is better than the inexact science (to say the least) of signature-matching. Colorado, now a solidly blue state that votes entirely by mail, rejected 29,000 ballots last fall (about 1 in 112) because the mailed signatures didn’t match those on file. That doesn’t count the 11,000 who were allowed to “cure” the issue by texting in a picture of a — gasp — photo ID. Illustrating the point further, the Tampa Bay Times just came out with an amusing article about how Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s signature has changed over the years, apparently leading to his ballot being tossed in a 2016 primary.

Voter ID more generally is hugely popular, including among Democrats.

Source: ILYA SHAPIRO: The voter suppression lie. The voting wars have flared up again, though they’ve …

[Eugene Volokh] Race and Violent Crime

[Do “Black and white people routinely commit crimes at similar rates,” if we focus on violent crime? Is “Black-on-Black crime … a myth”?]

An article by a criminal law professor Thursday in the Columbus Dispatch included this assertion:

The reality is that Black-on-Black crime is a myth, and that Black and white people routinely commit crimes at similar rates, but Black people are overwhelmingly targeted for arrest.

Yet I think this is not the reality, at least as to violent crimes of the sort that are usually labeled “black-on-black” when committed by black criminals against black victims. (Blacks and whites do seem to commit drug possession and drug distribution crimes at relatively similar rates, but in this post I focus on violent crimes.)

….

Here, then, is the data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ Race and Ethnicity of Violent Crime Offenders and Arrestees, 2018, with regard to “rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault“:

….

Still, the best data that I know of suggests that

  • black-on-black violent crime is not a myth;

  • blacks and whites generally commit violent crimes at substantially disparate rates (and, for homicides, sharply disparate rates); and

  • as best we can tell, the disparity in arrest rates for violent crimes is pretty close to the disparity in crimes that are committed, and especially crimes that the victims report to the police.

Source: [Eugene Volokh] Race and Violent Crime

You might want to send friends a link to this article on CRT

We’ve discussed Critical Race Theory many times on this blog. But it’s easy to forget that it’s still not exactly a household word, even though it’s been dominating so much of the current turmoil, and has found its way into schools both private and public. It’s one of the most dangerous and divisive philosophies that has ever hit this country, and people need to learn what it is and why it needs to be fought.

Here’s the article. It’s long, but that’s true of just about any treatment of CRT, and this one is shorter than many. There’s really no time to spare in getting the word out.

Source: You might want to send friends a link to this article on CRT

The left exposed as racist on Voter ID

Just so we’re not throwing around numbers arbitrarily, Crowder’s site lined up the stats for you to see for yourself:

  • Majorities of whites (74%), blacks (73%), and other minorities (82%) say voters should be required to show photo identification before being allowed to vote. SOURCE: Rasmussen
  • 87% of black people have some form of confirmed photo ID. SOURCE: ProjectVote (pg. 3)
  • 90% of Latin Americans have a form of confirmed photo ID. SOURCE: ProjectVote (pg. 3)
  • Percentage of Americans who have ID vs. percentage who vote. SOURCE: CNN
    • 87% of black people have ID, only 13% voted in the 2020 Election.
    • 90% of Latin Americans have ID, only 13% voted in the 2020 Elections.
    • 95% of white people have ID, only 67% voted in 2020 Elections.
  • 97% of registered voters in Georgia have a valid ID. SOURCE: AJC
  • Voter ID laws have been shown to actually INCREASE turnout in states that recommend them, such as Georgia and Indiana. SOURCES: HeritageHeritage
    • Specifically in Georgia from 2004 to 2008, turnout increased
      • 140% among Hispanic/Latino voters
      • 42% among Black voters
      • Compared to 8% of Whites

This confirms what I have been saying all along about the racism of those who think blacks are incapable of getting an ID.  It is absurdly racist on its face.  The real reason Democrats oppose voter ID is that it makes it harder for them to cheat.  It makes it harder to stuff the ballot boxes.

Source: The left exposed as racist on Voter ID