SJW’s and Anti-Asian Racism

It’s in the National Review, but it’s nice to see it out there anyway: Why Social Justice Warriors Think It’s Okay To Be Racist Towards Asians. It brings up many of the issues that we’ve discussed over the years. Asians get screwed by colleges in college admissions, Asians get targeted for violence on the streets, but no one sheds any tears for us.

In another MTV video, “If You Farted Every Time You Were Racist,” the Asian-American character is the subject of racism by a white character, but she was also shown dishing out racism to a black character. The black character, of course, wasn’t racist to any other character, because, according to MTV News, she can’t be. As Franchesca Ramsey, host of MTV News’ Decoded, said in another video, racism is defined in entirely leftist terms. For example, sounding like a college freshman who has recently been indoctrinated by her lefty Sociology 101 reading, she claims, “Reverse racism is not a thing.” And yet, as we’ve seen, it is indeed a thing.

It’s amazing how tired I am of this stuff. I can’t even talk about identity politics anymore. That’s how tired I am. As sick and tired as I am of Trump’s incompetence and obtuse behavior, I’m even more sickened by the lies, hypocrisy, hatred, cowardice, racism, and violence coming from the Far Left. They won the cultural war, which is why Asian Americans don’t have a significant voice in the public sphere. It’s why Asian women get raped, Asian delivery men get beaten and murdered, Asians of both genders get thrown in front of trains, and no one bats an eye.

People have been posting about the mass resignations from the President’s Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. I’m going to catch fire from the AA blogosphere if anyone sees this, but I’m not sure that’s necessarily a bad thing. Too many people who serve on such commissions are professional whiners who are obsessed with leftist URM victimology. People who’ve made a living from Asian American identity politics have screwed us. Good ideas rarely come from people who serve on boards like the President’s Advisory Commission. Remember how Congressman Ted Lieu bravely stood up to the SJW racists who were promoting affirmative racism? It was a resounding victory for a community that rarely experiences political victories. Lieu didn’t get that idea from a commission; he got that idea from his own hard-working Asian American constituents who were angry at getting kicked around by liberal racists.

Trump is kissing up to Putin and endangering the country with his incompetence and anti-Muslim xenophobia, but yes, I’m standing by my statement that he was always the best pick from race relations, especially for those of us who have always been silenced. It’s an opportunity for us to finally break through the leftist monopoly on the public sphere. Let’s hope more of our voices are heard.

383 thoughts on “SJW’s and Anti-Asian Racism

  1. I think this is somewhat short-sighted. Trump is currently being flagrant against the SJWs’ URMs™ and the regressive leftists with their media propaganda is responding in full force. However, don’t forget Trump also is targeting China (despite his own sweatshop manufacturing is also done there) and that by proxy Chinese/Asian-Americans are also targets by the alt-right.

    In fact, Bannon is known to be anti-Chinese racist and thinks that war with China is inevitable. Guess who’s going to be 1st in line for the new “war relocation centers?”

  2. I read the article and actually amazed to learn that John Session’s grand-daugther is Hapa from his daughter Ruth Sessions-Walk and Asian son-in-law John Walk. Obviously, Sessions’ own ideology is completely different than his daughter’s marriage decisions so I’m not so gullible as to say John Sessions isn’t racist simply because of his daughter. However, it is abhorrent that MTV would mock a little girl for their own political agendas. But this is not surprising to anybody who’s aware of the media racism against Asian Americans.

    The rest of that article.sort of rambles on and being a right-wing publication feels like it’s trying to manipulate Asian American sentiments in favor of right-wing agendas. And that’s more annoying to me than the normal blatant right-wing racism: polarizing Asian Americans and playing us against ourselves without our own voices and political destiny to be acknowledged.

  3. Aardvark,

    “Obviously, Sessions’ own ideology is completely different than his daughter’s marriage decisions…”

    I’m not buying it. I’ve looked at all the so-called “evidence” of Sessions’ supposed racism, and no, I’m not buying it at all. I’m especially not buying the idea that everyone who surrounded Hillary would have some kind of moral high ground. I’ve seen the implosion among liberals that followed Trump’s win, and I was surprised by some of the racism, hatred, and intolerance coming from these so-called liberals. “Liberals” just seem to hide it better, unless they get flustered and emotional, then it all comes out.

    Now if you’re saying Bannon is racist, I’ll agree with you. But then again, it’s not as simple as that either. You saw how Trump did a 180 on his supposed challenge to the One China Policy. That will happen again and again and again. If it’s a choice between making money and racism, they’ll all choose making money. Of course, it’s important that China remains economically strong, otherwise yes, we’re all in trouble.

  4. Jeff Sessions opposed the Civil Rights Movement. Most White people would agree that’s pretty racist.

  5. Steve Bannon thinks Silicon Valley has too many Chinese and Indians. So he’s not racist against Asian Americans “by proxy”. He’s racist against Asian Americans, period.

  6. “Jeff Sessions opposed the Civil Rights Movement. Most White people would agree that’s pretty racist.”

    He opposed the Civil Rights Movement? No, I’m sorry, but that is something he definitely did not do. If he did, we’d be reading about this everywhere.

    I do agree with you on Bannon. I just think you have to put it into perspective though. Lots of these SJWs think that elite colleges have too many Chinese and Indians. So yes, he’s totally racist, but so are lots of other people.

  7. Byron,

    I’d like to get clarification on your criticism of the President’s Advisory Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islanders. As someone unfamiliar with policy wonks, what specific acts and policies have these appointees supported which resulted in “negative service” to the AAPI community? I assume you’re hold little faith in the lionshare of the current Asian American advocacy groups. What AAPI organizations then, do you personally support (feel free to email me privately if necessary)? Regarding your statement that Trump was boon for better race relations, how do you reconcile that with the numerous physical assaults and racist vituperative attacks on AAPIs (mostly Asian females) in the days following the election?

    Best,
    KK

  8. @ bigWOWO

    He opposed the Civil Rights Movement? No

    As a Goldwater Republican, he was against the Civil Rights Act. That’s a red flag for me. He’s also against the Voting Rights Act and supported the Supreme Court’s decision to shut down voting centers in Black areas across the South. In a democracy, we should be increasing votes, not suppressing them.

    we’d be reading about this everywhere.

    Trump referred to Japanese people as “Japs” but just about everybody is unaware he did. That doesn’t prove anything.

  9. BigWOWO,

    The problem isn’t the personal prejudice held or expressed by President Trump or any of his subordinates, like Steve Bannon or Jeff Sessions.

    The problem involves open support by the new Administration for measures designed to impede voting by members of minority communities. To oppose to Voting Rights Act is to oppose, among other things, government-provided bilingual ballots, so that non-native English speakers may engage the franchise without difficulty.

    It’s not possible to maintain and/or strengthen the Asian American vote without these protections, so indifference toward the Trump Administration’s bigotry is not wise. Couple this with the Trump Administration’s overt hostility to undocumented and legal immigrants, and the Trump Administration proves overtly hostile to Asian American interests.

    It’s fine to disagree with liberal America on race relations (though it would be helpful to do so with more evidence of liberal screw-ups than anecdotes from MTV, as appeared in the article above.) But the substantive concern for you should be the maintenance and expansion of the Asian American vote, so that your voting power can force political parties to take your race concerns seriously.

    Donald Trump, and the ideologies his Administration represents, oppose measures that would allow the Asian American vote to expand. Given this, the claim that Donald Trump would somehow prove ‘good’ for race relations stands in conflict with this blog’s stated mission.

  10. @Kiwi,

    Steve Bannon thinks Silicon Valley has too many Chinese and Indians. So he’s not racist against Asian Americans “by proxy”. He’s racist against Asian Americans, period.

    I know we like being pedantic just for the sake of argument. So I’m gonna ask: how many of those Silicon Valley Chinese and Indians are H1B vs US citizens/greencard people?

    Immigrants make America great, but H1B reforms are definitely needed so people don’t game the system.

    @bigWOWO,

    I just think you have to put it into perspective though. Lots of these SJWs think that elite colleges have too many Chinese and Indians. So yes, he’s totally racist, but so are lots of other people.

    Nobody’s disagreeing with anybody else here on this issue. Both SJWs and the alt-right are racists. LIEberals just use the excuse of “diversity” to cover up their racism against Asians; whereas I can appreciate Bannon and co. because they’re honest and just too lazy to even pretend it’s anything else but.

  11. @bigWOWO,

    I’m not buying it. I’ve looked at all the so-called “evidence” of Sessions’ supposed racism, and no, I’m not buying it at all.

    He opposed the Civil Rights Movement? No, I’m sorry, but that is something he definitely did not do. If he did, we’d be reading about this everywhere.

    I’m really curious as to what you’ve read on him and the media outlet that you looked at? I’m more than ready to admit the mainstream media is very biased (but not “fake news”) and willing to distort the truth to fit their agendas.

    There are lots of articles about Sessions’ history and the fact the GOP will censor Warren from reading Coretta Scott King’s letter should be telling.

    I’m no fan of the LIEberals either, but when it comes to their URMs voting block they’ll go to bat like the rabid fundamentalists they are.

    I’m not buying it at all. I’m especially not buying the idea that everyone who surrounded Hillary would have some kind of moral high ground. I’ve seen the implosion among liberals that followed Trump’s win, and I was surprised by some of the racism, hatred, and intolerance coming from these so-called liberals. “Liberals” just seem to hide it better, unless they get flustered and emotional, then it all comes out.

    I got no disagreements here. I wanted to vote for Bernie, but had to “settle” for Stein because I was disgusted by the DNC and Clinton’s voter suppression tactics. It’s dirty politics as usual.

    However, I think the logic mistake here is you’re conflating all anti-Trump protestors with the segments of extremist SJWs who are the racist liars, especially that abhorrent Berkeley protest and their anti-Asian racism. There are other legitimate peaceful protestors with issues that does concern all citizens and all of humanity.

    The analogy here would be to equate the KKK with all pro-Trump supporters. There are legit blue collar workers who just want decent jobs in the rust belt. And they would’ve voted for Bernie if it were not the DNC dirty politics.

  12. Krobrah Kai wrote:

    how do you reconcile that with the numerous physical assaults and racist vituperative attacks on AAPIs (mostly Asian females) in the days following the election?

    Specifics, please! I remember Byron posting about that one Asianwoman who made up fake assault stories for the SJWs. And another Muslim one who did the same.

    While there’s been an uptick in news reportings of hate crimes, where are the SJWs on actual anti-Asian and anti-Asian female violence? I’ve not seen Jenn Fang nor the CAAAV and their twitter cronies report on any of the recent NYC hate crimes against Asians.

    I’m reading on reddit and where are the SJWs on WM toxic misogylinity?

    http://www.wokeasians.com/list-of-white-male-asian-female-wmaf-violent-crimes-that-made-the-international-news/

  13. Snoopy Jenkins wrote:

    It’s not possible to maintain and/or strengthen the Asian American vote without these protections… the Trump Administration proves overtly hostile to Asian American interests.

    the substantive concern for you should be the maintenance and expansion of the Asian American vote…

    OMG! This is actually the first time I’ve seen James Lamb-Fang making some modicum of attempt for Asian American interests.

    I have to agree with bigWOWO on some level Trump is great for “race relations” but in the opposite sense: Trump so polarized and enraged most minorities that people have to band together in solidarity like they never thought before. There’s a common sense of fear and disgust for the Trump administration that would never been possible under the Clintons again with the SJW racists.

  14. Kobrah Kai,

    1. I said that I thought the mass exodus was not “necessarily a bad thing.” It’s not so much of a criticism of the group itself, but more of an argument to say that maybe it’s not so bad that they’re going.

    Here’s a question: What are the two biggest problems that Asian Americans face in American society, as determined by public uproar? If you go by what rea working people actually complain about, it’s legal discrimination in college admissions (by far), and it’s targeted racial violence against Asians. Did Obama ever speak on either of these two issues? No. As far as I know, not ever. Either the advisory commission wasn’t doing its job, or Obama chose not to listen.

    So the question is: what good is an Asian American advisory commission if it’s not speaking–or maybe not being heard–on issues that really matter to Asian Americans?

    The answer is that it’s not much good at all. So rather than having the window dressing of a group of Asians who get to hang around and chill with the president, why not have those people go somewhere where they can be more appreciated? (I think we can all agree that they ain’t gonna get much appreciation from Trump no matter what happens!)

    2. In terms of good organizations, I’d say that most organizations have some good points, and most also have some bad points. ALDEF has done good work on opposing targeted racial violence. 80-20, even though I’m not crazy about the leader, has been the only organization independent and brave enough to fight for the elimination of legalized racism against Asians. If you want to contribute, I’d say to go ahead and do so, but also let them know why you’re contributing and what you would change.

    3. It’s hard to talk about violence after the Trump election because as we later saw–and as I predicted based on my own experience with SJWs–lots, if not most, of the incidents ended up being fake (see Aardvark’s comment above). This is a very sore point for me because of my own real-life history in activism of being lied to and deceived by professional liberal whiners who see no shame in fabricating hate crimes.

    I would also say to look at the long-term benefits rather than the short-term. Things are getting ugly in the short-term. But that doesn’t mean that we’re not making progress. Already so much of the nonsense and deception is becoming clear. This is good news for us.

    Kiwi,

    Saying a person is against civil right because he supported a candidate who opposed the Civil Rights ACT is like saying that John opposes the Affordable Care Act, therefore John is against affordable healthcare. It makes no sense in either case.

    Trump referred to Japanese people as “Japs” but just about everybody is unaware he did. That doesn’t prove anything.

    The Sessions thing doesn’t even come up on Google. This means that even fake news peddlers aren’t pushing it.

    Also, I don’t think you should compare a respected politician like Sessions to Trump. As we’ve all seen, normal rules don’t apply to Trump.

  15. Snoopy,

    “designed to impede.”

    We’ve gotta stop assigning motivations to people we don’t know. As far as I know, you didn’t study mind-reading at Cornell, so you have no idea why people created these measures.

    I think you need to be more specific about what you support/don’t support within these bills. I remember one “voting rights” bill that King found that said people should be able to vote with ID’s. That’s not “voting rights;” that’s fraud rights.

    I’m a volunteer translator at my local school for ex-pat parents. Yes, I’m neither culturally nor linguistically monolingual. I love my volunteer job, and I love learning about different cultures. I think it’s great for the parents, and it’s even better for the students. I put in lots of time, and I encourage parents to contact me with any questions because I’m 100% committed to helping them make the most of their temporary stay in this country. OH…and by the way, guys, I PASSED the N4!!! I also help Chinese parents in the community get to know their non-Chinese neighbors.

    I obviously support multicultural outreach and bilingualism, otherwise I wouldn’t be putting so much time and effort into translating and interpreting. Some of my closest friends come from different cultures. But if we’re talking about American citizens exercising their right to vote as Americans, Americans should learn English. I don’t think taxpayers should be footing the bill for translation, along with the legal bills to review that translation, and I don’t think it’s good for us to have a country where it’s acceptable for citizens not to have basic competence in a common language. If you’re going to be an American citizen and you’re going to vote, learn English. It’s as simple as that. My grandparents did it, and so can you.

    Snoopy, let’s not make a race issue where none exists. If you’re saying that a large number of Asian Americans can’t read English enough to vote, the problem isn’t that they can’t vote; the problem is that they can’t read English. And if they can’t read English, there’s no way they can possibly make an informed decision on what is best for this country.

  16. BigWOWO, American citizens of eligible age have the right to vote without regard for their facility with the English language. Conservatives who wish to restrict voting to fluent English speakers only work against multilingual minority groups where many do not speak English fluently.

    Put another way, the Voting Rights Act protects the voting rights of minority citizens without requiring those citizens to achieve a standard of English fluency other citizens may appreciate. That’s how rights work — they exist without negotiation with disinterested third parties. Literacy tests were eliminated precisely because they were used to violate minority rights by people who wish to restrict minority voting. The political heirs to that legacy currently support the Trump Administration.

    Asian Americans, given their high proportion of first and second generation immigrants, cannot congeal a voting bloc from their members without respect for non-English speaking voting rights, so, again, if you respect the Asian American vote, your opposition to non-English speaking voters is the wrong approach.

  17. Thing is, this is settled law, BigWOWO. To deny many of those people the most consequential form of political activity based on reduced English proficiency is a position that would deny voting rights to a substantial proportion of the Asian American population — roughly one-third of Asian America in 2012 exhibited limited English proficiency.

    That proportion translates to roughly 5.5 million Asian Americans. BigWOWO, to suggest that 5.5 million of your fellow citizens should not be able to cast a ballot is to consign the group from which they emerge to political irrelevance.

    This matters, because you’re all in favor when Asian Americans engage American politics to oppose affirmative action. You take no issue when Asian Americans protest and march and inform others about their gripes with the prosecution of Peter Liang. But when they choose to cast a ballot, let’s check their English skills?

    No. Ballots and election information in the language in which a citizen is more fluent is a hallmark of modern suffrage, and should gain support from every citizen, including every citizen of color. To oppose non-English ballots as guaranteed by the Voting Rights Act is to oppose full citizenship for people of color.

  18. Snoopy,

    You’re talking in non-sequiturs again. I was going to ask you how many languages you speak. Clearly you speak both English and Non-Sequitur.

    No, you don’t have to speak English in order to vote, nor does voting by itself require fluency. There is no literacy test. But should I have to pay for a translator and legal team if you’re too lazy to learn even the basics of the language which is spoken in your new country? Sorry, I’m not a big fan of spending money on people who won’t help themselves. If others want to spend such money, that’s fine. They can do it through an NGO or other nonprofit.

    For those who don’t speak Non-Sequitur, we’re talking about hypotheticals that mostly don’t exist anyway. Virtually all native-born Americans speak English (and have access to the public school system). Those who are naturalized take a citizenship test, where English is mostly required (some age-related exceptions may apply).

    https://www.us-immigration.com/us-immigration-news/us-citizenship/is-it-possible-to-have-a-translator-at-the-citizenship-interview/

    So once again, Snoopy is asking us to spend money frivolously.

    Asian Americans, given their high proportion of first and second generation immigrants, cannot congeal a voting bloc from their members without respect for non-English speaking voting rights, so, again, if you respect the Asian American vote, your opposition to non-English speaking voters is the wrong approach.

    Again, you’re talking to someone who actually deals with immigrants on a regular weekly basis and is familiar with their struggles. I can attest that what you just wrote has no basis in reality.

  19. Snoopy,

    But when they choose to cast a ballot, let’s check their English skills?

    Do they have a language test that measures one’s skills in Non-Sequitur? Because I think this sentence would qualify you at the highest level of fluency!

    Again, I’m someone who talks to immigrants on a regular weekly basis. Unlike you, who had the benefit of being from a family that has been here for many generations, I have grandparents who came to this country not speaking English. I know the struggles of immigrants, I know what it means to learn languages, and what you wrote has no basis in reality.

  20. Oh, and just to make sure we don’t forget the original point–not wanting to spend frivolous money doesn’t make one a racist. I think that’s how we got caught up once again on the Snoopy train…

  21. BigWOWO, your supposed dealings with immigrants have nothing to do with this conversation. No one cares what you do weekly. The point is your stated opposition to Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The point is that you believe American voters should speak English in order to vote.

    That’s a glaring problem for the Asian American electorate. If our country’s voting laws aligned with your perspective, BigWOWO, millions fewer Asian Americans would cast ballots. Knowing this, it’s not surprising that you believe Donald Trump will be good for race relations, or that you think Jeff Sessions is not a racist: your views align with race conservatives like them, men who express support for or seek to enact measures that would reduce minority voting.

    Roughly 25,740,000 Americans exhibited limited English proficiency in 2015. Of that population, 22% were Asian American. To argue that American citizens should be able to speak and understand English before voting (as you have above, BigWOWO) is to argue that these citizens’ rights may be violated until they reach an arbitrary fluency standard native English speakers will never endure, at whatever personal expense is required to improve their English proficiency.

    This is not how rights work, BigWOWO. American citizens have the right to vote, without regard for their language proficiency. To ensure that the electorate does not inappropriately discriminate against limited English proficiency citizens, our government uses taxpayer money to offer non-English language ballots and election information to citizens in certain locales.

    This is a reasonable use of taxpayer money, when one recognizes the benefit of election procedures that do not discriminate against citizens based on the languages they speak. It’s funny how all your storied interactions with immigrants have yet to allow you to comprehend this basic, simple point, BigWOWO, a point that was clear to Congress in 1975.

  22. I never said they didn’t have the right to vote. Again, I’m writing in English and you’re responding in Non-Sequitur. If you think that’s money well-spent, then that’s your opinion. It doesn’t mean that I don’t have a right to my own opinion. Nor does it give you the right to ascribe motivations to people (“designed to impede”) without any evidence.

    I’m really happy that you feel empowered to spend my money on frivolous pursuits, Snoopy. If I don’t have a car, maybe the government can send a limo to my house to take me to the voter’s booth, just so that I don’t feel discriminated against.

    I can’t get over the irony that I, a volunteer translator and the grandson of non-English speaking Asian immigrants and a member of the race which you feel is facing discrimination, am debating this with you, a monolingual non-Asian dude whose family has been here since before you can remember and who has spent no time working with non-English speakers.

  23. @ bigWOWO

    Saying a person is against civil right because he supported a candidate who opposed the Civil Rights ACT is like saying that John opposes the Affordable Care Act, therefore John is against affordable healthcare. It makes no sense in either case.

    Considering that the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were two of the three major legislative outcomes that the entire Civil Rights Movement worked for and that they continue to be hailed as the greatest victories of the movement, opposing them effectively means opposing civil rights, unless you’re implying the Civil Rights Act doesn’t outlaw racial discrimination, given your comparison to the Affordable Care Act. All talk of race aside, nobody who supports closing voting centers should be in government, period. It’s undemocratic. The fact the NAACP gave his voting record a complete F rating should raise a red flag. His behavior is part of a larger, problematic pattern.

  24. Kiwi,

    This is becoming Snoopy-logic. Sessions may have supported a candidate (when Sessions was only 18 years old, by the way) who had a particular view of a particular piece of legislation. I supported Obama; does this mean I supported affirmative action or the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor? No.

    Can we please step away from this kind of logic? It’s just not right.

    I’ve LONG felt that the NAACP is out of touch.

  25. I’m not trying to be mean here, Kiwi. I’m just trying to say that we need to look at the facts and get away from the non-facts. Let’s not be quick to smear people. Let’s look at what they’re actually doing. Give people the benefit of the doubt unless they’ve proven they don’t deserve it.

  26. @ bigWOWO

    I agree on giving Sessions the benefit of the doubt.

    But I think we can also agree that voting is important and that in principle, people need to be more active participants in politics. I just don’t think Sessions is the best man to help achieve that.

  27. I can’t get over the irony that the volunteer translator and the grandson of non-English speaking Asian immigrants in this discussion opposes measures designed to ensure that non-English speaking Asian immigrants do not lose their right to vote by virtue of their status as non-English speaking Asian immigrants.

    BigWOWO, you wrote:

    But if we’re talking about American citizens exercising their right to vote as Americans, Americans should learn English. I don’t think taxpayers should be footing the bill for translation, along with the legal bills to review that translation, and I don’t think it’s good for us to have a country where it’s acceptable for citizens not to have basic competence in a common language. If you’re going to be an American citizen and you’re going to vote, learn English. It’s as simple as that. My grandparents did it, and so can you.

    Snoopy, let’s not make a race issue where none exists. If you’re saying that a large number of Asian Americans can’t read English enough to vote, the problem isn’t that they can’t vote; the problem is that they can’t read English. And if they can’t read English, there’s no way they can possibly make an informed decision on what is best for this country. — BigWOWO (emphasis added)

    Frankly, it’s not possible to read this statement from you without acknowledging your opposition toward voting from limited English proficiency voters. Given the statistics I’ve already shared in this discussion, it should be clear to you that massive proportions of the Asian American electorate would be prevented from voting if the Trump Administration tried to counteract Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act in the manner you support.

    Such a move would lead to an increase in proportional strength for White electorates throughout the country, and more wins for national Republican candidates, given current partisanship. It brings states like California in play for the GOP, which leads to more belligerent foreign policy and more civic unrest in urban areas. It does not improve the chances that policies like affirmative action will be dismantled; a neutralized Asian American vote will have no recourse should White nationalist politicians continue to galvanize White electorates against all who are not like them.

    BigWOWO, this isn’t complicated. You’ve expressed disdain for voting from citizens with limited English proficiency, knowing that many of those voters are Asian Americans. Frankly, you’ve got no business calling your blog a space for Asian American common sense after expressing these views.

    BigWOWO, I didn’t major in mind-reading at Cornell. I did take a couple of Asian American Studies classes. You should have done the same. It would save you the embarrassment of having a monolingual non-Asian dude whose ancestors were stolen from Africa educate you in public on the effects of your Anglophone bias against minority language citizens in your own community.

  28. Snoopy:

    So now speaking English or encouraging people to speak English is Anglophone bias? I’m always in awe of your ability to turn everyone into a victim…even people who don’t want to be victims. It’s also ironic that all of a sudden you’re pro-immigrant after Jenn and you attacked an immigrant (ChineseMom) on your own site. I don’t want to be mind-reading (I didn’t study mind-reading either), but it’s almost as if you want to use immigrants as window dressing without hearing their real concerns, such as racial discrimination in college admissions against their kids.

    “Given the statistics I’ve already shared in this discussion, it should be clear to you that massive proportions of the Asian American electorate would be prevented from voting if the Trump Administration tried to counteract Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act in the manner you support.”

    This is just ridiculous. So if the ballots weren’t translated, people would be prevented from voting? They’d lose their right to vote? I don’t see it this way. Most of the immigrants that you supposedly are speaking for don’t see it this way. If you’re going to be the Immigrant Whisperer, I think you ought to work on your mind-reading skills. Or else maybe just learn some Chinese so you can ask them how they feel. Or hell, just talk to ChineseMom who can speak to you in English. 🙂

    I did take a couple of Asian American Studies classes.
    I took ONE. So if you’ve taken two, you’re one more than me.

    BUT…(insert evil laugh) I speak Chinese well enough to communicate with immigrants. And I use it. And that’s something they can’t teach you in an Asian American Studies class.

    Snoopy, aside from the non-sequiturs, I think the biggest difference between you and me is that I think people are capable of change. You seem to think that people don’t change. Some of my grandparents spoke no English when they came here. That problem was remedied by the time I was born. You seem to think that immigrants hate English or can’t learn it or see it as a form of discrimination or oppression. I’m here to INFORM you that that isn’t the case, no matter what you learned in Asian American Studies.

  29. So if the ballots weren’t translated, people would be prevented from voting? — BigWOWO

    No. This is wrong. What actually happens is that people choose not to exercise their right to vote because none of the material one would use to vote (like the ballot) appears in a language they understand. In that instance the government hasn’t actively impeded a minority language citizen’s voting rights, they’ve passively allowed those voting rights to go without exercise because linguistic barriers to voting have been allowed to persist.

    This represents discrimination, because government material impedes citizen exercise of the franchise based on specific traits not held in common by all citizens. Again, taxpayers pay for minority language ballots and election information to prevent discrimination, not to add specific benefits to particular citizens.

    We’re not talking about victimhood, we’re talking about the legal standards in voting law since 1975. Recognize that I’m not speaking for immigrants, I’m speaking for the law. If you’re unfamiliar with this legislation, look it up. I’m sure you can find it in both English and Mandarin; whatever you prefer.

    Again, no one cares about your grandparents, Byron. I don’t believe immigrants hate English or that people aren’t capable of learning it. The point is that nothing should impede a citizen’s exercise of her rights, especially decisions made by their government.

    That’s how rights work.

    Literacy tests are not legal. Given this, minority language citizens can and should expect ballots and election information in their language, to allow direct absorption of the civic information required to vote. When you oppose this, you oppose roughly a third of your population who have limited English proficiency, and you pretend that their suffrage is or should be in question.

    Byron, you said “And if they can’t read English, there’s no way they can possibly make an informed decision on what is best for this country.”The problem is that no one needs to know English to make informed decisions about what is best for this country. Further, no legal standards exist that force citizens to vote in reference to what is best for the country.

    People just have the right to vote, a right government should not actively or passively impede. You should know this already.

  30. I work with immigrants on a daily basis and my opinion is that based on my experience, lacking English skills does not mean someone is incapable of reason or making thoughtful decisions. Some immigrants do genuinely struggle with learning new languages, like my grandmother. She has diligently studied English daily for decades yet still has some difficulty due to her age, so for regular voters like her, having multilingual options available has been helpful.

    I like to think of America as a multicultural country, so I don’t believe English speakers should be privileged over non-English speakers. Navajo speakers and all the rest probably know what I’m talking about.

  31. Snoopy,

    This reminds me of the conversation that ChineseMom had with you, the one where she was talking about how YOUR culture is completely incompatible with Chinese immigrant culture. She identified your culture as Black. I don’t. I know lots of hard-working, no-excuse Black people. I identify your culture as Far Left Liberal. But in any case, I agree with her–your culture is completely incompatible with Chinese immigrant culture.

    You just don’t get it, Snoopy. A Chinese immigrant who sees a ballot in English isn’t going to run and hide from it or allow it to bother him. A Chinese immigrant who sees a ballot in English will most likely work to understand what it says. That same Chinese immigrant came here to learn English, not to sit back and look for reasons to cry racism. They don’t come from your culture, Snoopy. So it’s pointless for you to use your culture to extrapolate their feelings based on what your culture tells you to do. That’s the point I was trying to make about you being monolingual. The world is much bigger than what you think it is.

    What you see as an “impediment” or discriminatory is based on your own victim-based assessment of life. You’ve got the victim-goggles, Snoopy.

    Given this, minority language citizens can and should expect ballots and election information in their language, to allow direct absorption of the civic information required to vote.

    Oh. My. “Expect.” I guess you were going to use that word sooner or later. This would be like me moving to Korea and being angry if the ballots weren’t in English. This is exactly the Far Left culture of entitlement that turns off the moderates.

    I think it’s time we bump up the Elijah Muhammad post:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2010/04/what-the-world-owes-you/

  32. Kiwi,

    There’s a reason why citizenship tests allow translators for old people. There’s also a reason why they don’t allow translators for younger people. Snoopy, if he’s being consistent, would have to call this discriminatory.

  33. No one suggests that any limited English proficient citizen would not or should not attempt to understand unfamiliar, difficult English documents. That willingness, however, is precisely not the point. Voting should be seamless, totally devoid of barriers between a citizen’s desire to express her political perspectives with her vote and the election process.

    Any barrier to this free exercise, linguistic or not, is an impermissible infringement of her rights as a citizen. None of this involves anyone’s feelings or anyone’s cultural proclivities, BigWOWO. I’m talking about the law.

    The point here is that the limited English proficiency citizen has the right to vote, and nothing about this citizen’s limited English proficiency can or should be used to prevent that vote. When ballots and election information appear in English alone, this creates a barrier to this citizen’s suffrage that violates her rights.

    This is why Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act addresses minority language citizens. When Republican politicians like Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump express support for reducing the protections of the Voting Rights Act, not only do they attempt to reverse the signature legislative achievements of the Civil Rights Movement, but they also work to reduce the Asian American vote.

    Roughly one-third of Asian America have limited English proficiency. Without protections for the rights of minority language citizens like these, many states will violate minority language citizen rights by only providing ballots and election information in English. This will reduce Asian American voting rates and shrink the Asian American electorate, making it more difficult for the Asian American community to protect itself from measures designed to marginalize members of their community, like the reactionary immigration bans the alt-right adore so fiercely.

    So your bizarre conservative opposition to minority language citizen suffrage can have a severe impact on the Asian American community, BigWOWO. If you understand immigrants, you should understand that it is not wise to stand opposed to their voting rights over linguistic differences.

    Oh. My. “Expect.” I guess you were going to use that word sooner or later. This would be like me moving to Korea and being angry if the ballots weren’t in English. This is exactly the Far Left culture of entitlement that turns off the moderates. — BigWOWO

    No. Not at all. If you moved to Korea whatever anger you expressed about Korean ballots would not matter, because you are an American citizen. You have no valid expectation to vote in a Korean election.

    Here in the United States, you do have a valid expectation to not only vote in American elections, but also to expect that ballots and election information appear in languages you understand. Again, this is how rights work.

  34. Snoopy Jenkins,

    Do you personally know any Asian immigrant whose English isn’t good enough to read the ballot but wants to vote? Or do you even know any Asian immigrant well enough to talk about this beside your wife? From your and her writing, I can tell that you don’t even know her family well. It’s so funny to see you advocate for Asian immigrants voting “right”. You and many leftists are so fake and so out of touch with reality and Asian immigrant community, and that is part of the reason so many Chinese immigrants abandoned the Democrats and voted for Trump, even they know he is a very flawed person.

    FYI, from what I see in Chinese social media and BBS, overwhelming majority favor voter ID. They have hard time to understand why asking for ID is voter suppression, they consider not asking ID is a pass for voter fraud. Nobody care about. Nobody really care about the language thing, because those immigrants don’t know English well usually don’t care to vote. If their English is good enough to read the ballot, how could they know the candidate?

  35. ChineseMom, the relevant question has nothing to do with the Asian immigrants any of us know personally. None of that matters. The only relevant point here is whether someone who claims that American voters should learn English can also claim to support the maintenance and/or expansion of the Asian American vote.

    I’ve argued that both ideas cannot be held in concert. Opposition to minority language citizens negates any supposed support for the Asian American electorate.

    Chinese immigrants, like all citizens, have every ability to use their vote to support politicians who pursue policies that oppose those voters’ interests. Plenty of low-income, low educational attainment White voters also voted for Donald Trump, and along with the Chinese immigrants you believe abandoned the Democrats those voters elected the most gaudily incompetent pro-corporate chief executive in recent memory.

    The point isn’t about how Chinese immigrant voters use their voting rights. The point is that no American citizen should be forced to vote using English-language ballots and election materials simply because their government is too lazy to provide ballots and election materials in the language they understand.

    This is settled law. Individual Asian Americans have every right to disagree with the law, but when they express distaste for legal protections that preserve voting rights for minority language citizens, they work against their own racial political interests. Shrinking minority electorates allow for candidates controlled by White nationalists and alt-right antagonists to win higher office.

    ChineseMom, it’s also possible that, as you put it, “nobody really care about the language thing” because the option has remained a long-heralded feature available on Election Day, should people choose. Again, people’s feelings about their rights aren’t the point. The point remains the preservation of those rights. Conservative politicians like Jeff Sessions find the Voting Rights Act odious, and the Voting Rights Act maintains the legal protections that support voting within many communities of color, including the Chinese American community.

    Any Asian American support for Donald Trump as President or Jeff Sessions as his Attorney General in essence supports figures who would prefer to reduce the Asian American vote rather than appeal to Asian Americans. If you care about Asian Americans, you should be in favor of statutes that maintain and/or expand the Asian American vote.

    BigWOWO is not in favor of statutes that allow minority language citizens to vote, and in my view that makes him insufficiently supportive Asian American political advancement. It doesn’t matter how many Chinese immigrants either of you personally know if you expect them to pass English language proficiency exams before they may exercise their right to vote as citizens.

  36. Oh…ouch. The “Immigrant Whisperer” just got schooled AGAIN by an actual immigrant for the hundredth time. ChineseMom also rightly points out that Snoopy’s wife Jenn is an immigrant, but she is an immigrant from Canada, not China, and Jenn doesn’t speak or read Chinese. So unless Jenn needs a “translator” to change words like “color” into “colour,” I don’t think she’s speaking from any kind of first-hand experience. Clearly Snoopy isn’t speaking from any kind of experience either.

    (I’m now worried that I’ve given Snoopy another opportunity to get politicians to spend my money: “We need a Canadian translator! Add a “u” to every “or.” Use more ink, kill more trees, and spend more money!”)

    Snoopy,

    ChineseMom, the relevant question has nothing to do with the Asian immigrants any of us know personally. None of that matters.

    Of course it matters. Why would it not matter? If you don’t know any Chinese immigrants (haha…except for ChineseMom who corrects you on all your wrong ideas), how can you be telling your elected officials how to help immigrants? It’s kind of like Jenn and the skipping meals to buy a book thing…if you don’t know anything about or anyone from a demographic, how can you intelligently help that demographic?

    Here you go, saying that these laws are “legal protections that preserve voting rights for minority language citizens,” and you’ve got a real immigrant telling you that that isn’t the case, that these laws don’t really help the way you say they do. Who should we listen to? The Monolingual who doesn’t know and can’t speak to any Chinese immigrants, or the person who actually IS a Chinese immigrant. I know who I’m listening to.

    Also, I’m not sure why you keep harping on “it’s the law.” Of course it’s the law. No one disagreed with that. Sessions wasn’t contesting that. I wasn’t contesting that. What we’re talking about is whether laws make sense or whether they ought to be changed.

    I’m not sure how Jeff Sessions feels about wasting money on court-mandated translations of ballots (as if a Chinese immigrant citizen can’t read the word “Trump”), and the fact that you keep bringing this up seems irrelevant. ChineseMom rightfully brings up the Voter ID laws, which is the main issue that came up with Sessions and voting “rights.” You seem to love bringing Chinese immigrants into the discussion without any kind of consideration of whether:

    a) it’s relevant to the person we’re discussing (Sessions), or
    b) what you say actually takes place in real life (not having translations disenfranchises millions of people!)

    If you moved to Korea whatever anger you expressed about Korean ballots would not matter, because you are an American citizen. You have no valid expectation to vote in a Korean election.

    It’s illegal for a non-citizen to see a ballot, so it’s obvious that I meant moving to Korea to become a citizen. Let’s assume that a White guy married a Korean woman and became a Korean citizen. Would he have a valid expectation of having the ballot translated?

    Or better yet…let’s say a Chinese guy moved to a majority black country. Let’s say he married a Ugandan woman and became a citizen, and he wanted the ballot to be translated into Chinese. Could he demand that Uganda pay for a translator to accommodate him? Could he claim discrimination if Uganda decided it had better ways to spend its money? Or should this Chinese guy get off his lazy ass and learn how to speak English or Swahili?

    Again, we’re not talking about rights here. We’re talking about YOU spending MY money in a way that benefits hardly anyone. I don’t think anyone would say that there’s anything wrong with translating documents–you’re talking to an actual translator who loves translating–but if it’s a mandatory cost, it means that it costs ME money. If it’s MY money, then certainly I ought to have a say in how it’s spent.

  37. First of all, there isn’t one single, solitary immigrant experience. Both you and ChineseMom are more than welcome to speak from your experiences, but that material isn’t conclusive, or persuasive.

    Second, Chinese immigrants aren’t the only immigrant citizens within Asian America, and it’s possible you two may have blind spots in your articulation of Asian American immigrant voting perspectives.

    Third, the individual perspectives you both raise are not relevant. The law is, and the law is completely clear about its support for minority language citizens. Only race conservatives attack the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, and they do so to express their ideological and practical disregard for minority voting rights. To support these race conservative perspectives is to support race conservative disdain for minority voting rights.

    Fourth, plenty of limited English proficiency citizens possess conversational English, or can handle tax forms, but find complex election information difficult in English. It makes sense to allow these citizens the option to receive election information and ballots in their primary language, to preserve their voting rights as citizens. Frankly, the minor financial cost of multi-language ballots and election information is not relevant.

    The cost of not spending money to offer immigrant citizens and limited English proficiency citizens ballots and election information in their primary language is reduced political influence from communities of color. It’s possible you find this concern immaterial BigWOWO, because you’re already too integrated within White America to care, or because your interest in and support for Chinese immigrants leaves you little time for domestic American concerns.

    Perhaps you find your privilege so immutable that you believe it cannot be harmed, no matter what laws are passed. Whatever. It’s not important. The point is that your opposition to legal protections for minority language citizens is not compatible with support for Asian American political uplift.

    You can’t be a voice for Asian American common sense and speak against minority language citizens, as you have repeatedly in this conversation.

    Fifth, I can’t speak to Ugandan political history or culture. My argument is that in the American context, voting rights have been established such that all citizens, no matter their facility with English, can expect that their voting rights are not subject to literacy tests, for reasons directly tied to historical wrongs committed against minority American citizens in violation of their Constitutional rights for generations. Today, in recognition of this history and the concerns of minority language citizens, limited English proficiency cannot be used to deny suffrage to American citizens.

    Certainly a Chinese immigrant to Uganda could argue that Ugandans provide ballots and election information in languages other than Kiswahili; whether this perspective would be viewed as reasonable requires an understanding of Ugandan political history and culture I suspect neither of us possess.

  38. The fact that having English ballots but not Navajo ballots in America is seen as “normal” throws cold water on the idea that Americans should not provide multilingual ballots. If Chinese invaders flooded into America by the hundreds of millions, numerically overwhelming and killing off most of the locals, we’d be arguing about why Chinese should have to pay for English ballots and Chinese ballots would become “normal”.

    The only logic here is might makes right.

  39. Kiwi, this isn’t an argument. There’s the law, based on the premise that all citizens should be able to vote without government impediment, even though linguistic differences, and there are those whose opinions exist at odds with the law.

    The United States of America gets plenty wrong about its interactions with citizens from minority groups. This isn’t one of those instances. Multi-language ballots and election information presents a success story worth defense.

  40. Black men in particular are very racist against asian men, because they’re black so no one dares to call them racists, they don’t have to hide their racism like white people.
    Black kids are also taking your kids’ spots in Ivy League schools. Your kids are going to work hard, get perfect grades, participate in a lot of extra curriculum activities, and still end up in state universities without scholarships. Black kids are going to take all the scholarships that your kids and you work so hard for. They are going to have a lot of children, and your kids’ tax dollars are going to pay for those black kids’ kids.
    Then your kids will become so poor and undesirable that they have to import wives from asia to have kids, and your kids’ kids will become the next generation of slaves to serve all non-asians.

  41. @ Kyrie

    The Black American fertility rate is only 2.1, barely at replacement level.

    Aside from that, it is a fact that Americans generally feel safer discriminating against Asians than against other races. Asians don’t have the social, political, or cultural power that Blacks and Latinos have accrued to punish others for being racist. There is also the fact that Asians are more of a numerical minority than Blacks or Latinos and since Asians are mostly immigrants, they get hit hardest by xenophobia. The fact that Asians are seen as rich and successful makes attacking them seem like “punching up”, not just to other minorities, but even to Whites. Just like how Germans felt they were “punching up” when they marched Jews into concentration camps, Americans felt they were “punching up” when they marched Japanese into concentration camps.

    Unsurprisingly, Asians get the shortest end of the stick compared to all other races when it comes to salaries and promotions:

    “The percentage of whites, blacks and Hispanics who are executives is the same as their percentage in engineering roles. Asians, meanwhile, are about half as likely to be managers as they are to be coders and hardware hackers.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/opinion/yang-tech-diversity/

    “But researchers at the American Institute for Economic Research found that Asian tech workers on average made $8,146 less each year than white workers in 2012, $3,656 less than Black employees, and $6,907 less than those who identified as “other.”“

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/new-numbers-reveal-asian-wage-gap-tech-n223196

  42. Asians are constantly told by other races not to play the Oppression Olympics because it is said that there is no reward. But there is. In a world of ever increasingly scarce resources, winning sympathy as a victimized race nets you rewards like preferences in school admissions, salaries, promotions, media portrayals, historical representations, social interactions, and legal protections.

    As a result of the racial imbalance of power, Asians are expected to support Latinos and especially Blacks but the reverse is never true. Blacks supporting their own interests is lauded as helping everyone but Asians supporting their own causes is attacked as a selfish attempt to gain White privilege.

    Racism comes down to power. Power is about maximizing your own self-interest while minimizing everyone else’s interests. Instead of sticking their necks out for other races only to be attacked by them, it’s high time that Asians fight for their own share of the pie unapologetically.

  43. Snoopy,

    I’m not sure why you resist common sense so strongly. You make all these statements about immigrants with nothing to back it up. Again, it’s the old “skip a meal to buy a book” fallacy. You’re so used to seeing everything through your victim goggles that you fail to take our culture into account–we don’t believe in victimology.

    Do you even have a number on that “minor financial cost?” I can tell you that it’s quite a bit of work for me, and I don’t use extra paper, a legal review, a proofreader, or anything that an official mailer or ballot would require.

    ChineseMom and I have both told you that it doesn’t do squat for “political influence.” Again, we Chinese don’t come from a culture of victimhood. We come from a culture of common sense. That’s why you see Chinese immigrants revolting against Affirmative Racism while not caring about multilingual ballots.

    There’s the law, based on the premise that all citizens should be able to vote without government impediment, even though linguistic differences, and there are those whose opinions exist at odds with the law.

    When you say government “impediment,” that’s victim-talk. It’s normal in Far Left Liberal culture to nitpick and take umbrage at all of life’s little inconveniences. It’s normal to look for excuses to attack Whitey or Chang (depending on what you’re looking to get.). In Chinese immigrant culture, regardless of which Chinese subculture you’re talking about, you’ll find few people who think that printing American ballots in English is a form of “government impediment.” Most are looking to learn English and will step up to the challenge. People’s Exhibit A: ChineseMom.

    Fifth, I can’t speak to Ugandan political history or culture. My argument is that in the American context, voting rights have been established such that all citizens, no matter their facility with English, can expect that their voting rights are not subject to literacy tests, for reasons directly tied to historical wrongs committed against minority American citizens in violation of their Constitutional rights for generations. Today, in recognition of this history and the concerns of minority language citizens, limited English proficiency cannot be used to deny suffrage to American citizens.

    Yeah, and this has nothing to do with our conversation. No one here has proposed literacy tests or denying suffrage to anyone.

  44. @Kiwi,

    Kyrie is a racist troll trying to sow dissent and discord among reasonable and enlightened people. He’s the worst kind of racist wolf-in-sheep clothing devil there is. No need to bother rational commentaries against him.

    In a world of ever increasingly scarce resources, winning sympathy as a victimized race nets you rewards like preferences in school admissions, salaries, promotions, media portrayals, historical representations, social interactions, and legal protections.

    I pretty much agree with your overall sentiment that the real world works with everybody trying to maximize their own gains, or perceived gains; no matter how much James Lamb-Fang live in glass houses and cast stones against Asians, the reality is in racist USofA everybody is out for themselves.

    HOWEVER, I don’t think this has to be the paradigm for the whole world in 21st century humanity. I don’t agree with food and resource scarcity, because there’s new technology on the horizon that promises to do away with any sort of environmental restrictions. We’re well on our way to 0.9 Kardashev civilization and on the verge of space-faring.

    The problems with starvation and false scarcity is man-made and because of greed to keep others down. Under Trump it’s very obvious we’re stuck in 20th century Cold War mentality of fossil fuels and manufacturing capacity. This is no longer the case with renewables and automation and hydroponics.

    Escape the Matrix.

  45. @bigWOWO,

    Do you even have a number on that “minor financial cost?” I can tell you that it’s quite a bit of work for me, and I don’t use extra paper, a legal review, a proofreader, or anything that an official mailer or ballot would require.

    We’re pragmatists and realists here. I’d put each election’s official ballot costs around $10,000 at most for each language. There are tons of community volunteers willing to help out with proofing/checking and communicating non-English speakers here in CA. The cost of printing ballots and forms is marginal for a few million printed sheets of paper.

    I’m more upset and others should be more upset at the pork spending on Trump’s security details’ “rental” of Trump towers and the Air Force One’s expenses and the motorcades every weekend for him to party and schmooze at Mar-A-Lago every weekend. And we Californians pay an disproportionate amount of the tax dollars for pork projects in other states which are hundreds of millions of dollars that could be better spent on our own infrastructure here.

    That’s why you see Chinese immigrants revolting against Affirmative Racism while not caring about multilingual ballots.

    I think this is shortsighted and narrow-minded for immigrants who still cling on to old world ideas that education equals opportunities to socially advance. They don’t understand the power of the vote and how necessary it is in democracy to vote.

    My own parents haven’t even become citizens, despite holding greencards for over twenty years. They’re still thinking of retiring someday to China, and is only here to work and raise kids. However, they probably won’t go back and it’s to their benefit to start voting.

    Lots of Asian Americans don’t even bother and that’s more problematic than interpreting/translating documents. The local ethnic media doesn’t even cover much of it either.

    I definitely agree with you that James Lamb-Fang’s hyperboles and spin doctoring of “government impediment and disfranchisement” is ridiculous. At least when there’s enough population like here in CA, there are plenty of get out the vote drives.

  46. Man, even when I agree with James Lamb-Fang on 90% of the issues in this topic I can’t help but notice the Strawmans and spin doctoring.

    It’d behoove you, James, to stick to the facts and not exaggerate like a crazed Chicken Little every time somebody disagrees with you just one little iota.

    I definitely agree the government should provide all means possible to help Americans of all backgrounds to vote, despite the abysmal voter turnouts, and providing ballots and forms in other languages would help. And Byron is also being ridiculous about driving limos to the polls, since there’s mail-ins.

    HOWEVER, James Lamb-Fang screaming “voter suppression” “voter suppression” when it’s not the case in some places where Asians and other 2nd language speakers are vast minority is just too much to take as far rational and sensible statements. #Sad!

  47. @ aardvark

    I agree with you on false scarcity. The food people produce is enough to feed the world several times over. The problem is with people themselves. Instead of a war over resources per se, I think the greatest challenge of our times is winning the war over ideology. The Trump crowd needs to understand that automation and globalization aren’t to blame for their woes. It’s capitalism.

    But in the US, with its Cold War history of anti-communism, I think this battle is going to be a long one.

  48. According to the U.S. Department of Justice:

    A jurisdiction is covered under Section 203 (of the Voting Rights Act) where the number of United States citizens of voting age is a single language group within the jurisdiction:

    – Is more than 10,000, or
    – Is more than five percent of all voting age citizens, or
    – On an Indian reservation, exceeds five percent of all reservation residents; and
    -The illiteracy rate of the group is higher than the national illiteracy rate

    In 2016, 263 jurisdictions around the United States must provide language assistance during elections for limited English proficiency citizens, according to the formula quoted above.

    A full listing of the jurisdictions, along with the language minority group assisted, can be found here. The determinations listed use data from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey five year estimates, in accordance with congressional statutes.

    “The 263 covered jurisdictions make up 3.3 percent of the 2,919 counties and 4,943 minor civil divisions that comprise the political subdivisions in the United States which were calculated for the Section 203 determinations. There are 68,800,641 eligible voting-age citizens in the covered jurisdictions, or 31.3 percent of the total U.S. citizen voting-age population.

    The 2016 determinations found a total national population of 21,739,327 voting-age citizens subject to minority language assistance that reside in the 263 covered jurisdictions, compared with 19,209,431 and 248 jurisdictions in 2011, an increase of 13.2 percent. The determinations found a total of 16,621,136 Hispanics, 4,760,782 Asians, and 357,409 American Indian and Alaska Native voting-age citizens in the covered jurisdictions.” — U.S. Census Bureau

    I encourage you all to review this material, especially the excerpt from the Federal Register. It is clear from this document that Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act exists to protect the voting rights of immigrant citizens, many of them Asian American.

    BigWOWO’s opposition to government-provided non-English ballots and election information displays opposition to Vietnamese American citizens in Alameda County, California, and Korean American citizens from Los Angeles. Apache voters in Otero County, New Mexico deserve to vote like any other American.

    BigWOWO thinks they should learn English to cast ballots, and that opposition is flagrantly immoral.

    Chinese American voters in King County, Washington need not learn English before exercising their right to vote, period. Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act exists to ensure that citizens in immigrant communities enjoy the same rights all Americans enjoy.

    ChineseMom and I have both told you that it doesn’t do squat for “political influence.” Again, we Chinese don’t come from a culture of victimhood. We come from a culture of common sense. That’s why you see Chinese immigrants revolting against Affirmative Racism while not caring about multilingual ballots. — BigWOWO

    BigWOWO, when you pretend that the right to vote somehow doesn’t really matter when minority communities seek political influence, you expose your ignorance of American politics. Further, as I wrote upthread, Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act was added in 1975. There’s no need to protest over what you already have.

    The only danger involves the attempts by the conservative legal community, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions, to rollback the protections of the Voting Rights Act, to impede voting from citizens from minority communities. This is the perspective with whom you agree BigWOWO, and if people like Jeff Sessions are successful, Asian American citizens with limited English proficiency would find needless obstacles to voting that their English proficient neighbors would not endure.

  49. If an immigrant is a citizen, who presumably went through the naturalization process to get his right to vote, isn’t it necessary to have a basic grasp of English to go through that process? Or is it somehow possible to become naturalized while knowing little or no English?

  50. Kobukson, the concern isn’t a ‘basic grasp of English’. The problem here is a linguistic litmus test for citizens to exercise their right to vote under the law.

    Limited English proficiency may take all sorts of forms; from the state’s perspective, it question (settled in 1975) involves how best to ensure that all citizens, without regard to their language skills, maintain their voting rights.

  51. BigWOWO,

    It’s interesting that you raise the notion of victimhood to the guy who reminds you that multilingual ballots maintain Asian American political support. Given conservatives like yourself, Asian American political power does not assist me or my community. I recognize that the vote empowers people, individually and generally; it ensures that citizens may fight against those who seek to victimize.

    Your position places a barrier, a linguistic obstacle, between a citizen’s desire to vote and their ability to vote. If the federal government operated as if English-only ballots were law, Asian Americans in particular would be terribly affected. If you didn’t see that when you wrote your statement above, fine.

    Admit your mistake and move on.

    But if your hyperbolic response to the civics lesson I’ve graciously provided you this week continues to override your rational judgment, well, perhaps you should check your emotions and read some of the links I’ve provided above.

    I’ve no obligation to “personally know any Asian immigrant whose English isn’t good enough to read the ballot but wants to vote”, as ChineseMom stated upthread. The government has identified jurisdictions where populations of limited English proficiency Chinese American citizens exist in high enough number where they’ve mandated that voters in those jurisdictions have the option to use ballots and election information in their primary language.

    Personal interactions with immigrant Chinese are not relevant or necessary to wish to preserve voting rights for limited English proficiency citizens, BigWOWO. Frankly, you should know that. This conversation has nothing to do with victimhood. It concerns the law, and if you do not know the law, don’t pretend that your opinions on it have any merit.

  52. Like I said earlier, bringing up immigrants misses the point that requiring English also applies to Native Americans who don’t speak English. Yes, they exist. They have that right.

    We can argue that the minorities should accommodate the majority but if Japan had conquered and mass exterminated the Chinese, the Japanese would be arguing over why they should have to spend money to provide ballots in Chinese (or why Chinese should be allowed to vote at all). I doubt any of the Chinese on this blog whose own families were royally fucked by the Japanese would agree with that reasoning.

  53. Aardvark:

    You can’t have community volunteers writing ballots. It has to be official. You have to pay someone to do it, and you have to pay someone to proof it.

    And Byron is also being ridiculous about driving limos to the polls, since there’s mail-ins.

    What if I can’t read my own name in English? There’s no way I would be able to get my mail. That’s so racist and discriminatory. That’s government impediment.

    No, sending a limo to my house is the only way to solve this problem. And please don’t even think about asking me to tip the driver.

    I think this is shortsighted and narrow-minded for immigrants who still cling on to old world ideas that education equals opportunities to socially advance. They don’t understand the power of the vote and how necessary it is in democracy to vote.

    They’re not revolting because they can read English and vote. Lots don’t do it, but they could. But it’s not uncommon. Less than 50% of eligible voters vote, regardless of race.

  54. Kobu,

    I suppose it’s also possible to forget a language. “Let’s cram for the citizenship test and then forget everything we learned! We’ll sure show them Yankees!” 🙂

  55. Snoopy,

    Can you PLEASE stop talking nonsense? Your appeal to “it’s the law” is ridiculous because no one is arguing against that. We don’t care if it’s the law. At one point in time, slavery was the law, but I haven’t seen you arguing for slavery. If it’s the law, we’ll comply with it. The question is whether or not the legal requirement makes sense. As ChineseMom, a real immigrant, and bigWOWO, a real translator, have argued, it doesn’t help anywhere close to the “millions” of people you think it helps. Therefore, I argue it makes no sense.

    Snoopy, I think you need to do more homework to better understand Chinese immigrants. We’re Asian immigrants. We’re the people known for focusing on education. You print it in English, we’ll learn English. You print it in Serbo-Croatian, we’ll learn Serbo-Croation. You print it in Braille, we’ll learn Braille. You’re making it sound as if this law is rescuing tons of people from disenfranchisement, whereas the truth is that it hardly helps anyone other than government bureaucrats who make money from the extra work.

    I’ve no obligation to “personally know any Asian immigrant whose English isn’t good enough to read the ballot but wants to vote”, as ChineseMom stated upthread.

    Sigh. I know. Just the same as when you were under no obligation to read about Thomas Jefferson before calling him a rapist. Just as you were under no obligation to volunteer in poor schools before commenting on poor schools and poor students. You’re under no obligation, but if you don’t do your research, you’ll just never know what’s really going on.

  56. If it’s the law, we’ll comply with it. The question is whether or not the legal requirement makes sense. As ChineseMom, a real immigrant, and bigWOWO, a real translator, have argued, it doesn’t help anywhere close to the “millions” of people you think it helps. Therefore, I argue it makes no sense.

    Snoopy, I think you need to do more homework to better understand Chinese immigrants. We’re Asian immigrants. We’re the people known for focusing on education. You print it in English, we’ll learn English. You print it in Serbo-Croatian, we’ll learn Serbo-Croation. You print it in Braille, we’ll learn Braille. You’re making it sound as if this law is rescuing tons of people from disenfranchisement, whereas the truth is that it hardly helps anyone other than government bureaucrats who make money from the extra work. — BigWOWO

    The point of this law is not for you as a citizen to comply with anything. The point is to compel local governments to offer citizens options, so that the government may preserve the citizen’s right to vote, even though all citizens do not speak and write fluent English.

    As a citizen, you are not compelled to use a non-English ballot, nor are individual citizens able to gain single ballots in whatever language they speak. You’ll notice that Serbo-Croatian does not appear on the list in the Federal Register as a language minority group under this statute.

    But Vietnamese does. And Apache. And Choctaw. And Korean. And Navajo. And Cambodian. And Bangladeshi. And Chinese. The list reflects language minority groups in these jurisdictions whose populations meet the aforementioned requirements to enact Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act.

    BigWOWO, you and ChineseMom pretend that your personal experiences justify your stance against this law, but what do you know of the Vietnamese community of San Diego, CA? How can you speak for Bangladeshis in Hamtramck, Michigan?
    In truth, you don’t grasp the effectiveness of laws designed to broaden voting participation among immigrant communities.

    Though you may wish to focus on your personal experiences with the immigrants you know, the actual concern here involves conservative encroachment on minority voting rights, to select majority White electorates and retain power, without regard for America’s changing demographics.

    Even if one were to accept your model minority tripe as valid (which I do not) there’s a normative concern with the expectation that immigrant citizens are supposed to put in more work to vote than natural-born citizens, in a nation that nominally supports the ideal of equality under the law.

    No one cares if Chinese American immigrant citizens are or are not willing to learn any language and bear any burden — the point is that as American citizens they cannot be asked to do so unless everyone’s citizenship requires extra work.

    At some point, if as a Chinese American you are so willing to learn more than everyone else BigWOWO, walk down to your local community college and register for a basic civics course. You need it.

  57. Today I found out that 145 languages are spoken in Houston, TX, which has many immigrants. Snoopy’s idea sounds high-minded in theory and principle. But in terms of the nitty-gritty of practical implementation, one wonders how realistic it is.

    Furthermore, one wonders how Asian Americans can come together as a cohesive political bloc if all the different Asian ethnic groups don’t learn to speak English. How can I discuss politics with my Chinese or Viet neighbor if we just speak our own native tongue? If there is an Asian American candidate running for office, should he have to speak Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Hindi, etc in order to reach out to the diverse Asian crowd?

  58. Kobukson, that’s where the formula I quoted above comes in. Citizens from language groups must reach a certain numerical threshold before jurisdictions are compelled by the Voting Rights Act to offer multilingual ballots.

    It’s not so high-minded, really. America has a history of violent and passive voter suppression. Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act is simply one practical method to eliminate some of the passive suppression.

  59. My experience as a Chinese Canadian is very much like chinesemom and bigwowo. In fact, I don’t know of anyone in my extended families who are politically engaged enough to want to vote but feel limited by their lack of understanding of the English language to vote. There are probably exceptions but usually those who want to vote also consume local media and understand English well while those who stick with media from the old country can’t speak English well but also do not care to involve themselves with voting.

  60. Kobukson:

    Furthermore, one wonders how Asian Americans can come together as a cohesive political bloc if all the different Asian ethnic groups don’t learn to speak English. How can I discuss politics with my Chinese or Viet neighbor if we just speak our own native tongue? If there is an Asian American candidate running for office, should he have to speak Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Hindi, etc in order to reach out to the diverse Asian crowd?

    In the U.S., people can’t do much without English, although to once again emphasize the common sense that Snoopy hates, people can’t do much in any country without speaking the local language. You can’t find what you’re looking for, and you can’t make many friends. Asian immigrants realize this. Asian cultures realize this. That’s why we learn.

    Snoopy’s advice is a form of deflection coaching. It’s advice that does nothing for us. I wouldn’t say that he’s necessarily trying to get us to take our eye off the ball, but he refuses to educate himself on the actual communities he’s lecturing. It looks something like this:

    “We need equal rights! (in college admissions and work)”
    “No, I won’t let that happen. You need bilingual ballots!”
    “We already speak English! Or we can learn!”
    “No, you don’t! And you can’t!”

    To be fair, I do have some relatives who have lived in this country for decades and don’t speak English–although because they’re related to me and possess an average or above level of intelligence, they can speak/read enough to read a ballot. But as ChineseMom rightly points out, these relatives tend to be people who don’t really care about reaching out or voting. Even if the ballots were translated into fifty different languages, they wouldn’t vote. They’re not interested in making friends with non-Chinese. They’re similar to Aardvark’s parents, thinking that someday they’ll go back.

    Snoopy:

    Kobukson, that’s where the formula I quoted above comes in. Citizens from language groups must reach a certain numerical threshold before jurisdictions are compelled by the Voting Rights Act to offer multilingual ballots.

    Wait! I thought you just said, “the point is that as American citizens they cannot be asked to do so unless everyone’s citizenship requires extra work.” Oh, but there’s a formula to determine your rights. Certain people can be “asked to do so.” Man, you really don’t believe anything you’re saying, do you?

    Point is that the law makes no sense. It’s an expense for people like me to pay. Not because it helps Chang, but because it makes people like you, who know nothing about immigrant culture and refuse to learn, feel good.

    BigWOWO, you and ChineseMom pretend that your personal experiences justify your stance against this law, but what do you know of the Vietnamese community of San Diego, CA? How can you speak for Bangladeshis in Hamtramck, Michigan?

    Don’t even ask. I’ve got knowledge that you obviously don’t care about.

    At some point, if as a Chinese American you are so willing to learn more than everyone else BigWOWO, walk down to your local community college and register for a basic civics course.

    And we end with yet another deflection…

  61. mmjames:

    Exactly. People like you and me and ChineseMom also come from families and communities. We know other immigrant families and relatives. We share a common experience and are familiar with that experience. All these ivory tower extrapolations have little to do with reality.

  62. Thomas Sowell said, Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good.

    There’s a tension between individual agency and government overreach.
    This insistence on having multi-lingual ballots also reminds me of how liberals want to change the entrance examinations to NYC’s elite public high schools. Instead of insisting that underrepresented minorities study harder, they want to make the exams less rigorous. Similarly, instead of insisting that citizens have basic English skills as a requirement of voting, they want to have more regulation. But if what many here are saying is true, that English lacking immigrants don’t even tend to vote in the first place, then this is wasteful regulation in defiance of on-the-ground reality.

    These sorts of questions comes down to what kinds of values we hold. I’m a big believer in individual agency myself. That certain things are my responsibility. My Christian worldview informs how I view the division of labor between the individual and the state. The things that are within my control, I will take care of. The things that are outside of my control, I leave that to God. Similarly, I want government to take care of things that are outside of my control. Such as maintaining roads and bridges. But for goodness sakes, learning English to know how to vote should be the individual’s responsibility.

  63. BigWOWO, the only advice I’ve provided in this thread has been to encourage you to learn more about the laws that govern your country. You do not understand American election law, and your pattern in this conversation has been to make uninformed pronouncements about that which you do not understand, and pretend that your cultural affiliations justify your ignorance.

    They do not. When Asian Americans like you clamor for equal rights in college admissions and work, the only method by which you may obtain those rights (or defend them once you gain what you want) is through the vote. So your insistence on English-only ballots makes no logical sense.

    Put another way, I don’t pretend expert knowledge of immigrant Asian American communities. I don’t need to in this conversation: the point at issue is whether measures designed to remove barriers to immigrant citizen voting like multilingual ballots prove useful.

    I argue that English-only ballots create an unjust burden for citizens with limited English proficiency, a perspective that has been federal election law since 1975. I suggest further that the willingness many limited English proficiency citizens display to improve their English skills is commendable, but utterly beside the point.

    Our government has a compelling interest to remove barriers to voting access, within reason. A practical example of this interest involves the formula used to ensure that language minority groups have the option of non-English ballots in the 263 jurisdictions I linked earlier.

    While the government cannot ensure that every limited English proficiency voter who wants a non-English ballot may receive one, the government can identify the localities where the bulk of limited English proficiency citizens live, and take reasonable steps to encourage voting participation from those populations in our elections, so that the rest of us don’t elect officials who lack concern for these populations’ interests.

    BigWOWO, you believe that many, if not most Chinese Americans disagree with affirmative action. If that is true, than it’s not surprising that in California, a state with large numbers of limited English proficiency Asian American voters, affirmative action still has not returned. All the public protest and legislative pressure that state lawmakers received from the Chinese American community there had substance because of the ever increasing voter participation rates in Asian American communities.

    In some Californian voting districts, it’s not possible to be elected to higher office without the support of Asian American citizens. Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act makes this reality possible. The Asian American electorate’s strength would be greatly diminished if English-only ballots were mandated throughout America.

    So if you oppose affirmative action and wish to end the practice, you can’t also express support for English-only ballots, BigWOWO. When the Silicon Valley Chinese Association approaches lawmakers about their opposition to affirmative action, their leverage directly proportions to the voters they can mobilize on Election Day.

    BigWOWO, your support for English-only ballots would shrink the leverage those anti-affirmative action advocates have, just because you find something model minority positive about the idea that immigrants should speak English before they participate in American politics. That’s self-destructive, and illustrates that you lack support for the Asian American community.

  64. Snoopy,

    We’ve been agreeing on the law since the very first post on the subject. I’ve not disagreed with you there. Nor has anyone else. I’m not sure why you’re questioning my understanding of the law when I’m in 100% agreement with you on the law.

    I argue that English-only ballots create an unjust burden for citizens with limited English proficiency…

    And I’m telling you that they don’t. I’m telling you that it’s not a “burden.” I’m giving you real information rather than liberal propaganda. I’m telling you that immigrants in general don’t come to this country and become citizens with the expectation that they shouldn’t have to learn English–anyone who wants to learn it can. I’m telling you that they are a lot smarter than you give them credit for. With or without those Chinese ballots, immigrants would find a way to overturn racist discrimination policies or at least make their voices heard. You make it sound like learning English is rocket science. Or that learning it is like crossing a military imposed barrier. That’s not the case. Hundreds of millions of people speak English. Hundreds of millions of people study it every day.

    Mmjames and ChineseMom are telling you the exact same thing. Anyone with significant experience with immigrants will also tell you the same thing. I don’t think it’s just limited to Asian immigrants either. When there’s a will there’s a way, which is why money could be better spent elsewhere.

  65. @kobukson

    If an immigrant is a citizen, who presumably went through the naturalization process to get his right to vote, isn’t it necessary to have a basic grasp of English to go through that process? Or is it somehow possible to become naturalized while knowing little or no English?

    You can take a look at the naturalization test and see for yourself the level of English “proficiency” needed to pass. It’s a completely different ball game than voting ballots and forms where not even native-born citizens can grasp the language sometimes.

    Having other languages doesn’t harm anybody, especially not the different language tax payers when they’re also the ones paying for the printing costs.

  66. @bigWOWO,

    You can’t have community volunteers writing ballots. It has to be official. You have to pay someone to do it, and you have to pay someone to proof it.

    What law says community volunteers can’t help translate ballots? Sure, it makes sense to have a notorized copy at the end, but lots of voting related activities are run by volunteers only.

    Sounds like pork spending to have everything paid to somebody’s cousin to make it official.

    What if I can’t read my own name in English? There’s no way I would be able to get my mail. That’s so racist and discriminatory. That’s government impediment.

    That’s another ridiculous exaggeration on James Lamb-Fang’s rhetoric. How are you even paying the tax, bills and rent if you don’t know your own address?

    There has to be some basic level of understanding how to operate in this society. While I’d agree that it becomes ridiculous at some point to mandate everything in all languages, there’s no doubt that voting is sporadic and any translated materials help.

    Lots don’t do it, but they could. But it’s not uncommon. Less than 50% of eligible voters vote, regardless of race.

    That’s a real social problem we should get behind instead of the James Lamb-Fang deflections. I know lots of Asians who don’t care enough to exercise their civic rights as citizens of a democracy. #SAD!

  67. @James Lamb-Fang,

    You probably skipped right over my comments above, but I wrote that I agree with 90% of what you wrote. However, I still find it laughable most of your exaggerated Strawmans and spin doctoring just detracts from your argument and make you look like Chicken-Little.

    No one cares if Chinese American immigrant citizens are or are not willing to learn any language and bear any burden — the point is that as American citizens they cannot be asked to do so unless everyone’s citizenship requires extra work.

    This is where Byron and ChineseMom definitely has it spot on, and as a child of immigrants I have to say that Immigrants make America great by doing most of the trudge work in society, be it menial labor or high-tech mind numbing IT stuff.

    Immigrants move to another country knowing it’s going to be hard to change and adapt in order to find a better life. Immigrants are willing to work crazy hard for small benefits. Sure, it places some undue burden to make one extra step to learn the issues on election ballots, but in general that’s why you see Asians “over-represented” in Ivy schools: because it’s definitely the bootstrap mentality to work like mad at education and other things to get ahead in life.

  68. @mmjames,

    those who stick with media from the old country can’t speak English well but also do not care to involve themselves with voting.

    #SAD! T_T

  69. Liberal propaganda? BigWOWO, calm down. This isn’t fake news, it’s a fair explanation of a reasonable law, one that enhances Asian American political influence.

    When you suggest that Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act allocates funds that “could be better spent elsewhere”, you argue that the infinitesimal fraction of your taxes that allow for multilingual ballots (assuming that you live within one of the 263 jurisdictions where non-English ballots are an option) are too much to pay to ensure viable Asian American local political influence.

    In my view, that means that you insufficiently support the Asian American community. BigWOWO, it’s just common sense — if you care about Asian Americans, you should wish to maximize the potential voting pool from that community, not shrink it.

  70. Asians don’t vote because their english is constantly ridiculed, so they don’t speak english, when they dont speak english, they dont engage in conversation, they feel excluded, so they don’t care about politics.
    We have spanish radio stations, spanish TV channels, para espanol oprima dos. Yet we don’t have anything like that for the asian community. It also helps that hispanics all speak spanish, and Asians speak many different languages, so it is more difficult to have radio stations and tv channels, and there aren’t enough 1 digit numbers to dial.
    Solutions ? More asians, we need more asians, we need 10 times more asians than hispanics. Once that happens, we will have more radio stations and TV channels to engage the asian community. Once asians feel welcome and feel like home, they will get out of their shell and vote.
    I can’t believe Byron doesn’t support ballots in foreign languages. That is just disgusting and stupid not to support. I hope he isn’t a haole. Byron, I know you’re an idealist, but why take the high road when other races are shitting on you. Do you want more asians to come out and vote ? even if it costs $1 billion to get one more asian to vote, it’s still totally worth it. That $1 billion would be wasted anyway to pay for social welfares and for the likes of Snoopy to go to Ivy League colleges, or to pay for racist liberals to further discriminate asians.

  71. Snoopy:

    When you suggest that Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act allocates funds that “could be better spent elsewhere”, you argue that the infinitesimal fraction of your taxes that allow for multilingual ballots (assuming that you live within one of the 263 jurisdictions where non-English ballots are an option) are too much to pay to ensure viable Asian American local political influence.

    Actually, I’m arguing that a significant dollar amount of my taxes has an infinitesimal influence on the number of voters who wouldn’t vote without translations. It’s just not necessary. Spend the money elsewhere.

    Snoopy, monolingual as you are, and as much as you look down on immigrants, I’ll bet that if we dropped you off in France, you’d be able to read a French ballot within a year. If we dropped you off in Korea for five or six years, you’d be able to read a Korean ballot too. Language isn’t rocket science. Virtually everyone who wants to get there eventually does.

    Aardvark:

    Sounds like pork spending to have everything paid to somebody’s cousin to make it official.

    But that’s how government works. We spend spend spend. $10k sounds reasonable to translate something managed by the private sector, but it’s probably much higher than that if it’s government-run.

    As you said, there needs to be some basic understanding. In the case of naturalized citizens, the English level is almost always higher than basic.

  72. Snoopy, does bring up a valid point, about giving voice and shared power to minorities who are handicapped by language. I think there is no reason on ideological grounds to inhibit, their power to vote, on some level there has to be atleast an attempt to address the issue, maybe when the entire system of voting itself changes for the better? Such as making the entire voting process much more convenient and streamlined for all people to access. Such as doing it electronically over a smartphone, or a website that has multilingual assistance that would solve this issue. Even that may not be necessary as there are readily available client-side translation systems that could take care of that easily. In general making things inconvenient like fumbling over a paper ballot and having to drive to some voter center, seems like something from the past century, and something that needs to be reformed in light of advancing technology.

    “Furthermore, one wonders how Asian Americans can come together as a cohesive political bloc if all the different Asian ethnic groups don’t learn to speak English. How can I discuss politics with my Chinese or Viet neighbor if we just speak our own native tongue? If there is an Asian American candidate running for office, should he have to speak Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Hindi, etc in order to reach out to the diverse Asian crowd?”

    However I agree with this statement from koku, this issue here highlights the fact there is an inherent contradiction between the need to integrate disparate minority populations yet having an obligation to provide all citizens the ability to vote. I mean sharing the same language and culture is something that brings us all together as ‘Americans’, that can’t be ignored. I have friends who were Chinese-American, Japanese-American, Filipino-American, Taiwanese-American, when we are together we don’t think like… Oh hey he’s Taiwanese! and believe in this and that about our history!

    I see it all the time here back in Asia, Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, as tourists and in situations where groups of them are together will self-segregate into their own insular little groups holding on to preconceived notions of each other while they stay within their own insular bubble of shared language/culture.

    I mean in America, what I noticed is atleast with 2nd+ generation Asian-Americans, we leave all that shit in Asia atleast most of it behind where it belongs. In general when I meet other Asian Americans in America and abroad there is a sense of unity here with all of us, doesn’t matter where our parents came from what “they” believe. This has everything to do with a shared language/culture and perhaps unconsciously a new found identity. If you ask me I think there is huge untapped potential here, especially with a growing Asian American population that has economic clout, if Asian-Americans as a group mobilized politically and asserted some form of influence, this isn’t something that would affect politics domestically, it might go beyond that…. Why? Well for the one thing the U.S isn’t just an ordinary country, who we elect to power as the U.S president has a huge effect on what happens ‘out there’, how we influence Hollywood, and institutions that have global influence isn’t gonna just change things in the U.S…..

    Whether integration should be enforced through the ability to vote, is not something I’m sure should be done, but it doesn’t like this question has a clear “right or wrong”, hard for me to call.

  73. “Furthermore, one wonders how Asian Americans can come together as a cohesive political bloc if all the different Asian ethnic groups don’t learn to speak English. How can I discuss politics with my Chinese or Viet neighbor if we just speak our own native tongue? If there is an Asian American candidate running for office, should he have to speak Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Hindi, etc in order to reach out to the diverse Asian crowd?”

    This is true.

  74. Sorry that was me testing to see if my comment got through as I failed with the CAPTCHA previously,

    @Kiwi
    Do you have an email that I can communicate with you in private? Thanks

  75. Another post of Byron’s that is repetitive and redundant.

    Most Asians do not care about Asian issues. They only care about personal issues and issues that affect their own ethnic group among the immigrant community.

    The rate of intermarriages between the different Asian ethnic groups pale in comparison to the prevalent Asian/White marriages.

    Yet, a certain segment of the acculturated Asian demographic want White people to know that they are oppressed too.

    The only racial minority group in America with so much going for them and they do not take fully take advantage what America has to offer. They only whine and whine for not being on the same level with White folks, while doing everything they can to be the model minority.

    Steve Bannon’s dislike of successful Asian CEOs in Silicon Valley is what he calls we need to be a civic society. Well, Asians are perceived as non-civic, materialistic and most important, not very dynamic when successful. Do Asians provide any significant value in a White majority-society? It seems like they don’t.

  76. @bigWOWO,

    I’m arguing that a significant dollar amount of my taxes has an infinitesimal influence on the number of voters who wouldn’t vote without translations.

    I’ll also need some guestimates here. What’s “significant dollar amount” and “infinitesimal influence” just to get a good mutual framework?

    I agree that printing out more flyers won’t necessarily help more people to be interested to vote – because it’s putting the cart before the horse logic, and it’s the issues that make people want to vote; whatever can help law-abiding taxpaying citizens to exercise their democratic freedoms should be promoted by the government.

    I agree that the private sector can be much more efficient in many things, but I’m only talking about finding the lowest bidder to print some pamphlets and ballots. The translation part can be done by volunteers, since there are so many of these organizations around, and then notarized.

    Government inefficiencies can be reduced and the idea was always about lowest bidders, but then the corporate influence and lobbyists got in there and ruined our government. >.<

    Also, James Lamb-Fang is totally going off the wall (as usual) with his "voter suppression" BS hyperboles. He's not interested in debate, but empty rhetoric and tantrums. I applaud you for believing in freedom of speech, and not like their racist censorship on Reappropriate, but at some point you need to call out the lying hypocrisy that is the Fangs. I agree 95% with what he wrote here about voting, but still has to call out his Strawmans and lies and spins.

  77. Kobu, Deus, and MM:

    Sorry, my spam filter has been ultra-aggressive recently. I just approved your comments. I’m really sorry about that. If it ever does that again, just let me know, and I’ll be on it right away.

  78. Kobu:

    These sorts of questions comes down to what kinds of values we hold. I’m a big believer in individual agency myself. That certain things are my responsibility. My Christian worldview informs how I view the division of labor between the individual and the state. The things that are within my control, I will take care of. The things that are outside of my control, I leave that to God. Similarly, I want government to take care of things that are outside of my control. Such as maintaining roads and bridges. But for goodness sakes, learning English to know how to vote should be the individual’s responsibility.

    That’s also a very Asian way of seeing things, and I think that’s why we’re all disagreeing with じゃんけん (janken/Snoopy) here. For us, we see it as a responsibility. Our parents and grandparents didn’t immigrate with the idea that Americans would be forced to speak or pay for translations into Chinese or Korean. For us, it just isn’t a big deal; it was part of the bargain we took when we came here.

    Now Janken is going to argue that his ancestors were stolen from Africa. He’s correct…but he also speaks nothing but English. So for him, it should be even LESS of a big deal.

  79. We got a good word for these kind of Asian activists. PAAs progressive asian activists.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/comments/48qqvc/new_acronym_paa_progressive_asian_activist/

    Wanting to kiss up to progressive establishment. Always put progressive establishment interests first. Asian interest takes the back seat. Never dare to raise their voice within that coalition. What’s the point of making alliances if your input is not taken seriously in the coalition?

  80. @kobukson

    you point out an important political problem:

    “Furthermore, one wonders how Asian Americans can come together as a cohesive political bloc if all the different Asian ethnic groups don’t learn to speak English. How can I discuss politics with my Chinese or Viet neighbor if we just speak our own native tongue? If there is an Asian American candidate running for office, should he have to speak Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Hindi, etc in order to reach out to the diverse Asian crowd?”

    The answer is that you cannot build a coherent political force within a majotarian voting system. The reason is that for an Asian American political elite it is always better to bond with white elites than with the average Asian American voters. The cost for English-speaking Asian American leaders to communicate with the average Asian American voters is too high because they need to know all the languages.

    One solution is demarchy. You must allocate posts with a mixture of lottery voting, rotation and voting.

    Sensibel posts should be allocated with a voting procedure. The Athenenians did it for military posts. I think you should adopt it for the posts of campaigners. In order to avoid the dominance of an ethnic group or a class, you can implement a two stage voting procedure. First assign each candidate a score with evaluation of his qualification, this score is converse to a weight for an weighted lottery. A pool of qualified candidate is drawn from the weighted lottery. The voting base vote for the drawn candidates. The majority determine the selected campaign leader.

    Minor posts should be allocated by lot. This idea sounds unfamiliar but it helps with social cohesion. No subgroup have an advantage to get a post just because they are more wealthy, more educated etc. The low rank officials will accumulated increase generalized trust for the Asian American voting bloc, because they interact on a daily basis with the Asian American average voters.

    Danish Direct Democracy theoretician invent the concept of of mini-public to implement a plebiszit element for check and balance. The mini-public get veto rights and can choose electorial procedures for application. The electorial procedures are drawn from a lottery to minimize strategic voting. The mini-public also get an right to make proposals that must be taken into consideration by officials.

    The mini-public is medialized with ICT. It is selected in the following manner. For example the life expectancy is 60 and the number of Asian american in Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Metro Area is 1,884,669. The mini-public is then 1,884,669/60 ~ 31411. If the members of the mini-public have to rotate every month. Every month have 31411/12 ~ 2617 voting members.

    The problem of low voter participation can be solved if you link voting with a lottery. each voter participate in a lottery automatically if he go to the ballot. The voter is required to donate the jackpot to a local community organization, education facility or a coop.

  81. BigWOWO, you disagree with me. It’s not clear that everyone in this conversation disagrees with me. Further, all I’m saying is that Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act makes a sensible attempt to ensure that, in the aggregate, limited English proficiency voters are not inhibited from the full exercise of their voting rights.

    Further, the problem with conservative politicians like Jeff Sessions is that their stated hostility to provisions in the Voting Rights Act that regularly review the state voting procedures that allow members of marginalized communities unencumbered exercise of the franchise endanger the voting rights of the members of those communities. One of those provisions, Section 203, is directly linked to the electoral strength of the Asian American community, as I explained above.

    Given this, support for Jeff Sessions and conservatives of his ilk works against support for Asian American political strength. The knee-jerk expectation that all immigrants must learn English to vote argues for a linguistic litmus test for voter registration that does not appear anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.

    Further, no matter what certain privilege immigrants believe, there is a meaningful difference between English proficiency as a requirement to fully engage Western markets, and English proficiency as a requirement to vote as a full citizen in a Western nation. Capitalist markets do not exist laden with natural protections against individual harm; Western liberal democracies impose those protections, where they are found, to reduce the substantive harm unfettered markets wreak on individual citizens.

    So when an Asian immigrant enters the American state, we should identify want exactly imposes the expectations of which you write, BigWOWO. Perhaps the immigrants assume they must learn English because of the economic benefits of engagement with Western labor and retail and investment markets, not because they expect literacy tests, which have been illegal throughout America since 1970.

  82. @ Richard

    We can talk on the Open Thread. If not, then it’s probably not worth discussing.

  83. When my aunt (Chinese) was doing her PhD at a mostly White university, she discovered her thesis committee was actively trying to prevent her from graduating. She discussed it with her White liberal friend and asked her if it was possible to sue them. Her friend gave my aunt a look of disbelief and said “You? Sue them? Are you kidding? You’re not even Black!”

    Remind me how Asians are “privileged” compared to Blacks when Blacks’ concerns are taken more seriously than Asians by Whites.

  84. At my mother’s workplace, a Black colleague recounted to her that when he rented an apartment, the landlord required him to sign a contract that he wouldn’t sue him over anything. The colleague explained that Blacks are more likely to succeed with racial discrimination lawsuits because of the popular image that Blacks are helpless victims that deserve rigid protections, which makes it easier to guilt trip people and win sympathy in court. Not so for Asians. We’re the minority that gets cry bullied by other races but not the other way around.

  85. The commonly accepted idea among SJWs that Asians can be racist towards Blacks but Blacks can’t be racist towards Asians because that would be “punching up” is seriously flawed:

    1. Unlike Blacks, Asians are generally new to the country and lack the deep roots in this country that Blacks have established over many generations.

    2. Asians regularly experience xenophobia. Blacks do not. Even Black immigrants are often mistaken for Americans. Being American is a privilege.

    3. Blacks have not experienced a major war on their home soil in the last 150 years. Most Asians have, including in just the last two generations.

    4. Most Asians came from countries living in third world poverty. Blacks have lived in the world’s richest, most powerful country during all that time.

    5. Due to living in abject poverty, Asians like my family grew up starving. Blacks have not had that experience since World War 2.

    6. Imperial Japan killed and enslaved more Asians during World War 2 than European empires ever did to Africans in the entire 400 years of the Atlantic slave trade.

    7. Most Asians came from oppressive countries like military dictatorships that massacred or starved to death tens of millions of civilians. When Blacks were being hosed down, Asians were being gunned down.

    8. The lynchings of Blacks in the last 150 years can never compare to the scale of atrocities that most Asian families have gone through in even the last 100 years.

    While much of what can be said of Asians also applies to Black immigrants, there has been no concerted effort to attack Black immigrants as a “privileged” group even though Black immigrants tend to be better off than most Asians.

  86. Black privilege is just the surface of the asian problem in Murica. Most non asians subliminally deem asian men as effeminate, inferior, weak, and cowardice. Look at shows like 2 Broke Girls. How is that show still a hit ? Because “Muricans” love to watch that show, they have no problem bashing asian men because asian men are not worthy to be “muricans”. They think they are being righteous by allowing asian men to stay in their murica.
    Asian men in Murica are like Jews in Nazi Germany. They both love their country, are willing to serve their country, want to be a part of their country. Many of them are brainwashed to think they are indeed inferior, and their countrymen hate them.
    Asian men as a group is the easiest group to exterminate in Murica. It would take the least effort to mobilize muricans to send us to camps than to send any other groups.

  87. What each major Asian American group has gone through since 1865:

    Chinese:
    El Niño Famines
    Minority Rebellions
    World War 2
    Chinese Civil War
    Great Leap Forward
    Cultural Revolution

    death toll: tens of millions

    Korean:
    World War 2
    Korean War

    death toll: millions

    Japanese:
    World War 2

    death toll: millions

    Filipino:
    Philippine-American War
    World War 2

    death toll: hundreds of thousands

    Vietnamese:
    World War 2
    Indochina War
    Vietnam War

    death toll: millions

    Indian:
    El Niño Famines
    Partition

    death toll: tens of millions

    This applies to all Asians who arrived after the Civil Rights Movement. Those who arrived before, like Chinese, Japanese, and Filipinos, were ethnically cleansed, lynched, and interned.

    What Black Americans have gone through since 1865:
    lynchings
    police brutality

    death toll: thousands

    Based on their ancestral legacies over the last 150 years, Asian Americans have suffered tens of millions of deaths while Blacks have suffered only thousands. That’s four orders of magnitude in difference. Black activists commonly point to their ancestors being slaves as justification for affirmative action. If we want to be consistent, then by the same logic, Asians have a stronger case for affirmative action based on all the shit they had to go through in recent history that Blacks didn’t.

    But the SJWs will still insist in spite of all historical fact that there is “Asian privilege”.

  88. Black activists commonly point to their ancestors being slaves as justification for affirmative action. If we want to be consistent, then by the same logic, Asians have a stronger case for affirmative action based on all the shit they had to go through in recent history that Blacks didn’t. — Kiwi

    Without question, Asian citizens have endured untold domestic suffering and calamity, but it’s not reasonable to compare events like the Cultural Revolution to events like, say Jim Crow segregation, because both phenomena did not occur as a direct result of American domestic policy.

    If a person wishes to assert that Vietnamese refugees deserve some form of affirmative action given American foreign policy from the 1950-70’s, a case can be made, as a case could be made for any American citizen who suffered as a direct result of American foreign or domestic policy.

    The persuasiveness of those claims depends in large measure on whether the American government holds any liability for the effects its decisions impose on non-American citizens.

    However, American policy did not precipitate the Cultural Revolution in any sense. We’re not responsible for every famine that occurs worldwide. Kiwi, your listing above offers a great example of the danger of comparing mass calamities across national boundaries: Asian Americans arrived in the numbers present today largely after 1965.

    While many Asian American families trace their first encounters with America earlier than that point, many others do not, and it’s difficult to suggest that mass calamity that happened to Asian Americans immigrants in their home countries should result in affirmative action for those groups in America.

    But what’s interesting about affirmative action as it is practiced today, is that it largely applies to Asian Americans. Certainly many Laotians, Cambodians, Vietnamese, Samoan, Thai, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, and Chinese America benefit from affirmative action in order to pursue studies, not out of recompense for past wrongs, but because selective colleges and universities recognize the utility of inclusive, diverse learning spaces, and use holistic review to construct inquisitive student bodies that include Asian Americans.

    Black people have endured much more than lynching and police brutality since 1865, but all that we have endured occurred as a direct result of American policy. Cross-racial, cross-historical comparisons, to my thinking, are always impermissible, but if you’re going to employ them Kiwi, you should at least keep the governmental context consistent.

  89. James Lamb-Fang the equivocator wrote:

    phenomena did not occur as a direct result of American domestic policy.

    What sorts of double speak is this? The NSA and CIA/DIA are all supposedly “foreign” operational entities, so then you deny the link between CIA and crack-cocaine peddling? But my guess is that as soon as anything related to Black victomology is encountered, the James Lamb-Fang spin doctoring Ph.D. goes into over-drive.

    I “suggest” you look up the CIA involvement in all sorts of 20th century black-ops around the world. And any sorts of “insights” on Liberia?

    your listing above offers a great example of the danger of comparing mass calamities across national boundaries: Asian Americans arrived in the numbers present today largely after 1965.

    By this hard limit on the moratorium of historical events, limit your Black victomology Ph.D. thesis to after 1965 as well. Otherwise, it’s disingenuous.

    At last we have a baseline now from which to play Oppression Olympics from!

    what’s interesting about affirmative action as it is practiced today, is that it largely applies to Asian Americans. Certainly many Laotians, Cambodians, Vietnamese, Samoan, Thai, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, and Chinese America benefit from affirmative action in order to pursue studies, not out of recompense for past wrongs, but because selective colleges and universities recognize the utility of inclusive, diverse learning spaces, and use holistic review to construct inquisitive student bodies that include Asian Americans.

    Yes, in the same way that “African-Americans” as loosely termed in Reconstruction Era to the Civil-Rights era certainly doesn’t encompass post-1965 Africa, Afro-Caribbean and Afro-Latino immigrants including Kenya, Nigeria, Botswana, Rwanda, Swaziland, Somalia, Cuba, Venezuela, Brazil, etc, etc, etc who are all phenotype Black, but speak hundreds of languages and cultural practices. But hey, SJWs just want to play social engineers and lump everybody all together.

    I didn’t realize James Lamb-Fang got dual Ph.D.s: spin doctor and lump all the various ethnic groups into socially constructed other as simply “Asian.”

  90. Great find ChineseMom.
    Very short article but covers so much. Can’t comment on the white-guilt part but I definitely agree with Steele’s view with the new liberalism. I have always identified as “liberal” and definitely don’t see eye-to eye with this new identity-based liberalism. I like the ideal-based version a lot more.

  91. In case y’all don’t realize it, the culture is different. What Asians went through could (or could not) be much worse, but Snoopy is always going to look for excuses or reasons to get more free stuff for black people. It’s just the way he’s primed. Look above to see how he creates this “American government” argument that makes absolutely no sense. Why should suffering because of the American government take precedence over any other kind of suffering? The reason? It shouldn’t. It’s just another Snoopyism. Not to mention the obvious: why should suffering mean “free stuff” in the first place?

    I really liked Shelby Steele’s article. I’ve read other stuff from him, and he’s spot on. I was taken by this quote: “Today’s liberalism is an anachronism. It has no understanding, really, of what poverty is and how it has to be overcome.” It reminds me of the old skipping a meal to buy a book discussion. Steele is 100% correct that liberalism has become corrupt. It’s why Trump won.

    Something that I’ve realized is that activism isn’t about arguments; it’s about values. If someone was taught to always think of himself as a victim, it’s hard for him to undo that mindset. If he was taught that his race or people are more important than all others, and that no one else’s voice matters, it’s hard for him to hear anyone’s voice but his own. It’s because those values have become a part of him.

  92. Snoopy’s logic is ideological. He sees the world as divided between perpetrators and victims: Whites and non-Whites. Anything that breaks out of that mold is not truly worthy of outrage. In short, we should only care about human suffering inflicted by White people because that’s more emotionally gratifying.

  93. An opinion piece by an Asian SJW that is a glaring example of anti-Asian racism among Asian progressivists.:

    Why ‘Get Out’, a Movie About Anti-Black Racism, Had an Asian Character
    http://nextshark.com/get-out-film-asian-character-racism-llag/

    In summary, the article says Asians are “privileged” minorities but then says they have nothing to gain by aligning with White supremacy. So which is it? Are Asians privileged or oppressed? On this point, even the author seems confused and convolutes his own story.

    The author also claims that if Asians don’t align with Blacks, they are automatically part of the problem. Should Asians align with Chris Rock or Steve Harvey, even as they belittle Asians with demeaning, racist stereotypes on national television? How about Colin Powell, who covered up the My Lai massacre? Blacks are so often portrayed as the standard bearers of racial oppression and social justice in media and education that we forget the struggles of other races and Black complicity in their oppression.

    And most damning of all, the author reveals his own anti-Black bias when he automatically assumes that a Black person in a work of art about Mongols is a slave. This was called out by several commenters and calls into question the author’s own prejudices towards Blacks.

    The root problem among Asian SJWs (and SJWs generally) is that the American narrative on race is usually framed as a Black and White one. Because people tend to think in Black and White (literally in this case), Blacks are stereotyped as victims while Whites are stereotyped as oppressors. Therefore, any racial struggle over social justice inevitably devolves into “pick a side” dichotomy where third races are denied an autonomous voice and are expected to align with either Blacks or Whites.

    Because Blacks have been the largest and most influential racial minority for the overwhelming majority of America’s history, social justice advocates have long had to cater, or at least pander to Blacks to win political capital. Asians are far from obtaining this kind of power, so appealing to Asian interests usually results in a loss of political capital. This is why we have Asian SJWs like LLAG who pander to Blacks while simultaneously attacking Asians as a “privileged” minority complicit in White supremacy.

    This ignores all historical reality. Just as Asians have formed coalitions with Whites against Blacks, Blacks have also formed coalitions with Whites against Asians. But due to political expediency, it is more socially convenient to call out the former but not the latter.

  94. LLAG and other Asian SJWs are the Michelle Malkins of the regressive LIEberals. They’re only in it for themselves to gain as much benefits as possible, and not for Asian American interests first and foremost.

    This ignores all historical reality. Just as Asians have formed coalitions with Whites against Blacks, Blacks have also formed coalitions with Whites against Asians. But due to political expediency, it is more socially convenient to call out the former but not the latter.

    The history of the Civil Rights Era and Yuri Kochiyama and Richard Aoki tends to be overlooked, doesn’t it? In fact, Grace Lee Boggs only get recognition when it’s commemorative stamps editions talks in May. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Now when’s the last time a prominent NAACP leader spoke out against anti-Asian violence like Oakland and racism by Steve Harvey?

  95. Kiwi, no. We should recognize that not all human suffering is America’s fault. Asian Americans didn’t endure the Cultural Revolution; Chinese citizens living in the PRC did.

    The difference here is that I do not confuse Asian Americans with Asian citizens who live in Asian countries. Your comment above pretends that Asian Americans endured calamities that took place in Asian countries, outside of the United States of America. That is not true. Generally speaking, Asian Americans are American citizens with ancestral or ethnic connection to Asian countries, however anemic, but who live and work within American states as American citizens.

    There is no reason to assume that any Asian American has any direct tie to anything from or involved with a foreign Asian nation; to make that assumption is to engage in the perpetual foreigner stereotype.

    Therefore, there’s no reason to expect that all or most or any Asian Americans have any connection whatsoever to any of the terrible events you list. Some of those calamities, like the Korean War and the Vietnam War, resulted directly from American influence. Some, like the Cultural Revolution, have nothing to do with American policy at all.

    Further, all those events happened outside United States territory, so your suggestion that Asians have somehow suffered more than Black Americans has to acknowledge that all that suffering occurred outside American influence or context, unlike the calamities that befall Black Americans.

    Given that, it is not possible to make useful comparisons between those events and suffering endured by Black Americans within the United States of America as a direct result of American policy. Kiwi, you simply cannot make the claim you make above reasonably.

    Asian Americans haven’t suffered ‘tens of millions of deaths’ as you claim above, Kiwi. Asians have. There is a difference. 17.3 million Americans identified in whole or in part their Asian heritage on the last U.S. Census; while Asian Americans are the fastest growing population, they are also quite small in comparison to other American populations, reaching into the tens of millions only recently.

    My logic is not ideological, Kiwi. But it is logic. You should recognize the difference. When you do not, people like me will point out the flaws in your argument publicly. It’s a real shame I have to Negrosplain your community to you, but when you ignore basic population differences, it’s impossible to let that silly slide.

  96. Suffering doesn’t mean “free stuff”, but it’s clear that no one’s asking for free stuff. Affirmative action operates as a means by which Western liberal democracies attempt to overcome the inherent bias and discrimination in their educational systems. It’s never been about “free stuff”, BigWOWO. That’s just your sad race conservatism talking.

    Affirmative action is no longer tied to direct recompense for past American domestic policy; rather, today affirmative action’s continued utility as delineated by the Supreme Court relies upon what is known as the ‘diversity rationale’, the claim that selective colleges and universities have the right to use affirmative action as one method within many admissions strategies to compile a diverse student body.

    Kiwi’s argument on race suffering above hearkens back to earlier affirmative action history, where affirmative action gained support as a public policy designed to recompense Black Americans and others for the discrimination and bias that American policymakers ignored and/ or exacerbated through their policy choices. In that instance, it’s not about the depth of suffering a national minority endures, but rather the culpability of the American state in that suffering.

    Put another way, immigrants from Country X could not argue that pogroms within Country X entitled them to affirmative action consideration in selective American colleges and universities, especially if America had nothing to do with the pogroms in Country X.

    However, the diversity rationale changed things. Now, immigrants from Country X can argue that pogroms in Country X entitle them to affirmative action consideration in selective American colleges and universities, because (as they or their advocates can argue) the experience of living through and escaping the pogroms in Country X add diversity to a student body.

    Before American culpability mattered, especially in the manner in which Nixon Administration policymakers first conceived affirmative action. Today, affirmative action operates much differently, and an incomplete list of human suffering like the one listed above by Kiwi does not discuss the particular histories of the calamities invoked with adequate specificity to allow for meaningful comparison.

  97. FYI: ~70% of Asian Americans are foreign born. While this doesn’t necessarily imply the perpetual foreigner who’s inscrutable other yellow peril, it does inform successive 2nd+ generations attitudes within the family unit.

  98. You see? Rich black kids get free bonus points over poor Asian kids in college admissions, but naw, that’s not free stuff in Snoopy’s book. That’s what he’s OWED.

    It’s so funny that Snoopy is trying to create a difference here despite being lectured many many times by ChineseMom, an Asian American, on the cultural revolution. I could get on my soapbox, but the point has already been made. And let’s not talk about the “bias and discrimination in their educational systems” that Snoopy talks about in his first paragraph above. As he rightfully says in his second paragraph, it’s not about discrimination because that discrimination doesn’t exist (and we could’ve saved a lot of time if he had just acknowledged this up front). Affirmative action is all about quotas and making sure that we’re “diverse.” Not diverse in terms of thinking or background, but race.

    As I said, we just have different values. Snoopy will continue to beat this victimology thing for all its worth. The rest of us are at an extreme disadvantage because our morals get in the way.

  99. Riddle me this, given the abject poverty within African American community, how is it that immigrants from Haiti or Hispaniola in general able to excel in academia over native born African Americans, when they’re literally living in huts in the Caribbean?

    Immigrants make American great!

  100. The smart Africans were never imported here as slaves because they used their intelligence to avoid it. Only the dumb and stupid were captured and shipped here. The weak died on the journey, leaving only the strong and dumb to arrive here. Thats why slave descendants are generally good in sports because of the genes, but have a hard time using the brain because all the smart ones still live in Africa. Real Africans are really smart though. They are just as smart and hardworking as Asians, but they’re quite promiscuous, making them superior to Asians.

  101. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    Asian Americans arrived in the numbers present today largely after 1965.

    Therefore, there’s no reason to expect that all or most or any Asian Americans have any connection whatsoever to any of the terrible events you list.

    I have family members who described to me in vivid detail their experiences living through multiple wars on their home soil, growing up starving in third world poverty, and living under a military dictatorship. My grandparents’ and even parents’ generation lost members to war, execution, or arbitrary imprisonment, including by a US-backed regime. Your family was voting well before mine had ever even seen a ballot. When Asian women married Black men (always an American GI) in my parents’ home country, it was considered “moving up” because that was their ticket to freedom and opportunity in the world’s richest and most powerful country.

    I and many others like me from Asian immigrant communities share a deep and powerful connection to our roots and the experiences of our families. This is true especially of Asian immigrants who arrived after 1965. They have all had to live through the terrible events I listed, which all occurred before 1965.

    The experiences of almost all Black Americans during that time have been far tamer by direct comparison. Even after tallying up the total deaths, the number only reaches the thousands. Asians in America on average may seem better off, but that’s because only the luckiest ones out of an unfortunate mass made it here.

    As someone who does not know or care about the sacrifices or struggles of immigrants and their communities, it would be best if you took a seat and stopped talking down to them by downplaying and minimizing their hardships.

  102. If simply describing the ancestral legacy of Asian Americans is the Perpetual Foreigner stereotype, then describing the ancestral legacy of Black Americans is the Perpetual Slave stereotype. Certainly the latter is just as, if not more condescending.

  103. The statements Snoopy makes are just so ridiculous, so ignorant, and so flat out nonsensical that y’all have no idea how to respond. I’m telling you: these are the people who got Trump elected! It’s the exact same playbook. Someone says something logical and intelligent, and they’ll just throw out the most ridiculous stuff out there.

    Media: Do you have any ties to Russia?
    Trump: Obama bugged my phones!

    Asian American: Life was tough just a couple of generations ago.
    SJW: Who cares! If it didn’t happen on American soil, it didn’t happen! That was before (the arbitrarily chosen year) 1965! Nanananafoofoo!

    If you call them out on their nonsense, they just double down.

    In other news, Rachel Dolezal just changed her name to Nkechi Amare Diallo.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/us/dolezal-activist-identifies-as-black-african-name.html

  104. I will say this–the rest of the world got blindsided by Trump’s techniques. But I’ve been here talking to Snoopy since before 2008, so I’m an old veteran when it comes to dealing with this kind of illogical logic. Can’t say that I’ve really figured out a good way to deal with it though…

  105. Describe Asian American ancestral legacy all you like Kiwi. That is not a problem. My contention is that you elide suffering faced by Asian Americans with suffering faced by Asians to claim that Asian Americans suffered more than Black Americans.

    Asian Americans and Asians are not the same group of people, Kiwi. You cannot support your claim, and the claim is a foolish one to make.

    Not only do I find your ahistorical comparison between Asian Americans and Black Americans ridiculous and disrespectful to both groups, I find your indifference to specificity when discussing your own people bizarre. It has always been clear that many Asians suffered mightily in their countries of origin; that fact has not been in dispute.

    The problem is that there’s no sense in comparing that suffering to that which befell Black Americans, because the impact of state action in both cases is so clearly different. A contrasting example to illustrate the poor utility of your original claim would suggest that the bloody failed states and rampant epidemics that plague West Africa today suggest that Black Americans have suffered more than Chinese Americans. It’s a silly, unpersuasive claim because West African political unrest has next to nothing to do with the Black American experience today.

    In like fashion, it can and should be argued that the Cultural Revolution has next to nothing to do with the Chinese American experience today. Kiwi, you make a false claim because you compare the plight of citizens in the developing world to the plight of national minorities in the developed world. While pockets of abject poverty and want persist in Black America, American infrastructure makes the sort of malnutrition and disease found in developing countries improbable within a domestic American context.

    I’m under no obligation to treat the hardships faced by members of immigrant communities with the reverence you and others here ascribe, Kiwi. I don’t have to care about them at all. We call that privilege. All I’m required to do in regard to the immigrant community is understand their histories and respect their civil and political rights. I satisfy that requirement when I suggest that there is no reasonable comparison between Asians living in Asian countries and Black Americans living in the United States of America, especially in regard to the violent episodes that befell both groups.

    Kiwi, your consistent argument has been that Black Americans have suffered less than Asian Americans. Not only is that unproven and historically inaccurate, it requires a false, misleading, and utterly impossible comparison you should know better than to make.

  106. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    A contrasting example to illustrate the poor utility of your original claim would suggest that the bloody failed states and rampant epidemics that plague West Africa today suggest that Black Americans have suffered more than Chinese Americans.

    Most Blacks arrived in the US during the 1700s. Most Asians arrived in the US during the late 1900s. Thus, your “contrasting example” shows your lack of reading comprehension and the limited scope of your own understanding of the “Black experience”.

    Recent African immigrants and their descendents can validly describe modern failed states and epidemics in Africa as a part of their families’ experiences. However, the percentage of Black Americans who belong to immigrant communities is so small that it is not a useful generalization. On the other hand, almost all Asians belong to immigrant communities. If Blacks have the right to point to slavery’s impact on their current condition, Asians have the right to point to events that happened even more recently to their families. Crossing a border doesn’t make that all go away, which is something even Black immigrants understand (but obviously not you).

  107. BigWOWO, Kiwi’s claim was not ‘life was tough for Asians just a couple of generations ago’, it was that Asian Americans have suffered more than Black Americans. It’s a false claim, in large measure because any hardship comparisons between different populations are impossible to prove with any reasonable certainty.

    If anything, such comparisons betray only the speaker’s bias, nothing more. Here, many people are supportive toward such claims of Asian American hardship compared with relative ease enjoyed by Black Americans. None of that support makes those claims reasonable.

    Further, the idea that President Trump was elected through some sort of frustration with race progressivism is completely absurd. In truth, the reactionary backlash Trump exemplifies coincided with the nomination of the most conservative Democratic nominee since John Kennedy, a woman who did not and could not generate meaningful support among her own party to mount an effective Presidential campaign.

    Even with those detriments, she still won the popular vote by nearly three million ballots.

    So no BigWOWO, race progressives are not at fault for President Trump. People like you are. When you’d prefer to consider measures that make America a more diverse and inclusive place problematic in favor of a “me-first” racial tribalism that cries and whines over affirmative action because you are wrongly convinced that it hurts Asian Americans, when you assume that any police officer from your group deserves leniency, no matter the callousness and indifference to human life displayed in his conduct, no matter who dies as a direct result of his actions, simply because you view him as a member of your race group, you view only people like you as truly worthy of public respect, and you justify the reactionary White nationalism that propelled Donald Trump’s ascendancy.

    So yes, Trump is your fault, BigWOWO. You certainly didn’t desire this outcome or support his candidacy. But people like you make America a worse place, because you prove incapable of the basic civility and inter-group concern that makes America great, period.

    You only care about Asians like yourself, Byron. That single-minded myopia is the problem with America today. Plenty of Asian American students with ancestral ties to massive calamity benefit from affirmative action just like Black students — you ignore all this because you assume Chinese Americans like yourself do not benefit. It’s this sort of “me-first, you never” thinking that corrodes our civic life from within.

    The very least you owe fellow citizens in this society is knowledge of their particular political histories and respect for their civic and political rights under the Constitution. People like you fail to muster even this low standard when your attention turns to Black people (really anyone darker than yourself).

    All Donald Trump accomplished in the 2016 election was political trolling that galvanized voters like you in White America. That’s why the ‘America First’ slogan, with all it’s difficult history, still worked: like you, they believe that Blacks and Muslims and undocumented immigrants from the global South fail to deserve the basic elements of the social welfare state to which they are entitled.

    Like you, they don’t wish to be publicly shamed for hating Black people; like you, they are quick to remind you of their support for and friendship with individual Black conservatives like Shelby Steele or Ben Carson or King. And like you, they would prefer a world where people like them enjoyed all the best jobs, and Negroes knew their place.

    Does any of this make Trump supporters or people like you racist? No. It makes you all insufficiently disgusted by prejudice. Trump supporters and other race conservatives like you are not racists: you simply do not consider anti-Black bigotry disqualifying, in others’ behavior our your own. BigWOWO, you are responsible for Donald Trump. Had Trump chosen Ben Carson as his running mate, you may have considered voting for him.

  108. James Lamb-Fang the equivocator wrote:

    A contrasting example to illustrate the poor utility of your original claim would suggest that the bloody failed states and rampant epidemics that plague West Africa today suggest that Black Americans have suffered more than Chinese Americans. It’s a silly, unpersuasive claim because West African political unrest has next to nothing to do with the Black American experience today.

    I’m under no obligation to treat the hardships faced by members of immigrant communities with the reverence you and others here ascribe, Kiwi. I don’t have to care about them at all.

    No matter how much you deny and ignore my statements and keep your broken record empty rhetoric spin doctoring, the question needs to posed again: why is it that African immigrants from West Africa and elsewhere perform academically better than native born Blacks in USofA? And it’s good to know you deny kinship to Africans because it’s exactly what bigWOWO called you out on: rationalizing anything to justify your nativist Black victomology rhetoric – thrown BFs and Africa immigrants under the bus because they’re not part of your racist doctrine of native born BMs first.

  109. James Lamb-Fang is a lying hypocrite that projects his own racist “tribalism” beliefs unto others in order to deflect his own lies.

    Byron has said several times he voted for Clinton, but James Lamb-Fang is a lying hypocrite that spin doctors however he sees fit to push his disingenuous political agendas.

  110. Kiwi, just a few comments above you argued that the ancestral ties to Asian mass calamities made it permissible for you to consider Asian Americans people who endured more suffering in comparison to Black Americans. Now you suggest that Black Americans could not make similar claims, because the vast majority of our population was stolen and kidnapped and sold here from Africa between the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries.

    One question: who are you to place a time limit on another people’s suffering, Kiwi? You’re comments assume that people from immigrant communities are somehow more connected to public mass casualties that befall their populations than populations a few generations removed from such episodes, without regard for subsequent injustices precipitated by or otherwise caused by the initial wrong.

    You make a plainly biased and utterly unpersuasive argument, one that serves no other purpose than to identify your prejudice in favor of Asian immigrants. The centuries-long mass rape of Black women in which Thomas Jefferson participated would not have been possible without chattel slavery; by your logic, only women like Sally Hemings have any grievance over that subject, even though the vast phenotypic difference among Black Americans (and differences in social and economic opportunities that stem from such differences in hue) directly result from the crimes against humanity rapists like Jefferson imposed on Black people.

    But in Kiwi’s world, none of that matters. You have some bizarre statute of limitations on Black American suffering that you do not apply to Asian Americans, given your list above. Prejudice is a virtue for you, apparently.

  111. @ aardvark

    why is it that African immigrants from West Africa and elsewhere perform academically better than native born Blacks in USofA?

    Because immigrants view America through a home culture frame whereas slave-descendants view America through an oppositional culture frame. The former is a positive outlook but the latter is a negative one, meaning that even in the face of equal opportunity, academic underachievement would still be endemic among Black American communities.

    Immigrants see America as a land of freedom and opportunity whereas non-immigrant minorities see it as a land of lost freedom and opportunity. When you see the world through that lens, you set your sights lower. The thinking goes: “Why bother when you’re just going to be kept down anyway?” It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  112. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    Wow, so Blacks have the right to talk about something that happened over 150 years ago, from which no one is even alive to describe but Asians who are still living aren’t even allowed to talk about events that happened to them personally. Not sure whether you’re stupid or disgusting. Probably both.

  113. @ aardvark

    Based on my observations and reading, many Black immigrants prefer to associate with Asian Americans than with Black Americans because of the different outlooks on life. Like I said, the former is more positive but the latter is more negative. As Black immigrants, they tend to gravitate towards the former group.

  114. Kiwi, you have every right to talk about events that have happened to your people. You do not have the right to suggest that those events are worse than what other people have experienced. When you do, you make apolitical claim that will spark a debate.

    You can talk as much as you like about the difficulties experiences during, say, the Cultural Revolution. It is clear and self-evident that Chinese citizens suffered greatly during those years. It is not clear that they suffered more than Black Americans or that you can even compare group experiences beyond national borders.

    I am sure that your perspectives are ill-informed, Kiwi. I am sure that your capacity for reasoned debate is stunted. But your limitations do not mean that I do not owe you the same respect anyone with such false and overly incorrect views deserves: someone to let you know how wrong you really are.

    Kiwi, you’re welcome. Glad to help.

  115. Snoopy’s logic:

    1. American lives matter

    2. Tens of millions of Asian deaths is not more tragic than thousands of Black deaths.

    3. If it ain’t Whites doing the killing, it doesn’t matter.

  116. More Asians were killed or enslaved by Japan during World War 2 alone than Africans were killed or enslaved by Europeans during the entire Atlantic slave trade.

    You can only believe the latter was worse if you think the value of a Black life is greater than an Asian life.

  117. @Kiwi,

    I know what the reasons are for “the new model minorities” of African and Afro-Caribbean/Latin immigrants. I was challenging Elder James Hypocrite Lamb-Fang to look into the issues.

    I will back-paddle a bit now and say that immigrants do have a nuclear family structure and system of social support that many native born Blacks are denied access to. I think the “documentary” “The 13th” has some good insights to the history of USofA breaking up the African American family unit..

    However, James Hypocrite Lamb-Fang wins again with his trolling, because we’re once again forced to talk about Black issues rather than APIA ones on an APIA blog. >.<

    To be honest, I'm sort of flabbergasted and disgusted the foremost Black victomology Ph.D. here has the gall to tell Asian, especially Chinese Americans, how to think and feel about old world experiences that's very much alive and relevant to the Asian immigrant experience in USofA. Yet on another level, I expect no less our Strom Thurmond of APIA blogsophere condescend and lecture Asians as how to feel and what our experiences are relevant to his racist ideology.

  118. More Asians were killed or enslaved by Japan during World War 2 alone than Africans were killed or enslaved by Europeans during the entire Atlantic slave trade. — Kiwi

    First, you can’t prove this in any sense, because no real accounting of the lives lost during the centuries-long Transatlantic slave trade exists.

    Second, who cares? Of what utility is your unproven and inaccurate claim? As I stated before, public policy in America is not based on direct recompense for past grievances, so who is supposed to be swayed by this false and misleading comparison?

    Third, you can continue to wallow in your victimhood, but it is clear that within the American context, many Asian Americans benefit from social privileges. Folk are a long way from Nanking today. What we all owe those who suffered in past generations is an accurate historical accounting of their narratives, not meaningless and inflammatory comparisons that serve no purpose outside of articulating anti-Blackness in online spaces.

    Perhaps you use BigWOWO’s blog as a safe space to feel a superiority to Black Americans you cannot enjoy in real life. If you need this space to help you feel like a special little snowflake, that’s fine. Whatever makes your journey easier. But inaccurate historical statements do not strengthen your argument, Kiwi. They are just sad.

  119. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    First, you can’t prove this in any sense, because no real accounting of the lives lost during the centuries-long Transatlantic slave trade exists.

    Right. Pay no mind to the plethora of scholarly research dedicated to the study of the Atlantic slave trade. For that matter, no need to pay attention to the 6 million figure from Holocaust research, either. It’s all unprovable speculation and probably political propaganda, anyway. This is not the first time you’ve demonstrated low regard for the findings of academia when it contradicts your dogma.

    Second, who cares? Of what utility is your unproven and inaccurate claim?

    You care, since you replied. The United Nations’ estimate of the death toll of World War 2 in Asia eclipses the one it gives for the Atlantic slave trade. It’s a fact you’ll have to learn to accept, but your victimogy narrative only cares about the Black experience.

    Third, you can continue to wallow in your victimhood

    That’s what you’ve been doing on this blog for years. Keep projecting.

    Folk are a long way from Nanking today.

    True. That applies to slavery even more so.

    But inaccurate historical statements do not strengthen your argument, Kiwi.

    Exactly. That’s why my historical statements are accurate and you’ve been unable to disprove any of them. Instead of refuting them (not that you could), you’ve resorted to acting like a petulant, entitled child. After all, that’s what happens when a delusional person is shown they’re wrong.

  120. The SJW narrative in America that Blacks had it worse than anyone else closely mirrors that of Jewish activists who advocate the “uniqueness” of the Holocaust. These are the same people who deny the Armenian genocide in order to protect the “uniqueness” of their people’s victimhood for political gain, like supporting Israel.

    Blacks are no different. And even though they say others should not practice Oppression Olympics because there is “no reward”, there is. There’s affirmative action, which primarily benefits Blacks, but hurts Asians. Only by maintaining a victimization narrative can Blacks elicit sympathy and support for their interests by guilt tripping others. That is like the whole reason Israel gets so much of the support it gets today.

    When your race has greater representation in media, education, society, culture, and politics, that amounts to privilege.

  121. James,

    SJW’s claim that Asian Americans are privileged is a big lie.

    Kiwi’s claim was not ‘life was tough for Asians just a couple of generations ago’, it was that Asian Americans have suffered more than Black Americans. It’s a false claim, in large measure because any hardship comparisons between different populations are impossible to prove with any reasonable certainty.

    One thing that keeps surprising/shocking me in my 30 years living in this country is how Black people’s opportunity and material life in this country have been much better than us back home, much better than what we expected before we came here, and much better than many new immigrants who just arrived in this country. The actual discrimination they suffered is less than what we endured back home and here.

    My newest surprise was several weeks ago when I heard from NPR that Black slaves were fed well and provided housing — better than probably 90% of Chinese 30 years ago.

    Before I came to this country, I thought Black people in America were discriminated against and oppressed (this is the education I got. and I believe most countries tell their citizens about African Americans similarly), I was full of sympathy for Black people. So I expected Black people to be timid, quite and easily be scared when I first came here, that is how discriminated and oppressed people behaves back in China, that were how I and my whole extended family members (we were discriminated, oppressed and persecuted) behaved before Deng took power and changed everything, that were also how my college classmates who came from rural countrysides or from very bottom of Chinese society behaved, that’s how rural peasants behaved when they first went to city. To my surprise, in my experience in this country, I only found many native born Asian American men behaved like this, not a single Black person.

    To any Chinese immigrant (I believe for any immigrant from developing countries), we will notice that Americans (including the poorest Black people) are privileged upon arrival. The poorest Americans were provided with all sort of government help and hand outs that better than rich people can afford back home. New immigrants can’t access to any of that. Most of us are also not allowed to work legally (unless to get a green card which is very hard to get). If we can make it, why Black people can’t? Most Chinese immigrants (probably most immigrants from developing countries) understanding of Black people will stay at this level unless they (or somebody) make an effort to educated themselves.

  122. @ ChineseMom

    If we can make it, why Black people can’t?

    SJWs chalk it up to “Asian privilege” while ignoring that Black immigrants are even better off than Asians. But Asians are a safe target, not Blacks, so it’s okay to attack Asians for achieving success.

    I’ve spoken to Asians who grew up in the same neighborhoods as Blacks and went to the same “bad” schools as them but ended up doing just fine. They would also add that Blacks who did worse academically got into better schools due to affirmative action. They knew this because these Blacks would brag openly about being admitted with inferior grades and effort. Asians don’t have this kind of wind at their backs yet they’re told by SJWs to check their “privilege”. Never mind that mainland Chinese, Filipinos, and Vietnamese go to worse schools than Whites but still outperform them. Even Whites attack Asians as a “privileged” group. Jews in Germany had to learn things the hard way.

  123. Any of you who is interested in understanding modern China has to keep in mind that Communist’s taking power in 1949 and the Cultural Revolution are two revolutions that took Chinese society upside down. The power elites, cultural elites and intellectuals were stripped of power and persecuted. Deng restored power of these people in 1978. Most of the narratives you hear today about modern China are from these elite class, more or less in the old framework. Most Chinese immigrants ( from mainland China, Taiwan or Hong Kong) to the West are from elite class if they were educated back home. So it shouldn’t surprise you that you heard many horrible stories from media or your relatives about Communist China. The silent majorities who benefited from these two revolutions don’t have a voice in current mainstream narratives. Is there an revolution in human history that is not bloody and full of human suffering? To evaluate the two revolutions of China, I suggest people to think about the French Revolution, in history context and to look at big pictures.

    Here is one scholar and his book talked about the Cultural Revolution from the silent majority’s position:
    http://revcom.us/a/174/dongping_han-en.html

  124. Kiwi,

    I know. But I don’t think it is fair to compare poor Asian kids from immigrant family to Black kids from native born Black families in those “bad” neighborhoods. Parents are totally different and make a big difference.

  125. If these people are silent then how do you even know what they’re thinking?

    How do you even know if their proportions form a majority?

  126. Here are some basic facts about China, Chinese Communist and Mao that your anti-China or anti-Communist education has never told you:

    1. One way to appreciate what Mao and Communist did to China is to compare China and India, the two most populous countries in the world. India gained independence from Britain in 1947 while Chinese Communist took power in 1949. India was comparable to China in many ways at that time, a little bit richer than China and had better infrastructures. India has much more arable-land/than China with less population (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_China
    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Agriculture/Arable-land/Hectares
    ). China was under international trade embargo orchestrated by the US from 1950 to 1971, cut off ties with Soviet Union around 1958 while India has been the biggest recipient of Western foreign aid (https://www.dawn.com/news/1194228). By 1976, the year Mao died, China had surge ahead of India in almost every measure of economic and social development except GDP per capita. In 2015, India’s GDP per capita was about $6100 while China was $14300.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

    Here are some excerpts from 1997 LA times article titled How China Beat India in Race for Success.

    Many experts now believe that China’s ability to move ahead so far and so fast is partly attributable to earlier, more brutal reforms–particularly land reform measures–forced at gunpoint in the totalitarian 1949-76 rule of Mao.

    But particularly in the early stages of Communist rule, in the 1950s, the country benefited from the land redistribution, introduction of compulsory universal education, adoption of simplified Chinese characters that led to greater literacy, and the introduction of health and welfare policies and other reforms that helped restore the country’s spirit and self-respect.
    Although it is much more controversial today, the Communist crackdown on religion, superstition, secret societies, triads and clans may also have helped the country break the cycle of endemic poverty.
    “China’s relative advantage over India,” argues Harvard economist Amartya Sen (he received Nobel Prize in Economics in 1998), a native of India’s West Bengal, “is a product of its pre-reform [pre-1979] groundwork rather than its post-reform redirection.”

    http://articles.latimes.com/1997/aug/10/news/mn-21296

  127. 2. Before 1949 when Chinese Communist took power, the life expectancy in China was around 35, about same as India and worse than many African countries. At that time, life expectancy in Taiwan and Korea were 50, Japan was 60 and the US was 68. This had not much to do with wars but had everything to do with under-development and lack of natural resources. For hundreds years, Chinese society had had hard time to feed its people. This is what Ron Unz wrote about condition in China in his essay How Social Darwinism Made Modern China 🙁http://www.unz.com/runz/how-social-darwinism-made-modern-china-248/)

    On the less fortunate side, the enormous population growth of recent centuries had gradually caught up with and overtaken China’s exceptionally efficient agricultural system, reducing the lives of most Chinese to the brink of Malthusian starvation; and these pressures and constraints were believed to be reflected in the Chinese people. For example, Stoddard wrote:

    “Winnowed by ages of grim elimination in a land populated to the uttermost limits of subsistence, the Chinese race is selected as no other for survival under the fiercest conditions of economic stress. At home the average Chinese lives his whole life literally within a hand’s breadth of starvation. Accordingly, when removed to the easier environment of other lands, the Chinaman brings with him a working capacity which simply appalls his competitors.[6]”

    Stoddard backed these riveting phrases with a wide selection of detailed and descriptive quotations from prominent observers, both Western and Chinese. Although Ross was more cautiously empirical in his observations and less literary in his style, his analysis was quite similar, with his book on the Chinese containing over 40 pages describing the grim and gripping details of daily survival, provided under the evocative chapter-heading “The Struggle for Existence in China.”[7]

    When my parents talked about their childhood or youth which were before 1949 when the Communist took the power, what impressed them the most were the deaths surrounded them. They often saw dead bodies of people who starved to death on the streets, even at their door steps occasionally. They were both from top 5% families so they never experienced hunger themselves, but many of their siblings and closed relatives died of infectious diseases at relative young age.
    Mao and Chinese Communist changed all this in probably less than 10 years. In just 27 years when Mao died at 1976, Chinese population nearly doubled, the life expectancy of Chinese increased from 35 to 68, closed to developed countries (India was about 53, Taiwan was 71 and the US was 73) , even though China was still among the poorest countries in the world, worse than many countries in Africa. None of my relatives who lived pass 1949 died before age 70, regardless rich or poor.

    Please remember that Mao and Communist China achieved this under the US embargo while India still has millions of children starve to death as of today and as major recipient Western foreign aid.

  128. 3. From 1949 – 1976, Mao and Chinese Communist increased Chinese literacy rate (defined as being able to read, write, and use arithmetic) from less than 10% to over 60%. Chinese adult literacy rate today is well over 95%. India’s literacy rate increased from 12% in 1947 to 74% in 2011 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_India).

    Most of this in rural countrysides was achieved during the Cultural Revolution which was documented in Dongping Han’s work http://revcom.us/a/174/dongping_han-en.html. Several of my college classmates from countrysides also confirmed what Han said in his book.

  129. More Asian SJW drivel:

    On the Token Asian in Get Out: a Look at Model Minorities and Conditional Tolerance

    http://www.themarysue.com/model-minority-get-out/

    One of the comments says the Asian is supposed to show that one doesn’t have to be White to have anti-Black views and having anti-Black views can elevate one’s status among Whites. On that point, I agree. But where they get it all wrong is implying that this phenomenon is somehow specific to Asians. That would be like saying Blacks benefit from conditional Whiteness/privilege relative to other races because Obama drone bombing Muslims, mass deporting Mexicans, and selling weapons to China’s enemies elevated his status among Whites. That’s a fact the SJWs will never face up to because its interpretation contradicts everything their Black/White binary view of race stands for.

  130. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    But inaccurate historical statements do not strengthen your argument, Kiwi.

    Exactly. That’s why you’ve made no effort to disprove my accurate historical statements.

    The National WWII Museum places the Pacific War’s death toll at 30 million:

    http://www.nationalww2museum.org/learn/education/for-students/ww2-history/ww2-by-the-numbers/world-wide-deaths.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

    The African Holocaust website places the Atlantic slave trade’s death toll at 10-20 million:

    http://www.africanholocaust.net/html_ah/holocaustspecial.htm

    People who survived the Pacific War are still alive today. Everybody alive during the Atlantic slave trade is long dead.

    The vast majority of Asian American families arrived after World War 2. Some of them lived through it themselves. The vast majority of Black American families arrived before the American Civil War. Not a single one of them has ever been a slave or has seen a major war on their home soil since then.

    Folk are a long way from Nanking today.

    Exactly. By your logic, slavery is even farther away.

    The fact stands that looking at history, Asian Americans’ families have had to deal with way more shit in just the last 150 years than Black Americans, even after you factor in lynchings, which Asians had to deal with in the Old West.

    You are so narrowly focused on the victimization of your own race that you minimize and downplay the suffering of other races, deriding everyone else but your own as privileged. The SJW narrative that Blacks supposedly had it worse than all other races boils down to the fact that Blacks have overwhelmingly been America’s largest racial minority for centuries and thus have dominated America’s racial narrative, making it into a Black/White one.

    This has obviously had a profoundly distorting impact on your ideology and has shut your mind to understanding that not everything has to always be about Blacks, but of course, you don’t care.

  131. Notice that while Snoopy opposes a time limit for Black suffering, he simultaneously makes no hesitation in placing a spatial limit on Asian suffering.

    To take bigWOWO’s words:

    “SJW: Who cares! If it didn’t happen on American soil, it didn’t happen!”

    “If you call them out on their nonsense, they just double down.”

    And like an eager volunteer, Snoopy steps in to be our pet lizard for show and tell. He proves my point that Black activists will bring up their ancestors experiencing slavery when it suits them, but turn around and attack others when they describe worse shit that their families had to go through more recently.

  132. @ChineseMom

    Aside from the utter futility involved with attempting group suffering comparisons, the trouble with the claim that Asian Americans have suffered more than Black Americans — Kiwi’s original claim — is that logic imposes a American-centered frame for the grievances compared. Asian Americans only exist in meaningful numbers in the States after 1965, so at best, if one is going to engage such a useless and fraught comparison, it makes sense to judge treatment in the United States that both groups endured during the time when both groups existed in the country simultaneously.

    If one makes that comparison, slavery is off the table. Jim Crow segregation, redlining, covenant buying, mortgages on contract, subprime lending, voting right attacks, police brutality, unequal pay, mass incarceration, the crack epidemic, low health insurance attainment, the HIV epidemic, and a number of other injustices are not. In contrast, Asian Americans deal with many of the same abuses, but you wouldn’t know from regular perusal of this site.

    Instead, to justify a specious claim on Asian American suffering, Kiwi had to rely on events that took place in Asian nations, often without any Western influence whatsoever.

    So no. There’s no reason to support the claim that Asian Americans have suffered more than Black Americans. There’s no reason to compare group suffering in this manner at all. But if someone did, the most one could say is that both groups have endured hardship within America. Kiwi’s claims of lasting group trauma carried through the immigrant experience and immaterial and meaningless.

    Why this should matter for you, ChineseMom, is that your comparison between Black material life in the US and the material life of Chinese people in China requires through historical examination of both groups — work you have yet to do, frankly.

    To argue, for example “that Black slaves were fed well and provided housing — better than probably 90% of Chinese 30 years ago” announces an absurdity unmoored from all reasonable interpretation of historical observation. It’s utter farce.

    It’s not really important to me if immigrants escape the depraved conditions of their countries of origin and find material wealth in America. If some immigrants look upon Black Americans and see privilege, I don’t have a problem with that. The concern happens when people with little to no understanding of the historical record assume they can make substantive claims about Black America without doing the work of learning the aforementioned historical record.

    ChineseMom, when you expected Black Americans to be “timid, quiet, and easily scared” when you first arrived, you applied behavioral attributes to an entire group of people based on information gleaned from interactions with people who were not Black Americans. While mildly understandable, your mistake was less about assumption and more about lacking historical and cultural context for the human interactions you witnessed. Without that historical and cultural context, based on understanding the historical record, it cannot be clear that the interactions you witness don’t involve timidity and fear in some capacity.

    Further, it’s not that Black Americans ‘can’t make it’. But again, impediments to economic success and social uplift that befall both communities should be examined in the historical record before claims about which communities ‘can make it’ are addressed. While local histories matter most here, it is clear that the successful Asian Americans who could afford entrance into wealthy suburban enclaves did so after the Civil Rights Movement forced the real estate industry to absorb integrative policies.

    Direct housing prohibitions against Black Americans did not always apply in the same fashion to Asian American home buyers; this offers one basic example of possible differences in treatment that help provide context for different economic outcomes. Obviously, there are more. But in many wealthy neighborhoods, social acceptance of certain Asian American nationalities remains commonplace and expected, just as the fear and ostracism that arises when Black Americans enter the neighborhood remain commonplace and expected. These treatment differences impact all manner of civic experiences, from public education to employment to political life.

    We owe it to ourselves to learn more about the historical record, to generate context for the unexplained phenomena we witness. Without that work, people make specious, unhinged claims that do not reflect reality.

  133. Once again, Snoopy spews yet more idiotic drivel. He’s gone from saying that crossing national borders magically wipes away historical Asian suffering (something he’d never say about Blacks) to saying Asians experience less housing discrimination than Blacks. Both claims are false. I’ve already posted data showing Asians experience just as much housing discrimination as Blacks. In fact, the trend is that while discrimination against Blacks is lessening over time, Asians are becoming more segregated as their population grows. That’s something the SJWs don’t know and obviously don’t care about.

  134. No one said that Asians experiences less housing discrimination than Blacks, Kiwi. I suggested that many Asian Americans and Black Americans experience housing discrimination differently.

    Further, I also didn’t suggest that crossing national borders eliminates suffering. I suggested that it remains a false comparison to suggest that Asian Americans faced more suffering than Black Americans, especially when the reasons for suffering you cite happened to Asians, not Asian Americans. I recognize a difference in those populations, while you seek to ignore those differences to claim a victim status that you feel is unjustly ignored because of the prevalence (to you) of social justice activism that focuses on Black Americans in this country.

    Social justice activism that focuses on rural White Appalachians doesn’t seem to bother you, apparently.

    You need not continue to misunderstand my points; the words are right here on the page. Scroll up. Read what you find. If you have and questions or concerns, let me know and I can clarify. But if you aren’t willing to relate my perspective accurately, that reluctance gives us all the evidence we need to dismiss your routinely erroneous thoughts.

    Because we should be clear. Asian American housing discrimination data must disaggregate by nationality. When it does not, we allow skewed pictures to persist. Wealthy Chinese American families with strong civic and business ties will experience housing discrimination differently than refugee Hmong populations. Again, it’s important to know and understand the historical contexts that shape populations in America, Kiwi. Your commentary routinely overlooks accurate historical specificity in order to claim a victimhood you would condemn in others.

    Should we call that Asian privilege?

  135. Snoopy also makes the idiotic claim that Asian Americans didn’t exist in significant numbers before 1965. They did. But unlike Blacks, Asians were ethnically cleansed by massacres, mass deportations, and prevented from forming families. Legislation like the Chinese Exclusion Act received the support it did specifically because of the very real threat that Asians were flooding and would soon take over the Western United States.

    The reason this historical fact doesn’t carry the same salience that Black slavery does in American racial discourse is because Blacks lived to tell their story while most Asians did not. And now we have tools like Snoopy assisting with the coverup.

  136. @ Snoopy

    I also didn’t suggest that crossing national borders eliminates suffering.

    the reasons for suffering you cite happened to Asians, not Asian Americans.

    And just as almost all Black Americans are descended from slaves, almost all Asian Americans are descended from Asian immigrants. Once again, you object to a time limit for Black suffering but don’t hesitate to impose a spatial limit to Asian suffering. Everyone can see your hypocrisy but yourself.

  137. Another myth that needs to be dispelled is the idea that economic success somehow inoculates Asians to racism. In fact, the opposite is true. Asians are unique among racial minorities in reporting more discrimination as they become upwardly mobile. Asians are attacked by other races, including SJWs, because they are seen as privileged. Jews were seen as “privileged” in Nazi Germany and attacked for their “success” accordingly.

  138. Been busy with lots of real-life stuff and I’ll admit that I haven’t read 100% of the posts above, but I wanted to comment.

    1. Snoopy is known for his contradictions, his repeated requests for the “numbahs,” and his distractions. One of his strongest suits is his apparent immunity to feelings of shame when he gets called out for his logical contradictions or fairy-tale portrayals of the various minority groups, including his own.

    While Snoopy is busying himself with examining the historical record and porin’ over the numbahs (while still refusing to read that book on Sally Hemings), the rest of the world is moving forward. Snoopy is an extremely creative individual when it comes to portrayals of victimhood. It’s always nice to see this kind of creativity in anyone, but we also have to be aware of how much it hurts the people he’s inaccurately portraying.

    2. Kiwi seems to desire the victimhood culture for Asians that Snoopy has mastered for Blacks. It’s not going to happen for two reasons. First, liberals will never accept us as a Protected Minority. Second, as a culture, we hate racism and unfairness and would never be comfortable demanding race-based free stuff as the self-appointed Guardians of Protected Minorities often do.

  139. No one suggests that economic success inoculates anyone against racist difficulty. What is clear is that the type of racist action one experiences can be affected by economic success. Workplace discrimination presents a severe difficulty to those who deal with such concerns, but it’s not the same as constant police raids on one’s street, or persistent lead poisoning in one’s apartment complex or municipal water pipes. It’s not stop-and-frisk. It’s not losing one’s life to a frightened police officer during a traffic stop, live on YouTube.

    No one attacks Asian Americans with the recollection that not all racist action is the same. When people beat and maim and kill others in hate crimes, those instances present a different severity to racist action than glass ceilings. We can lament and work against both, but they do not operate in the same manner, and that cannot be overlooked.

    Mind you, Asian Americans endure physical assaults in hate crimes, as do Black Americans. The statistics on this are clear. But misleading group suffering comparisons assist no one in reducing the difficulty individuals face in American society, Kiwi. Work on that.

  140. @ bigWOWO

    Just to clarify:

    Like I’ve said many times, I don’t think Asian Americans or their issues get the respect or attention they deserve, especially when it comes to media portrayal or history education. Pointing out the unfairness of that when Blacks and Jews receive far better representation not just in media and education but also in politics is not asking for “free stuff”. It’s asking for fairness.

    We can debate what constitutes “victimhood culture” but based on what I’ve seen, a huge part of the reason other races get away with the racist shit they do towards Asians is because Asians are never seen as victims. What do you propose we do about that? Nothing?

  141. BigWOWO, the most famous Asian American political controversy last week involved Finn Jones, star of Netflix’s Iron Fist, briefly leaving Twitter after facing off against supporters of the hashtag #AAIronFist, who argued that the White superhero he played should have been played by an Asian American, because “diversity”.

    If you honestly believe that Asian Americans “would never be comfortable demanding race-based free stuff as the self-appointed Guardians of Protected Minorities often do”, you are clearly absent from the central political currents among your people.

  142. Like I’ve said many times, I don’t think Asian Americans or their issues get the respect or attention they deserve, especially when it comes to media portrayal or history education. Pointing out the unfairness of that when Blacks and Jews receive far better representation not just in media and education but also in politics is not asking for “free stuff”. It’s asking for fairness. — Kiwi

    This is an often used argument by members of minority groups when they feel slighted by the larger political and/or popular culture. Many Black Americans make largely the same point. One could easily rewrite Kiwi’s quote:

    Like I’ve said many times, I don’t think Black Americans or their issues get the respect or attention they deserve, especially when it comes to media portrayal or history education. Pointing out the unfairness of that when Whites and Asians receive far better representation not just in media and education but also in politics is not asking for “free stuff”. It’s asking for fairness. — Kiwi (rewritten)

    If the rewritten version is victimhood (as Black Americans are often told they exude whenever they advocate for themselves), but the original version is not, than victimhood has no relevance.

  143. @ Snoopy

    Everything you describe sure as hell beats being seen as a foreign invader and being rounded up en masse during a national crisis- the penultimate step to genocide.

    Not a single Black civil rights organization opposed the Japanese American internment. The common wisdom among Black organizations like the National Negro Business League was that Asians were not real Americans and were relatively privileged, and thus they supported it.

  144. @ Snoopy

    Except your hypothetical has no basis in fact. Blacks have more representation in American politics, media, and education compared to Asians. Racism comes down to power. That puts Blacks at a relative advantage.

  145. Kiwi,

    1) Asian Americans are real Americans. Anyone who says otherwise is straight up wrong.

    2) There’s no utility in comparing Japanese internment with everything I describe. The point you still fail to grasp is that I’m disinterested in ‘better or worse’. Moral wrong is enough to condemn both the interment of yesteryear and mass incarceration/ militarized policing today.

    3) If you are correct, and Black Americans enjoy “more representation in American politics, media, and education compared to Asians”, then the relevant question asks why that so-called status quo exists. The problem is that it’s a mirage.

    Black Americans enjoy more visibility, not more power. Without question, selective college and university faculties feature more Asian American professors as compared to Asian American incidence in the American population than Black American professors as compared to Black American incidence in the American population.

    More Black American politicians exist today than Asian American politicians, certainly, though this has yet to reduce any number of political and social concerns Black America faces. Media representation is simply too meaningless to use as a basis for comparison. Meantime, all the Black entertainers, politicians, and academics in the country can’t revitalize the Voting Rights Act, or save the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act from gutting by conservative ideologues.

    So we’re still left with the same conundrum: comparing Asian Americans and Black Americans is neither useful, nor wise, but when you do, it’s not clear at all that Asian Americans end up on the bottom. Asian American political advocacy defeated Black and Latino political advocacy during the SCA 5 debate to re-institute affirmative action in California; reports of Asian American political invisibility have been greatly exaggerated.

  146. @ Snoopy

    When I said media, I was referring to the fact that White liberals like Stephen Colbert and Sarah Silverman are at ease mocking Asians on television when they would not similarly feel comfortable or get away with mocking Blacks or Jews. In that realm, Blacks have more power. When I said education, I was referring to the fact that many Asian Americans I’ve known who grew up in Asian communities know plenty about Black American history but next to nothing about Asian American history. Since the 1950s and 1960s, Black organizations like the NAACP and Jewish organizations like the ADL have played an active role in shaping the national curriculum on race and in making their own concerns heard when media personalities mock them. Much less so can be said about Asians. The political clout of Blacks also explains a great deal why America has had a Black president but never an Asian one. On all these measures, Blacks have accrued more power than Asians.

    But power is not static. Asians are the fastest growing race in America and in places like California, they’ve built up enough power to advance their own interests and sometimes win. These interests do not always coincide with those of other races nor should they have to. The accepted status quo, not just for SJWs, but for mainstream politics, has been to sacrifice Asian interests in order to support Blacks and Latinos. Almost never has the reverse been taken for granted. Based on the campus-wide email sent out to my majority Asian university, every affirmative action award given out this year was awarded to either Blacks or Latinos. This is not a coincidence.

  147. Kiwi, I think you’re confusing visibility for power, again. Stephen Colbert and Sarah Silverman do not avoid humor directed at Black American individuals; but even if they did, that would not indicate a power Black Americans enjoy that Asian Americans do not. There’s no so-called power in not being mocked by comedians when police terrorize your community with impunity, even at pool parties.

    President Obama’s rise to power occurred without assistance by the post-Civil Rights Movement leaders and organizations in Black America. To argue that his ascendancy indicates Black American political clout is to misunderstand both that political clout and the President’s biography. If anything, President Obama proved himself to the upper crust Democratic donor class in Chicago (read: White people), and later nationally, long before Black Americans embraced his candidacy after Iowa. In a very real sense, this distance helps us understand his rhetorical lectures of Black America as his Administration pursued race-neutral domestic policy.

    The common assumption here that so-called social justice warriors sacrifice Asian American interests in favor of those promoted by Black and Latino Americans is not accurate, though I agree that not enough people of color know Asian American history and understand Asian American political interests. Many in the activist community were at a loss to interpret the race tribalism on display during the pro-Peter Liang protests; more interaction with Chinese American immigrants may have helped everyone.

    Further, I agree that Asian American political interests need not accord with those promoted by other groups. When they do not, however, we have the makings of a debate, not any attempt to silence Asian Americans. Affirmative action opponents within Asian America often fail to acknowledge both the facts about affirmative action as practiced by selective colleges and universities and the vast numbers within Asian America who agree with affirmative action and wish to see it continued.

    Conservative Asian Americans, like those represented in spaces like this, should remember that no race is a monolith. Liberal and progressive Asian Americans outnumber the conservatives within Asian America, and these people are no less respectful toward their ethnic heritage or their immigrant elders when they disagree with conservatives about policies like affirmative action. This matters, because respect for pluralism and debate is required for people of color to thrive in American politics.

    More knowledge of and respect for Asian American history would make it easier for everyone to respect Asian American political perspectives as valid. To blame Blacks and Latinos for the lack of public knowledge of Asian American history vastly overestimates Black and Latino political influence. The actual problem stems from the reluctance of school boards in Texas and other large textbooks markets to respect ethnic studies in general. Much of red state America opposes any non-laudatory interpretation of American history, so much so that all ethnic studies curricula gets excised from children’s civic and historical educations.

    Kiwi, a case can be made that Asian American politics and history will likely assume a larger visibility in the coming years, as population percentages shift. But to assume that Black American visibility impedes Asian American progress both confuses visibility for power and overlooks structural reasons for the status quo that no person of color affects in any sense.

  148. @ Snoopy

    Your tone deaf comment perfectly illustrates the problem with SJWs today.

    I never said White liberals don’t mock Blacks. I said they are more comfortable mocking Asians than Blacks in comparable situations. I’ve been in numerous situations where Whites mocking Asians would have kept their mouths shut had the target of racist humor been Black. This is a common experience and realization among Asians but the natural response among Blacks is to downplay or deny it, like with your straw man. During the early 1900s, it was common for Whites to mock Blacks at the level that Asians face now but it wasn’t until Blacks had accrued enough power that they could force others to tone it down. Asians are still in the phase where they are trying to build enough power to stop being seen as safe and easy targets.

    To say that Obama did not benefit at all from Black political power conveys a race blindness on your part that is laughable yet sad. The main reason Obama won the Democratic primary is because of the Black vote and its large influence on the Democratic Party. I think it’s obvious to everyone but you that the Democratic Party cares more about Blacks than Asians.

    Asian police officers are not less likely to be prosecuted or convicted than Black ones. In fact, quite the opposite has been true. That likely has to do with Blacks having more representation in the police force than Asians.

    Peter Liang supporters were not morally inferior to OJ Simpson supporters. Liang killed accidentally. Simpson committed two murders. The only difference is Liang was convicted, Simpson was acquitted. The majority Black jury and race tribalism obviously had something to do with that but the SJWs don’t care.

    And just months before the OJ Simpson verdict, an almost all Black jury acquitted Davon Neverdon for the murder of Joel Lee. As you guessed, the killer was Black and the victim was Asian. Neverdon later protested the death of Freddie Gray. Once again, the SJWs don’t care.

    I also never blamed Blacks or Latinos for the lack of Asian American curricula. That’s another straw man you made up. Simply put, Blacks and Latinos do not care about Asians but expect Asians to support their causes. Their ignorance makes it easier to throw the Model Minority stereotype in Asians’ faces whenever convenient. So when Asians support their own causes, they get attacked for being “selfish” or “tribalistic”, something SJWs never accuse Blacks of doing.

    Again, every single affirmative action award handed out at my mostly Asian university was awarded to Blacks and Latinos. I’ve spoken to many Asians from disadvantaged backgrounds who never benefited from affirmative action and have also spoken to Blacks and Hispanics from advantaged backgrounds who did. There is no logical reason for this, all talk of “diversity” aside. Every Asian supporter of affirmative action I’ve spoken to had next to no knowledge of Asian American history but could rattle off the smallest details about Black American history. Most visitors to this blog can see the obvious pattern here but not you.

  149. Other than the victimology, another problem is the negativity. Have you ever noticed the amount of negative energy coming from the Far Left? It’s about the same as that coming from the Far Right.

  150. Look how nonsensical this is:

    The woman steals from the guy’s store, and suddenly she’s the victim and he’s the so-called “racist.” And there are actually others who are protesting and sharing this narrative? Sure, drive that Asian guy out of business. See what happens when all the businesses leave because they’re tired of being victimized by thieves and SJW protesters alike.

    This is why, Kiwi, I say that you’re barking up the wrong tree. Is that really the kind of world you want to live in? Where you see everything through the lens of race and nothing else? Because if that’s what you want, you’ve got a great teacher in Snoopy who can show you exactly what that looks like. You can bring that anger and sense of victimhood and self-pity to your own people.

  151. That’s video – that’s excessive force against someone who was only minimally resisting.

    You only need to prevent the thief from escaping until cops arrive. You don’t need to beat them into submission or go MMA groundfighter on them.

    What it looks like to me is that the guy got pissed off and started taking it out on the thief.

    Store owners and people in a similar situation need to think, even if the thief were a man, and was putting up determined passive aggressive resistance, but without threatening you, harming you or causing property damage, how much is too much before what you do goes too far?

    Instead of merely escalating the level of violence, begin with the idea of control over the entire situation. This also means self-control.

  152. Sengge,

    She was walking around and trying to leave. Plus, she hit him before he later threw that kick. Here’s the full video:

    I don’t think he beat her or did any ground and pound. The woman is pretty big, and as you can see in the full video, the man and his wife (I’m assuming) were not doing too well against her.

    I’ll say that it’s hard to watch a man hit a woman. It bothers me too. I think what we all need to realize is that the margins aren’t that high on some of these beauty products, and store owners aren’t going to react in an ideal way every time. You’ll notice that NO ONE is talking about lawsuits here, which to me seems to confirm that the woman did in fact try to steal something.

    What I’m saying is that there’s something shocking about a case where this woman is the initiator (stealing something) and then the SJW’s come out 100% in her support. It was the exact same thing with St. Michael in Ferguson.

  153. I watched the full video and I think the couple were doing “ok” against the thief. I don’t think the punch the thief threw was very strong or caused any injury… nor could she. The hippo was fat but not very strong. If the couple did not do well it was because they were trying to fight her face to face, got in each other’s way, and did not get through her center of gravity. But you’ll see that was quickly addressed.

    That chokehold was dangerous and the way he kicked her earlier led me to believe he was motivated by anger. In addition he tightened the hold even when his assumed wife asked him to let go. This stuff is dangerous. You could cause permanent neck injuries. The hippo was so fat the interruption in breathing could have caused cardiac arrest. It could maybe even give the hippo a stroke. I really don’t know what’s with this American fetish of grabbing people by the neck and putting them into chokeholds. Is it the MMA and youtube videos encouraging people to do things without understanding the severe injuries they could cause??

    Barring the lone crazy woman talking about “history of oppression” it seems that none of the protesters and interviewees were condoning the theft. They were protesting an excessive use of force. Talk about a “racial implication” seems to me to be something the network inserted into the story to turn minorities against each other.

  154. I might be too used to observing footage of serious threats and attacks. I just saw a video where a drunk man was ranting and aggressively confronting a group of bystanders who were not responding to him; he didn’t respond to the one among them who tried to placate him, then he ran to his car, took out his gun and shot the guy who tried to stop him, then ran to the group and started exchanging fire with one of them who pulled a gun from under his shirt and only shot back defensively.

    I always thought that you learn MMA and train in firearms combat to deal with murdering bastards and sons of bitches like these. Don’t pull a gun on a group of kids, and don’t use a chokehold on a hippo when plain old hippo wrangling tactics will do. Please.

  155. This is why, Kiwi, I say that you’re barking up the wrong tree. Is that really the kind of world you want to live in? Where you see everything through the lens of race and nothing else? Because if that’s what you want, you’ve got a great teacher in Snoopy who can show you exactly what that looks like. You can bring that anger and sense of victimhood and self-pity to your own people. — BigWOWO

    In no sense is it reasonable to suggest that I see everything through a racial lens alone. What is clear is that some people are concerned with the treatment individuals like us endure because of White supremacy, and others are not as concerned.

    Kiwi’s general interest in defending the social and political rights Asian Americans enjoy is sound. We disagree on the particulars, because I operate from an Asian American Studies framework tempered by a strong respect for multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism. In my view, there’s enough material wealth and political power and public respect available for all groups.

    Kiwi appears much more interested in a zero sum race pluralism where Black and Latino/a Americans lose political influence for Asian Americans to gain parity. I find this unwise and unnecessary. (@Kiwi: No one cares if Peter Liang supporters were not morally inferior to OJ Simpson supporters; all that means is that people of color in both communities have the capacity to be both inhumane and wrong.)

    The point is that neither of us engage victimhood when we present empirical facts about our communities’ histories. If Kiwi ceased his needless and uninformed cross-cultural comparisons, we’d be fine.

    In contrast BigWOWO, you prefer a world where a Black woman can be beaten and kicked with impunity, with no public condemnation or outcry whatsoever, because on some level you find Black criminality self-evident. There’s really no level of violence that you find excessive when directed toward a Black American accused of a crime. It is easy to disagree about the need for the physical restraint employed in that video, but I don’t think it’s really important.

    Some of us believe that Black Americans deserve the same physical safety expectations other citizens enjoy in public spaces. You do not agree, BigWOWO, especially if a Black American has been accused of a crime. In this, your race conservatism manifests as something darker.

  156. Kiwi,

    Please read what Snoopy wrote above. Again, I ask: Is this the world you want to live in? Do you want to bring this kind of wallowing in self-pity and victimhood to Asians?

    It’s a rhetorical question, yes. But I would like to know? I mean, yes, I agree with you that it would bring free stuff to Asians. But would that really be worth it? Would you feel comfortable taking this free stuff, which, more often than not, is based on something not true?

    I don’t remember who it was upthread who mentioned black immigrants. Most black immigrants I know are completely turned off by the self-pity and victimhood. Read the comments on this post: http://www.bigwowo.com/2012/10/why-doesnt-the-naacp-claim-nigerian-immigrants/

    If black people who could receive lots of free stuff and advantages are turned off by this victimology peddling by the SJW’s, you need to ask yourself why.

  157. @ bigWOWO

    I don’t recall where demanding schools do a better job teaching Asian American history equals “free stuff”. If simply paying attention in class is “self-pity”, then I suppose there’s nothing we can do. All I know is that people who learn about their own people’s history tend to be more successful career-wise later in life. Asians still experience discrimination in jobs, education, and housing and while SJWs have provided a counter-productive example of what not to do, I don’t think the lesson learned should be your approach of doing nothing.

  158. Wallowing in self-pity? BigWOWO, what does that even mean?

    I want a country where people of color are not assaulted. If we are assaulted, I would prefer that third-party observers did not assume we were guilty of some crime in order to justify the violence we were forced to navigate.

    This is not victimhood. It’s not wallowing in self-pity. It’s basic intelligence. Further, it’s the sort of country you and people like you enjoy, BigWOWO, because most citizens do not assume criminal behavior on your part.

  159. Aight, I’m going to excuse myself here. I have no idea what Kiwi is talking about with regards to Asian American studies (I never thought of that as free stuff) or me “doing nothing,” but it seems that Kiwi wants to learn from Snoopy, and it seems that Snoopy wants to teach him. So let me move out of the way so that the lessons can begin.

  160. No one’s looking for ‘free stuff’, BigWOWO. No one.

    Perhaps this conversation has advanced past your capacity to follow, since you keep insisting that people wallow in self-pity, embrace victimhood, and seek ‘free stuff’ when they clearly state otherwise.

  161. There is a new trend that the mexicans are using us as examples of highly educated, smart, hard working, law abiding illegal immigrants to win sympathy. Illegal asian immigrants are not representative at all of the majority of illegal immigrants. The majority are poor mexicans who live in the shadow, hoping to have kids born here, or they use their innocent children as a shield to cry “injustice”. Asians on the other hand, are actually the brain power of America, asians actually have a lot to offer. Asians, stop being used by those crying bullies. Whites, mexicans, blacks, arabs, south asians, mixed, etc are not your friends. Race has nothing to do with anything. They only look after their own interests using race. Stop being so pathetic and follow the crowds, stand up for yourselves, be proud of your heritage. Stop taking the high road, look out for your own people, gives no shit to everything else.

  162. Snoopy,

    I’ll probably say more about this in my next post, but you and I are polar opposites when it comes to prescriptions for society. My vision is about independence, lack of blame, and self-improvement. Yours is about taking from one group to feed another based on nothing more than race. Yours is race-based. Mine is human-based.

  163. BigWOWO, you say your vision involves independence, but you seek to make common cause between Asian Americans and conservative Whites at every opportunity.

    You say your vision involves a lack of blame, but you clearly blame Black Americans for not only their economic conditions, but for any violent excesses they endure at others’ hands. All that is really needed is the barest criminal suspicion, and you blame the Black American who lies on the ground beaten and bloody and gasping for air for her own troubles.

    You say your vision is about self-improvement, but you find Black Americans who embrace higher education an clear and present danger to young people within your community who choose college to escape poverty — all while you reject the historical record and privilege anecdote over rigorous statistics. Given what you share on this blog, you’ve yet to further your own education since college.

    Seriously, BigWOWO — if you care so much about self-improvement, why aren’t you taking classes somewhere? I’ve taken graduate courses at Yale over the past year, so when I suggest that a book on Thomas Jefferson’s rape of Sally Hemings is interesting but not necessary at present, it’s because I weigh review of material I already know against all the other philosophy and gender theory I absorb these days. You should start with Asian American Studies 101. Learn your history.

    So no, I reject your claim that your vision involves independence, lack of blame, or self-improvement. Unlike many of the commenters here, you don’t seek independence. You blame certain groups all the time, and the closest you get to self-improvement involves reading the last pop-political text Ben Carson’s ghostwriter penned.

    So it’s no wonder that you get my vision so totally and completely wrong: you don’t understand you own; how could you possibly evaluate someone else?

  164. Snoopy, Snoopy, Snoopy:

    For the hundredth time, I’m not conservative. Do I know conservative White people? Yes. Do I spend time at their rallies or online with them? No. I’m not conservative. I practice common sense. Even now, after all this talk about the woman who was accused of stealing from the shopowner, you can’t bring yourself to see the perspective of a storeowner who was being robbed. Why? Because she’s Black, and he isn’t.

    I just wrote my latest post:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2017/03/a-fine-young-man-by-michael-gurian-review/

    You can comment if you want. Or not. But basically, it’s Gurian’s CORE that sets you and me apart: Compassion, (H)onor, Responsibility, Enterprise. From what you preach, you practice very little of it. You have no compassion for people who aren’t Black. You don’t honor the rules, laws, or norms of this country. I’ve spoken lots about responsibility, so no need to say more here. The only thing we share is enterprise, but even then, I question whether your kind of enterprise really benefits anyone except for yourself.

    Seriously, BigWOWO — if you care so much about self-improvement, why aren’t you taking classes somewhere? I’ve taken graduate courses at Yale over the past year, so when I suggest that a book on Thomas Jefferson’s rape of Sally Hemings is interesting but not necessary at present, it’s because I weigh review of material I already know against all the other philosophy and gender theory I absorb these days. You should start with Asian American Studies 101. Learn your history.

    No, that wasn’t how it happened. How it happened was that you said you would read the book. Then you saw how long the book is. Then you changed your mind. Hey, I get it. We’re all busy. But why comment AT LENGTH about a topic which you won’t even read about? Who cares about philosophy and gender theory? If there were a rape case in court, do you think either side would get off or prosecute based on some philosophy or gender theory?

    On a personal note, honestly speaking, if I could do it all again, I’d get a grad degree right after college. I don’t know if you’re on your way to getting one, but I agree with you that you should, although I will say that some areas of study are complete bullshit because they’ve been screwed by political correctness. Government majors at Cornell, for example, clearly don’t require any background in economics (though to be fair, it’s not just you), and I don’t see how it’s possible to truly understand government without a solid background in understanding the scarcity of resources. I hope you get a grad degree, but I also hope you aren’t studying bullshit. I think you’re smart enough to go for something non-bullshit.

    As for me, I don’t have time. In getting my Japanese Language Proficiency Test certificate (which I passed in December), for example, I probably could’ve gone to the local community college to study for it. I think that would have been fun, and it would probably be cool to be surrounded by like-minded people trying to get the same certificate. But there just wasn’t time, so I studied with my friend, and I used both a book and an online course.

  165. @ bigWOWO

    I have no idea what Kiwi is talking about with regards to Asian American studies

    Maybe read the comments posted instead of saying you didn’t. This is not the first time you haven’t paid attention to what I’ve actually said.

    Why Are Asian Americans Missing From Our Textbooks?

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/psmag.com/amp/p/6319bd4ed0d6

    Money quote:

    “Of the nearly 100 Americans recommended to be studied, 77 percent were white, 18 percent were African American, 4 percent were Native American, and 1 percent were Latino. None were Asian American.”

    California is 39% White, 39% Latino, 14.7% Asian, 6.5% Black, and 1.7% Native.

    I know you don’t believe in doing anything (since that’s partly why you changed the blog header from “activism” to “common sense”) but I think having no representation in curricula is a bad situation for Asians to be in. And that’s where Blacks are at an advantage because of political power. Apparently, you see trying to do the same thing as bringing “self-pity” and a “victimization culture” to your own people. Or maybe you don’t want your tax dollars to pay for it because that would be race-based “free stuff”, just like you don’t care about protecting laws that increase Asian voting power.

    But the article adds:

    “Students of color are more engaged and earn better grades when they see themselves in their studies.”

    Common sense tells me that means we need to add more Asians to school curricula.

  166. You don’t honor the rules, laws, or norms of this country. — BigWOWO

    How did you arrive at this conclusion? Given everything you know about me, how does this comment make any sense whatsoever?

    Look, congrats on passing your proficiency test. I sure you enjoyed long hours of intense study to gain Japanese proficiency. I know something about long hours of intense study; when reviewing Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason I realized I lacked time to read a exhaustive history of Thomas Jefferson’s rape of Sally Hemings, a history with which I’m already familiar.

    But yeah, to say that I “don’t honor the rules, laws, or norms of this country is absurd. It’s just nuts. BigWOWO, you say you aren’t a conservative, but you rail against political correctness, link articles from the National Review, assume Blacks with whom you disagree practice ‘victimhood‘, and shun academic liberals with their love of sociological data and social justice in favor of people who do not mind your predilection for anecdote and gut truths. In case you haven’t noticed, that’s how conservatives operate.

    It’s funny: conservatives like you always suggest at some point that people with whom you disagree prove insufficiently invested in what makes America great. Good to know that you’re consistent.

  167. I remember asking on this blog why it is that more Blacks and Latinos don’t try their hands in STEM fields, particularly software engineering, in order to achieve an above average level of pay. This is largely how many immigrant Asians have done relatively well on the economics front. A few answered that long hours are involved and that you would have many geeky/nerdy co-workers. My feeling was that the relatively fat pay-check was worth it if there are no other better alternatives (I didn’t bother to state this back then).
    I suggested that there were really no real barriers that I was aware of preventing Blacks/Latinos from entering the field although I didn’t have any proof. Well this article from Geekwire suggests that Black applicants (at least in Seattle) actually have a 49 percent higher success rates in receiving offers compared to Whites while Asians have a 45 percent LOWER success rate compared to Whites. The article does point out that Blacks do ask for and receive less than Whites and Asians but they are still very high paying positions.
    The Asian SJWs have gleefully labelled Asians for being anti-black for simply being employed in Tech in such large numbers. I think if more Blacks were to get into the field, we would be killing two birds with one stone: Asians would appear less anti-black in the eyes of the Asian SJWs and there would be increased prosperity in the Black community.
    http://www.geekwire.com/2017/silicon-valley-employees-leading-the-migration-to-seattle-new-study-finds/#disqus_thread

    @Snoopy. I would really like to have your perspective as to why more Blacks don’t get into tech.

  168. Snoopy,

    I was talking about what you preach, not what you yourself practice. I probably should’ve made that clear, and so that’s definitely my bad. So I apologize for that. As I’ve said on many occasions, you and I are not that different. You follow the law, as I do. You probably watch your spending, as I do. You probably take care of your family, as I do. On a personal level, we’re more or less exactly the same.

    The difference is in what we preach. If someone beats a shopkeeper while stealing cigarillos, you’ll say nothing. If a woman tries to steal something from another shopkeeper, you’ll say nothing. If a guy lies about being hit by a car by the president of Mizzou, you’ll say nothing. In fact, you’ll turn it around and verbally attack the victim, the one who was following the rules and laws. That’s what I was talking about. Where is the condemnation of bad behavior? Similarly, you’re fine with spending government money frivolously. What you preach is different from how you live.

    So even though I am definitely in the wrong in saying that you don’t honor the laws without clarifying the difference between what you say and what you do, I’m sure you can see why I said that. If you think I’m conservative because of what I say, I’d say that BOTH of us are conservative based on how we live. I’m just asking people to live within reason.

    MMJames wrote:

    @Snoopy. I would really like to have your perspective as to why more Blacks don’t get into tech.

    I think it’s a decent question.

  169. Kiwi,

    I don’t understand what you’re saying. You seem to be arguing a completely different position against a topic that I didn’t even bring up, let alone disagree with you on.

    But honestly, I probably don’t have much to offer you anyway. I don’t say that to be dismissive, only to say that I really have nothing to offer. I was just kidding of course when I said that Snoopy should be your teacher, but seriously speaking, you probably do have more in common with him than me, and if you do want to incorporate some of that culture into your culture, I’m not against it. I just don’t think you’ll find many Asian people to come along.

  170. Snoopy,

    Another thing I want to say: At some point, what you say has to match how you live. It just doesn’t work any other way.

    Seriously, check out my latest post about boys. We’ve had the discussion on volunteering in the schools. You don’t do it, and that’s fine. Like I said, we’re all busy. But seriously, Snoopy, at some point, you need to think about what you want for the people around you. When it’s about people who you know and love, there’s no point in keeping it theoretical. You need to be able to prescribe a workable approach to life that will help your own, no matter what race they are.

  171. @ bigWOWO

    I don’t understand what you’re saying.

    I just don’t think you’ll find many Asian people to come along.

    Now you’re running in circles. First you say you don’t understand what I’m talking about then shift back to saying I want to incorporate a culture I didn’t bring up, let alone agree with.

    I don’t know how closely you read comments (and based on experience, my bet is not very closely) but I was very clear in multiple threads that a major cause for Asians getting shafted the way they do is because of a lack of representation in politics, media, and education. The solution is to gain more power.

    I know you will write that off as “self-pity” and “victimization culture” but if that’s what it takes to gain respect, so be it.

  172. “based on experience, my bet is not very closely”

    I think you should direct your comments to Snoopy. I’m not saying that to be dismissive. As I mentioned, I just don’t have anything to offer you. Snoopy is a good guy, and I’m sure he’s got lots more he’d like to share with you.

  173. “Black conservatives like Shelby Steele or Ben Carson or King.”

    This is rich. When did I become a conservative??? I’m a “centrist” or “independent,” meaning that I can see the mountains of BS piled up by both the conservatives and the liberals.

    As for voting with an ID, please show me the counties that do NOT require a valid ID to vote? I’ll wait…

  174. King, you’ve been the go-to Black conservative voice on this site as long as I’ve commented here. Whenever BigWOWO feels it necessary to rely upon a Black male’s perspective to contrast with mine, he chooses you.

    It’s not your fault; I don’t suggest you volunteer for the ‘acceptable Negro’ role, but it’s not like you’ve ever rejected that frame either. Further, your opinions on a number of issues discussed here are to the Right; not everything, not all the time, but my line isn’t coming out of left field.

    Put another way, plenty of Black men hold centrist political views like you say you do, precisely because they enjoy liberal views on certain items, and conservative views on others. All the Booker T. Washington ‘up-from-bootstraps’ conservatism to which you and BigWOWO adhere finds ready application in the Black community in ways you both have discussed here. It’s not inviolate or inappropriate, but it is conservative, to focus more on that than the systemic injustices that Black people face daily.

    So yeah King, on Black folk, you’re a conservative. BigWOWO holds fiscally conservative views to go along with his race conservatism; on something like, say, immigration policy, I’d expect BigWOWO to be slightly to the left, so long as non-English voting isn’t brought up. The point here is that to consider a person ‘centrist’ given the totality of their views is fair enough, but I was speaking in a race context, and in that context I consider you much closer to Shelby Steele and Ben Carson than, say, Michael Eric Dyson or Ta-Nehisi Coates.

  175. @Snoopy. I would really like to have your perspective as to why more Blacks don’t get into tech. — mmjames

    @mmjames — Many Black Americans graduate with computer science degrees, and find themselves dissuaded from pursuing careers in the tech industry. When Black Americans are hired, we’re likely relegated to office support roles, leaving the programming floor largely unaffected. Recruiting from tech companies doesn’t often stray past the Ivy-Plus schools to HBCU’s, where many Black students attend college.

    Certainly the companies recognize a need to diversify workplaces, but as is true in many industries, meaningful workplace diversity often alters a corporate space past where it is willing to travel. Usually when media highlights tech industry leaders, those people are White or Asian males. Further, as Delane Parnell writes, venture capital doesn’t exactly flow to firms led by Black people, so it’s a difficult startup climate for those businesses.

    Aaron Saunders, CEO of Clearly Innovative, suggests that a major disconnect is geographic, with a mostly West Coast tech industry and HBCU’s concentrated in the East Coast. Add to this the dearth of programming experience children receive in public school curricula, and many Black students learn programming once they enter college, perhaps a decade or more behind their White and Asian counterparts.

    If anything, I think implicit bias plays a role. One of my favorite video games is Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. When you finish that game and watch the end credits, you see a group picture of all the Eidos Montreal programmers. The picture shows a diverse group … of Whites and Asians. This has a meaningful impact: the previous Deus Ex installment, Human Revolution, featured Letitia, a street informant widely considered to embody racist stereotypes.

    Clearly, Eidos Montreal is simply trying to sell great video games. But all the years of programming and production and fine-tuning didn’t stop that particular awful character, and it results directly from Black under-representation in Eidos Montreal. Solving the tech industry’s diversity problem is more than hiring the ever-increasing numbers of Black computer programmers. It requires the tech industry, like all industries, to view workplace diversity as integral to its relentless drive for profit. We’ve yet to reach that point.

  176. Snoopy wrote:

    It’s not your fault; I don’t suggest you volunteer for the ‘acceptable Negro’ role, but it’s not like you’ve ever rejected that frame either.

    Wow.

    I’ve already apologized for not making the context clear, but do you see why I said that you “don’t honor the rules, laws, or norms of this country?” It’s not how you live in your life, but it’s what you say. When it comes to expressing your beliefs, your words do not honor the rules, laws, or norms of this country, even if your conduct does. I’ve already explained to you about the disrespect for law coming from your words, but this is a disrespect for norms. King is professionally successful, comes from a family of professionals, and is the son of an immigrant who has immigrant values, and you basically call him an Uncle Tom for that. That’s not normal, Snoopy. For most of us, it’s what we strive to achieve. Whenever a Black man becomes successful and advocates hard work–which is what King does because that’s what he was taught by his immigrant parents, and it’s what I try to do because that’s what I was taught by my immigrant grandfather–that Black man knows that there is an entire army of SJW’s ready to attack him and question his identity. Furthermore, King volunteers and gives back. That is a norm in this society, Snoopy, and yet you attack it.

    mmjames:

    To Snoopy’s credit, he answered the question. I’ve worked in tech and know people who work in tech. I disagree with him, but it’s nice that he answered it. I won’t go into why I disagree at this time. I know I’ve used personal experience to talk about the mortgage industry, the housing industry, volunteering in the schools, bilingualism, etc. In American (and really all) societies, experience is respected, but again, that’s another norm that Snoopy attacks.

  177. @snoopy,bigwowo
    I would like to preface my comments by saying that I’m looking at SW engineering as career that provides a solid salary in the upper-half of middle-class at a relatively low risk to your physical and mental health. I’m not talking about employment in hot startups or even the more elite bigger companies like Facebook and Google. Therefore even if snoopy’s comment about hiring only from IVY league type schools were true for the few exceptional companies I mentioned above, it is not true for the vast majority of other companies like “old tech” (IBM, HP, cisco, microsoft etc) and for banks and insurance companies that employ lots of IT people.
    When Black Americans are hired, we’re likely relegated to office support roles

    I’ve only worked in private industry and there I can pretty well guarantee you that there are very such positions (if at all). Typically, there is only one administrative assistant *per floor* and they won’t have a technical degree and they would laugh in your face if you ask them to help with your documentation unless you are a director or higher. Besides, there will be tons of born-to-be-slackers or burnt-out engineers looking for work exactly like that.

    Recruiting from tech companies doesn’t often stray past the Ivy-Plus schools to HBCU’s, where many Black students attend college.

    Again, most companies don’t require IVY league degrees. However, having a degree (from anywhere) would definitely help a lot. Those with only college diplomas would have to look mostly in the low-level IT areas.

    Aaron Saunders, CEO of Clearly Innovative, suggests that a major disconnect is geographic, with a mostly West Coast tech industry and HBCU’s concentrated in the East Coast.

    Well, this is a case where you have to take the “move with the job” attitude. Tons of engineers in America are actually Canadians if you check their passports.

    The last points about Eidos Montreal are outside the scope of what I was trying to discuss (SW career as a source of a pay cheque). These types of issues aren’t typically brought up (among tech workers anyways) and don’t belong in your average cafeteria talk. Some will have a opinions, especially among POC but they would keep it to themselves unless you know them well.

  178. @Snoopy its a good article you brought up, but wouldn’t you think that there maybe other factors other than just race maybe involved? I mean there are just as many underperforming Asians who are also tech majors.

    For example age discrimination, lack of experience, low gpa. Wouldnt those be huge obstacles for anybody to face in a cut throat profit driven Job Market that is ultra competitive?

    I mean how can an average asian/black/latino keep their spirits up after seeing job posts after job posts where they need experience to get the job that requires experience, and filing out dozens of applications to get no interest or callback? The reality out there is brutal out there for alot of job seekers, and im sure race does play a role but not as much as if the tech major guy who is either black or asian has to fight for a job and he has a low gpa and no experience or internship experience to snag something. It maybe virtually impossible.

  179. @Red Ribbon — I don’t believe that any one factor proves determinant here, nor do I assume that, say, Black college grads would be undercut by low GPA’s or face worse age discrimination and/ or experience lack than their White or Asian counterparts.

    Ultimately, the question of race vs. anything else that impedes tech sector employment isn’t the point. The relevant point asks companies to look beyond their comfort zones to find worthwhile applicants. If these companies are not willing to do so (and all evidence suggests that their reluctance persists) that is a problem worthy of address.

  180. BigWOWO,

    This is a great example of your inability to understand nuance.

    Just to be absolutely clear, I did not call King or anyone else an Uncle Tom. I do not believe that sentiment to be accurate about King. I suggested before that I thought King was a conservative on race, and I meant it. The two are not the same idea.

    None of King’s race conservatism makes him overtly concerned with the well-being and uplift of White people over his own, the layman’s definition of an Uncle Tom. BigWOWO, you either misunderstand the clear intent here, or you’re instigating conflict. Either way, you are in the wrong.

    As I stated before, I find King to express an ‘up-from-bootstraps’ Booker T. Washington self-sufficiency ethos that (while being authentically Black) tends to downplay systemic racism and institutional bias in favor of a focus on what Black Americans can provide for themselves. You favor this approach, because (like most race conservatives) you have no stomach or patience for concepts like systemic racism or institutional bias.

    In concrete terms, race conservatives look at low Black employment in the tech sector and suggest that more Black Americans should learn programming languages to gain tech industry employment. Race progressives tend to ask why Black Americans with computer programming degrees are not more often hired in tech firms, and examine those firms’ recruiting practices and office culture for their interest in and openness toward people of color. Race progressives consider the regular population of Black computer science graduates who emerge from the nation’s universities every year and fail to gain employment in the tech sector after twelve months.

    So when I say that King doesn’t volunteer for the ‘acceptable Negro’ role, I suggest that it’s in no way his fault that your perspectives on race align with his, most of the time. In essence, it’s not his fault that his perspectives are acceptable to you in ways that mine are not. No one’s attacked King for being a successful Black man who advocates hard work — I’m a successful Black man who advocates hard work: it’s the reason I helped to found a nonprofit that deals with workplace diversity in Connecticut. It’s the reason I start law school this fall.

    But BigWOWO, you’d like to believe that immigrants and their children possess a stronger connection to the values and mores that promote productive lives and moral citizens than the rest of us. You emphasize your shared immigrant background with King as if that makes a difference. Further, you prop King’s similar perspectives to yours as crass evidence that your perspectives on race are sound, in the same manner that race conservatives use people like Shelby Steele and Ben Carson.

    BigWOWO, your interest in treating King like the only acceptable Negro around this site doesn’t make him an Uncle Tom. It does say a hell of a lot about you. No one has questioned King’s identity: I make clear that your interest in parsing Black acceptability has nothing to do with how individuals live and everything to do what individuals think. It’s a political concern that you translate into a discussion about norms and mores and respect. That’s abnormal.

    I haven’t disrespected anyone in this conversation, BigWOWO. I’m certainly not breaking norms or attacking people. You have that wrong. I make clear that you make a political decision to characterize some Black people (children of immigrants, professionally successful, race conservatives) as acceptable, and others (native-born slave descendants, professionally successful, academic, race conscious) as unacceptable.

    To read from any of this the idea that I called King an Uncle Tom is totally absurd. It’s just wrong. I think you both agree on several political issues, that you use King as an example of a Black man who understands your perspective, and that if King ever had a problem with how Black Americans were characterized by you on this site, he’s more than capable of making his opinion known.

    King has no problem challenging, say, ChineseMom whenever she’s overtly bigoted with her language. But he doesn’t challenge your rhetorical flourishes about Black people, or your effusive praise of him. So it’s reasonable to conclude that he’s at best indifferent to your framing of him as the acceptable Negro among us, in contrast to the Negro you love to hate, to paraphrase Ice Cube.

    You two agree with each other, but you transform that synergy into something else, BigWOWO. Don’t get upset with me for pointing out the paradigm.

  181. @snoopy. I see what you are getting at, but even if those companies reformed and attempted to diversify there will still be “tech” majors that are shut out of the system due to the combination of the above factors. What about them? The guy who may not have made the cut but still dreams of making a future for himself?

    Just the reality of the job market, even if the system is fixed and you may open up a few more jobs, it is still depressing to realize that many get into STEM only to fail hard once they get out. No way to fix that I bet.

  182. Asian American SJW are shock troups of liberal populism that try to shift values and public discourse with gays, lesbians, trannies and blacks. In my opinion liberal populism want to create moral panic to distract public opinion. The real attack is performed against the lower and the middle class.

    We know that Black American got a unreasonable political advanage back in the 1960s when they exploit the Vietnam war for gaining political influences with a truce with white America. The practice to create majority district for Black politicians with gerrymandering must end. Black populations will not grow further. Every American should have equal voting rights. Decolonizaion also means that white America have to stop gerrymandering for Black candidates.

    The American polity had a bad start after independence because the demands of the anti-federalists are defeated to establish a mirror representation of the American people. Thee federalists won the political battle with false claims that the new regime is a democracy. In reality it was an electorial aristocracy led by the landed gentry, the industrialists and the liberal professions. Democracy was the name for the Athenian Democracy for Rousseau and Montesquieu. The federalist reinterpretate the content of democracy.

    The worker in the French revolution shared the same demand with the anti-federalists. They felt marginalized by the universalistic rhetoric and demand a mirror representation of the polity. Representatives should think , feel and talk like the common man.

    The Athenian understanding of democracy was equal probability to obtain a office in collegial bodies. They used the lot to avoid factionalism and corruption. Only for military affairs and finance an election decide who should get an office, but the citizen had the right to kick elected officers out at all times.

    The old understanding of democracy is comin back with the demarchy concept. Direct democracy like the Athenians is impossible for big states, so John Burnheim suggest that we should have a mixed membership in parliament with elected politicians and randomly chosen members. This body will approximately represent the society like a microcosmos. For decision-making it is very helpful to have common people in parliament. The pollsters are not a substitute for real common people.

    There are in UK a number of authors who want to introduce demarchy to replace the House of Commons and the House Of Lords to get rid of the confrontational political style of the Westminster system. In a Westminster system the winner takes all, the majoritarian party can practive tyranny of the majority. In the USA we have check and balances. Only at the state level you have a mix of direct democracy and representative democracy to challenge the decision of the electorial aristocracy. Federal power is unchecked and direct democracy cannot override federal decisions.

    The introduction of random selection of representatives to complement the electorial aristocracy is the way forward and will give all visible minorities a fair share of voice in the representative bodies. Even women, workers and religious minorities are represented. there is no need for Black privilege. Gerrymandering is wrong.

    Asian American liberals misrepresent Asian American political interests for their own egoistic gains. Asian American are very diverse in ideology, religion, languages and class backgrounds. That is why we nee demarchy to come together and learn from each other to define our common interests. The Asian American polity has the right to choose candidates, campaigners, dignitaries and artists to represent us in the public space just like the ancient Athenians.

    For constructing a overarching political polity in order to bring real democracy to the American people, we need to study the Swiss politicl system. The Swiss has a very small federal administration at their disposal. They have seven presidents in a collegial body, the posts are distributed among the parties.

    Civil morality in the Swiss society lead to a fair division of opportunities among the German-speaking majority and French speaking, Italian-speaking, protestant and catholic minorities. Direct democracy gives the minorities a weapon to fend off majotarian legislative attacks. Only small scale mobilization is necessary to bring up intensive debates about difficult topics that disrupt hegemonic discourse.

    Asian American campaigners should become the modern Perikles of our days. They must follow orders, if the Asian American public meet in a Asian American Social Forum and decide the agenda for the year. If not Asian America has the right to recall them immediately. We must train modern Perikles and give them our student youth to crush Asian American SJW.

    We cannot live with liberal paternalism and repressive tolerance. Man is born free and equal. No taxation without participation ! No representation without participation ! Down with Asian America identity politics.

  183. Snoopy,

    Yeah, I see no difference there. You say there’s nuance; I say it’s the same thing. When a Black man agrees with a non-Black person and you call him an “acceptable Negro” in the context of a political discussion, I really don’t see that as a compliment, especially coming from you, a person who likes to personalize along questions of identity. Nor is it a compliment to me, a person who views King as a rational, thinking person who shares my immigrant background, not as, in your words, an “acceptable Negro.” Sorry dude, I just can’t see how you can throw a term like that out there and then accuse me of failing to comprehend nuance when that is CLEARLY an insult.

    I’m a successful Black man who advocates hard work: it’s the reason I helped to found a nonprofit that deals with workplace diversity in Connecticut. It’s the reason I start law school this fall.

    Well, I’ll be honest here. Usually nonprofits that deal with workplace diversity don’t advocate for hard work. They advocate for handouts for the less qualified. Check out some of Jesse Jackson’s work against Google. I’d repost it, but I’m getting tired of reposting it.

    Congrats on getting into law school. I think it’s something that you should have done a long time ago.

    Not sure if you saw it, but mmjames posted a reply above to your statement about Black people in tech. Everything he says matches with my own personal experience in the tech field. I imagine it’ll match exactly with the experiences of 95% of people in the field. As I was saying when you were lecturing me on mortgages (despite never having bought or sold a house), real life matters. In law school, I hope you pay special attention to the ideas of precedent and how things are done in real life.

  184. BigWOWO, if you don’t see a difference, you’ve chosen to avoid the difference. I’ve made the perspective clear. My use of the phrase ‘acceptable Negro’ was not a compliment, nor was it an attempt to deny recognition of King’s Blackness in the manner you ascribe. I don’t agree with the race conservatism you and King share, in large measure because I find it insufficiently interested in academic analysis of the historical and sociological record that outlines the Black American experience.

    You guys prefer to deny the very existence of institutional racism and systemic bias, in favor of continued denunciations of Black American culture and politics. How often must people read your overt denial of Thomas Jefferson’s rape of Sally Hemings or your rants against affirmative action or your pronouncements that immigrants Chinese values should be employed by Black America before they conclude that you have very little respect for Black Americans, BigWOWO? Add to this King’s general support for or silence during our exchanges, when I challenge you on your odious views, and it is clear that in the context of our discussions, your ongoing and clearly heartfelt defense of your friend King stems in part from his general unwillingness to challenge your anti-Blackness.

    This is a quality I do not share. King’s the acceptable Negro to you because he doesn’t really take issue with your usual characterization of Black Americans as undeserving, ignorant victims desperate for free benefits paid for by others in the society. I do. None of my issues with you should be misinterpreted to suggest that I believe King is an Uncle Tom.

    But you both are race conservatives, and you both find difficulty with the idea that some of the explanation for Black America’s economic plight today stems from institutional racism. It is fair to discuss that openly: when MMJames references his experiences in the tech industry, he fairly offers his opinion about the benefits of the tech sector to employees. But the articles I reference earlier discuss the many ways in which tech careers are neither sold to or available to young Black people, methods unearthed by academic observation of the tech sector. To suggest that those findings don’t actually happen because you disagree with the racial implications of the findings is not reasonable.

    For example, the idea that certain tech companies are not willing to hire Black people who lack Ivy League degrees and the like isn’t fantasy, and its a phenomena that one finds in many sectors, not just tech. To pretend that doesn’t exist goes against the academic literature on the subject, and I find that denial unwise, at best. Further, it’s not reasonable to expect Black college students who often attend HBCU’s on scholarship to relocate to the West Coast at age twenty two to find employment in a sector that normally hires White and Asian men, or relegates Black employees to accounting, customer service, or clerical roles.

    But I recognize that your denial of the academic finding in this case and others stem from an indifference and/or hostility to institutional racism as an partial explanation of the experiences Black Americans endure, BigWOWO. This is something I suggest you should examine closely.

    Thank you for your congratulations on law school. I’m going to have an amazing time.

  185. Snoopy:

    Just a quick warning that I’m sure you already know: Law school is going to kick the shit out of you. They’re going to beat that hatred of fact and logic right out of you. And you’re going to pay for this vicious assault on illogic and wrongful accusations with your tuition dollars. But I agree you’ll have an amazing time. When the going gets tough, just remember that everyone on this blog is in your corner.

    King’s the acceptable Negro to you because he doesn’t really take issue with your usual characterization of Black Americans as undeserving, ignorant victims desperate for free benefits paid for by others in the society.

    Hold up. You’re saying that he’s the “acceptable Negro” to me, or he’s just the “acceptable Negro?” Because originally you said, “It’s not your fault; I don’t suggest you volunteer for the ‘acceptable Negro’ role, but it’s not like you’ve ever rejected that frame either.” You were saying originally that King was taking (or not complaining about) a role as an “acceptable Negro” with no mention of me, and now you’re saying it’s just from my perspective. I agree that your present statements don’t portray him as an Uncle Tom. But your original statement is something completely different.

    You guys prefer to deny the very existence of institutional racism and systemic bias, in favor of continued denunciations of Black American culture and politics. How often must people read your overt denial of Thomas Jefferson’s rape of Sally Hemings or your rants against affirmative action or your pronouncements that immigrants Chinese values should be employed by Black America before they conclude that you have very little respect for Black Americans, BigWOWO? Add to this King’s general support for or silence during our exchanges, when I challenge you on your odious views, and it is clear that in the context of our discussions, your ongoing and clearly heartfelt defense of your friend King stems in part from his general unwillingness to challenge your anti-Blackness.

    Aight, let’s think about this. My so-called “denial” (it was never denial; it was just innocence until proven guilty, which is something that they’ll also teach you in law school) is based on a work by an African American woman. My rants against affirmative action are supported by strong Black leaders like Ward Connerly, Ben Carson, and Shelby Steele, whom I’ve mentioned. Lastly, King is Black.

    So where do you get off accusing me of anti-Blackness? All of these people I admire are Black. Yes, I disagree with what you preach. I disagree with the racism coming from Sharpton and Jackson. Saint Michael of Ferguson was a violent thug. But who made you the arbiter of Black? To me that’s just divisive and wrong.

    Now I have no idea what you’re saying about academics and tech, though I wonder if it’s the same way you were lecturing me on the mortgage industry based on something you read on Huff Po. Here, you’ve got a guy who has worked in tech, and he’s tellin’ you how it really is. But you didn’t respond to that. I wonder why that is?

  186. First off, I appreciate the support on law school. Thanks. I tend to believe my appreciation of fact and logic will find ready acceptance in that space, but we will find out shortly.

    On the “acceptable Negro” line, you’ve quoted two passages:

    “It’s not your fault; I don’t suggest you volunteer for the ‘acceptable Negro’ role, but it’s not like you’ve ever rejected that frame either.” — Snoopy Jenkins (directed to King), 3/17/2017 at 7:05 AM

    “King’s the acceptable Negro to you because he doesn’t really take issue with your usual characterization of Black Americans as undeserving, ignorant victims desperate for free benefits paid for by others in the society.” — Snoopy Jenkins (directed to BigWOWO), 3/19/2017 at 12:08 PM

    I don’t see these statements as incompatible, nor do I read either statement to invoke the Uncle Tom stereotype you seem eager to ascribe. This entire line of debate began because King took issue with a line that characterized him as a race conservative like Shelby Steele and Ben Carson; the first use of the “acceptable Negro” moniker above stemmed from my explanation that King’s race conservatism finds ready acceptance among other race conservatives, in much the same manner as Steele and Carson remain popular among the same group.

    Steele and Carson are not Uncle Tom’s, but they clearly find themselves in support of conservative measures that would reduce opportunity and increase want within the Black community. Given this, they face a very real ostracism from some liberal Blacks, and this ostracism often manifests with the odious term Uncle Tom. But the rejection Black conservatives face, even when that slur is used, does not emerge irrationally, and it would behoove everyone in this conversation to remember that the term Uncle Tom carries a certain ostracism as a basic element of its many connotations that simply has not been invoked in this conversation.

    Rather, I’ve gone to great pains to suggest that
    a) King is no less Black than I or anyone given what he believes;
    b) Your support of his perspectives is not within his control, BigWOWO; and
    c) King achieves his race conservatism authentically, without any discernible attempt or desire to appeal to non-Black people with his political views.

    So in literally zero sense can it be reasonably claimed that I suggested that King was an Uncle Tom. All I’ve suggested here is that King has not, to my knowledge, rejected the support he receives from other race conservatives in this space for his views, or challenged your difficult perspectives on Black people in this space. I believe he’s both never sought the ‘acceptable Negro’ role, nor has he rejected it. In essence, he’s just ignored it, and people may debate the ethics of that posture on their own time.

    So BigWOWO, when you wrote …

    You were saying originally that King was taking (or not complaining about) a role as an “acceptable Negro” with no mention of me, and now you’re saying it’s just from my perspective. — BigWOWO

    … you misunderstood my words. I never suggested that King actively sought a role as an ‘acceptable Negro’; I said that you applied that role to him, and he at best ignored such application.

  187. My so-called “denial” (it was never denial; it was just innocence until proven guilty, which is something that they’ll also teach you in law school) is based on a work by an African American woman. My rants against affirmative action are supported by strong Black leaders like Ward Connerly, Ben Carson, and Shelby Steele, whom I’ve mentioned. Lastly, King is Black. — BigWOWO

    BigWOWO, you do realize that you now employ the “but I have Black friends!” defense against race prejudice claims, yes?

    I’ve never claimed that you take issue with individual Black people with whom you agree; I’ve stated repeatedly that you support race conservatives within Black America, like Connerly, Steele, Carson and King. The trouble is that you view the Black people within whom you agree as worthy exceptions to a mass of lower educated, violent, criminal Americans who drain social and civic resources away from more deserving groups. Further, you allow others to do so in this space as if those positions prove worthy in public.

    Really, it doesn’t matter in the slightest if you think of Michael Brown, now deceased, as a thug. What is interesting is your need to raise examples of Black thuggery to defend your views of Black people. Whatever one thinks of him, Michael Brown is no more an exemplar of the Black experience than Ben Carson, another brother with a violent youth. The major difference between the two is that Ben Carson was allowed to grow up.

    No one anointed Brown with sainthood; people rejected that clear indifference toward restraint employed by Officer Darren Wilson, just as they rejected his characterization as Hulk Hogan. That rejection is valid: many of us do not lose sight of Black humanity, even when we conflict with individual Black people.

    Is you anti-Blackness the worst I’ve ever encountered? Of course not. If anything BigWOWO, you place absolute faith in the moral perspectives of Chinese immigrants, and when those people fear and loathe Black people in the aggregate, so do you. Your affirmative action opposition boils down to disgust that sometimes, academically gifted Asian Americans do not gain acceptance to selective colleges and universities when some Black American students do.

    Case in point: I will attend a selective law school in the fall. Without question, many highly talented Asian American law school applicants were rejected in favor of my application. Many with your perspectives on merit and race would consider this tragic, because they can’t accept that someone like me would have more to offer a law school community than someone from your community, as defined by the people who admit law school students for a living.

    Race conservatives like yourself endorse this skepticism, a disbelief rooted in ugly denials of Black intelligence and Black scholastic potential. Race conservatives like King remain silent on this skepticism, refusing to fight back against attacks on Black cognitive ability in public while they reject the theory and practice of affirmative action, and people may debate the ethics of that posture on their own time.

    But please, discard the “my best friends are Black” defense, BigWOWO. It’s just … unconvincing.

  188. Snoopy,

    As I mentioned, there’s a difference between your original words and what you’re now saying. I reject the meaning of your original words, but I still think that what you’re now saying is wrong. Just your usage of the word “negro” is insulting to both of us.

    BigWOWO, you do realize that you now employ the “but I have Black friends!” defense against race prejudice claims, yes?

    And you’re going to law school? I’m worried for you, Snoopy. You’re the second most illogical person I’ve ever met (outside of this one mutual friend we have who works as a researcher at Yale). Unless you accuse your professors of racism and get off on white guilt, I don’t know how you’re going to pass. You may (gasp!) have to change your way of thinking!

    No, this isn’t the Black Friends defense. I was simply making a contrast. You say I’m anti-Black, but I’ve just been saying what others are saying–people who happen to be Black and who also happen to talk about Black people. Is Carson anti-Black? Because if he isn’t, then you have no reason to accuse me of that–my views are not different from his at all. That’s why I brought him up. What about Connerly and Steele? Are they anti-Black? What about Clarence Thomas?

    It seems that SJW’s always go ad hominem when they’re not getting what they want. It doesn’t work.

    Here’s another example:

    http://reappropriate.co/2017/03/26-years-after-the-murder-of-latasha-harlins-asian-americans-still-have-a-lot-of-work-to-do-around-anti-blackness/

    The guy happened to restrain a woman who he thought (probably accurately given the lack of argument from the other side) was stealing from him. No racial slurs, no proven history of racism, nothing–but again, as usual, he’s accused of being “anti-Black.” No proof. All the SJW’s need to see is that the man is Asian. Pin the Tail on the Asian Male. Where have we seen this before?

    Whatever one thinks of him, Michael Brown is no more an exemplar of the Black experience than Ben Carson, another brother with a violent youth. The major difference between the two is that Ben Carson was allowed to grow up.

    HAHAHA. Okay, this made my day!!! HAHAHA! Snoopy, even if you get really busy at law school, you’re going to have to promise to come here to post. I don’t care if you’ve gotta throw R-bombs at your professors, you’ve gotta make time!

    So according to Snoopy, if Michael Brown hadn’t tried to murder a cop, he would’ve become one of the most prominent doctors of the world. If St. Michael’s GIFTED HANDS hadn’t tried to snatch a cop’s gun, if those GIFTED HANDS handn’t been used to manhandle and ASSAULT a South Asian shopkeeper, those GIFTED HANDS would have been separating conjoined twins or doing brain surgery or heart surgery or curing cancer! And it’s all because of White Racism!!!

    I have no idea what kind of law you’ll be doing, but please don’t do criminal law. Do something where you don’t have to get your hands dirty. I say this in a good way, Snoopy, but part of what makes you lovable is your complete and willfull ignorance of the poor, of inner city black life, of the real estate world, and of life in general. You’ve never volunteered in the poor schools (unlike ChineseMom, myself, Aardvark, King, and most of the people on this blog), and your ignorance of that culture and refusal to go near people from that culture is what sustains your belief in these fairytales.

    I think you could make a decent civil rights lawyer working for white collar workers who are suing big companies for racial discrimination, but again, I think you’re going to have to change your thinking to incorporate logic and fact. There’s a big difference between getting into law school and winning cases.

  189. @bigWOWO,

    James Lamb-Fang is going to law school? LMAO!!!

    That completely makes sense now why he’s so ardent about pushing for affirmative discrimination. Unlike STEM fields, where data and logic have to be publicly accessible and peer reviewed, professional liars suppress data and manipulate arguments based on prejudices of the zeitgeist to no end.

    I think you’re going to have to change your thinking to incorporate logic and fact. There’s a big difference between getting into law school and winning cases.

    To the contrary, as we’ve seen even at “the highest court of the land it’s all populism and social engineering. As long you have enough people to make a ruckus and threats of social unrest, then the policies will heavily favor the protesters.

    Which is why you never see any policies that would actually help Native Americans – despite the “tribal gaming” boom. None of the SJWs even bother with Native American issues and I never seen the Fangs write about the Dakota Pipeline issue. >.<

    I'm actually more offended by Jenn Fang's crony Melissa Phruksachart's tabloid piece on Peele's Get Out with nonsensical made-up Asian anti-black racism than the hair salon incident. I doubt Jenn Fang has any insights from a Chinese-Canadian-naturalized-American perspective of the 1992 LA riots.

    In many ways I'd say the civil rights era was also about the US finally being able to criticize against and protest USSR expansionist policies in Africa and Latin America with having some modicum of "equality" because the US can't expand its own territories under the guise of liberty and freedom when so many of its own population lived under the yoke of oppression. Indeed, both MLK and Malcolm and others had some association with the black communist movements in the US.

    I'm sure Kiwi has some more interesting history tidbits to share. ^_^

  190. @ Snoopy

    ” I suggested before that I thought King was a conservative on race, and I meant it.”

    “Race” is a pretty big and general area. I wouldn’t consider myself to be a “conservative” on race although I’m not sure if there is only one definition of conservatism so that leaves a lot to personal interpretation. I would venture to say that on some racial issues I am to the right of your position (as a leftist). Maybe the best description for me is an “independent.”

    At any rate, I find that I am more open to ideas on both sides and more closed to certain ideas on both sides as well. I find it untenable to try and defend the broad platform either political polarity within American politics.

    However, of course, all of my positions are correct. :- )

  191. “Race conservatives like King remain silent on this skepticism, refusing to fight back against attacks on Black cognitive ability in public while they reject the theory and practice of affirmative action, and people may debate the ethics of that posture on their own time.”

    Not at all. I have constantly fought the specter of genetic racial cognitive theories. As for Affirmative Action, I reject it in education because the way it has been set up is nonsense! I accept Affirmative Action in business because in that realm it makes a lot more sense.

  192. Aardvark,

    We need to enjoy it while we can. In the past, Snoopy would boast about how he went to Cornell, as if that gave his illogical reasoning more weight. Now he may be showing off his Cornell degree and his law degree. On the other hand, we would hope that law school would bring his thinking in line with logic, which would probably reduce the amount of arguments by 99% or so, thereby eliminating his need to bring up his academic credentials. We’ll see.

    King,

    You raise a good point. We’ve ALL fought against race-based theories on cognitive ability, all of us, including ChineseMom. Here’s a podcast with me and King:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2010/09/podcast-with-aor-king-and-alpha-on-eugenics-hbd-and-racism/

    Again, Snoopy, I think it’s just you getting your emotions in the way of reasoning. No one here thinks black people have less cognitive ability, which is why we mostly support a level playing field. I would argue that those who support an unequal playing field are more likely to believe in a cognitive difference.

    But you’ve got me curious now. What field of law are you planning on doing? I’ll tell you that you’re going to have a really hard time with criminal law, or anything that requires convincing a jury. Why? Because the vast majority of people in this country are moderates who use logic. They’re going to be just like the people on this board.

  193. @bigWOWO,

    I still find your description of a Black professional vs a professional Black to be totally apt at describing our foremost crybully intellectual here. Anybody who doesn’t agree with his brand of racist rhetoric is labeled “race conservatives” and “anti-Black racists.” Meanwhile, the only true “safe space” that censors everybody else is reappropriate and the comments speak for themselves on there to anyone with any sense of reality.

    Maybe law school actually will be good for James, since the professors and classmates won’t just let playing the race card all day be passing grades – unless of course it’s one of those atrocious SJW campuses. >.<

    On a side note, Berkeley is disgusting outside of its STEM reputation. And this is the birthplace of "free speech movement" and higher-education liberal ideals of democracy and academic freedom.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfcv-pgZUO0

  194. @BigWOWO

    No, you employ the Black Friends defense, BigWOWO. Notice the structure of your argument: X (the political view you hold) is based on / supported by Y (person who happens to be Black), therefore X cannot be anti-Black. This fails as a logical defense because it fails to allow for the possibility that individual Black people may hold or support views that work against or reduce opportunity for or curtail the liberty of Black people generally.

    Further, it tries to use the melanin within individual Black people as a bulwark against intellectual criticism. Your reading of Annette Gordon-Lee doesn’t mean that your denial of Thomas Jefferson’s rape of Sally Hemings has merit. Your affirmative action opposition does not gain immunity from criticism on its racial negativity simply because Ward Connerly, Shelby Steele, and Ben Carson are Black. And yes, when you argue that you are not anti-Black by saying that your friend King is Black, that is the most literal possible use of the Black Friends defense.

    To be clear, to defend yourself against a claim of antiblackness levied against you, you didn’t discuss the merits of your ideas for the Black community. You listed individual Black people who may support some or all of your views. That’s the problem with the Black Friends defense: you don’t evaluate what reasonable Black people may say or think about particular social policies or political phenomena, and you don’t scour the academic literature to understand how Black Americans have been affected by such policy proscriptions in the past. No, you assume that one or two individual Black people with whom you agree immunize you from charges of overt or covert prejudice.

    Is Ben Carson anti-Black? The only reasonable answer there is that Ben Carson is not consistently anti-Black. Carson’s not the sort of anti-Black race conservative who takes issue with meeting new Black people or speaking before Black audiences. He’s the sort of anti-Black race conservative so enamored with his ability to gain social approbation from tony White audiences that he’s vibrantly unconcerned with the impact his policy proscriptions would have on Black citizens of lesser means.

    Carson’s opposition to the ‘affirmatively further fair housing rule’ in the Fair Housing Act given its requirement that municipal governments report statistics on race integration in neighborhoods to the federal government stands in stark opposition to the overwhelming sociological and education policy evidence we have that integrated neighborhoods produce real achievement gap reduction and improved wealth and educational attainment for marginalized Americans.

    But in the mostly White spaces in which Carson travels, integration is anathema to progress. So Carson supports the White wealthy over the proletariat from his own community; to consider this stance anti-Black is just being honest. Affirmative action is preferable for the Black students of academic heft who would be ignored by selective colleges and universities without the policy; When Ward Connerly opposes affirmative action as a result of his authentic libertarianism, the result may be anti-Black, though it is only fair to recognize that in Connerly’s case, appeal to White audiences for personal benefit is not the primary motivation.

  195. @King

    Holding positions on certain issues that would be classified as to my Right (like on affirmative action in education) isn’t really my concern. Like Connerly, I believe you to hold those views without interest in their appeal to others. But the moniker “independent” troubles.

    People who do not support affirmative action in higher education are not independents. They are conservatives, because they oppose what amounts to the minimum federal action possible to encourage students from marginalized populations to enter higher education, a clear economic necessity to navigate global markets. Without an undergraduate degree, individuals shuffle through labor markets with little job security or economic stability, forever buffeted by the whims of the credentialed.

    When marginalized communities are not able to access higher education, their communities fail to enjoy the upward mobility found among other communities, with direct political and social effects. In essence, as long as marginalized communities find their young people ostracized from higher learning citadels, those communities stay marginalized.

    Affirmative action, the bare minimum market intervention that proves politically feasible, works against that permanent despondency. To oppose this is to oppose upward mobility for marginalized communities, and to oppose higher education affirmative action while supporting affirmative action in business seeks, in my view, an education/ employment dynamic that would permanently etch Black, Latinx, and various Asian American communities in a state of permanent economic inferiority. Minority-owned firms from these communities, likely staffed with less credentialed, less prestigious personnel as viewed from mainstream America, would receive direct market interventions from the federal government to maintain their bottom lines, while the American economy would hum through the financial and scientific expertise of businesses staffed by Whites and certain privileged Asian Americans.

    Your view envisions stratified class boundaries roughly analogous to race differences, not a country where race does not hinder individual merit — basically the return to 1950’s normalcy heralded by the modern conservative movement, yet without the overt police-enforced racial separation. So yes King — it’s fair to consider your views on race as we’ve discussed them on this blog conservative.

    This is why BigWOWO uses you as his Black friend of choice when he wishes to defend his perspective from charges of racial insensitivity, King. BigWOWO pretends that a political perspective that requires the maintenance of a Black underclass and a White/ Asian overclass is not problematic, because individual Black people like you agree with it. The ethics of this dynamic people may discuss as they choose.

  196. Snoopy,

    I’ve written probably volumes on this site about how affirmative action and racial preferences and racial bonus points hurt African Americans. I’ve written at length about how the ethnic media’s war on personal responsibility hurts black families. I’ve written about how single motherhood affects inner city culture, and how people who actually live among that group, like Mayor Michael Nutter, work to change the proclivities of that group.

    With you it’s different though. You look down on non-Black people, so I bring up Black people. Not because I think it’s relevant that they’re Black (although the experience does make a difference), but because I know you only listen to Black people. Which is actually fine because they’re saying much of the same things as non-Black people. It’s not a Black Friend defense. It’s a “I know Snoopy only listens to other Black people, so that’s what I bring up” accommodation. Even then, I’m going by what they say, not who they are.

    Look above, and everyone can see that you treat Ben Carson and Ward Connerly differently from how you treat Aardvark or me. You treat King differently too. The only difference here is that Aardvark and I aren’t part of your in-group–or at least that’s the way you see it. I notice how you at least acknowledge subtleties in Carson, Connerly, and King’s position. But with me and Aardvark, you just group us in one large group of Big Bad Whitey and Changs looking to enforce the tyranny of equality on all of Black America. Don’t you see how this is wrong?

    I’ve said this many times, but I’ll say it again. There are only two answers to why Black people in certain areas underperform. (And I remember how it took me YEARS for you to even acknowledge that they underperform–something based on simple numbers–and I’m not going to let you wiggle out of that one.) It’s either the culture (dominant or minority culture or both) or the genes. Or it’s a combination of culture and genes. There are no other explanations. None. Zero. That’s logic at work. You like to throw out the genes thing, which is completely illogical given the work that everyone on this blog has put in to debunk the genes thing. It’s your right, of course, Snoopy, but it’s completely false, based on nothing more than your anger at Whitey and Chang.

  197. Aardvark,

    The interesting thing is that you’ll see tons of Professional Blacks working for civil rights organizations, but hardly any Black Professionals. I’m sure there are some Professional Blacks who have law degrees, but I don’t think there are many. Even guys like Johnny Cochran, who made a living mostly dealing with racial injustice, are highly intelligent, logical Black Professionals who were able to see things from both sides and frame it in a legal context, not just an emotional context. They see all sides and can speak both languages. They aren’t culturally monolingual, mostly because they’ve mastered their field along with the language of logic, fact, and (of course) some showmanship.

    One thing that I’ve noticed about SJWs is that any kind of acknowledgement of the “other side” is viewed as weakness. Any bilingualism is viewed as a form of weakness. That’s the way many of these Professional Blacks get their street cred. The less they listen to others, the more they turn a blind eye to logic, the more the people of their religion respect them.

    I’m not sure how that’s going to fly at law school, though I assume, like you said, that it may not be as strict as you and I think it is. As I said, I’ve never met an illogical lawyer, but I’m sure they exist, and I’m sure Snoopy could find a way to pass. Actually practicing as a lawyer is a whole different story. In order to pass the bar, you have to take a standardized test, which I’ve heard is pretty hard, depending on the state. Plus, Professional Blacks believe standardized tests are racist by their very nature. It would seem to me that to a Professional Black, just sitting for the test would be a violation of his/her moral code.

    In any case, I don’t think you actually have to pass the bar to benefit from a law degree. I think you still can put the JD after your name, and there are probably jobs that require a JD but don’t require passing the bar. I think most of the high-paying jobs require passing the bar, but money’s not everything.

    Hey, if Snoopy can come here and debate logically and coherently after three years of law school, I’ll consider that money well-spent.

  198. Has Snoopy heard of unintended consequences? Just because something seems to work in theory, doesn’t mean it ends up that way.

  199. There are only two answers to why Black people in certain areas underperform. (And I remember how it took me YEARS for you to even acknowledge that they underperform–something based on simple numbers–and I’m not going to let you wiggle out of that one.) It’s either the culture (dominant or minority culture or both) or the genes. Or it’s a combination of culture and genes. There are no other explanations. None. Zero. — BigWOWO

    King, when I suggest that you are insufficiently invested in challenging BigWOWO’s more odious race commentary, material like this comes to mind. BigWOWO believes that only cultural or genetic factors influence Black ‘underperformance’ by which I must assume he means standardized test scores in comparison to those from other racial groups.

    This implies that Black Americans possess either dysfunctional cultural attributes or defective genetics for intellectual pursuits. Both of BigWOWO’s argument options require a support for a fundamental inferiority among Black Americans — for BigWOWO, poverty, want, hunger, social trauma, police harassment, street crime, unsafe housing, inadequate sleep, lack of housing, etc. have no discernible impact on youth test scores. Just culture and genes.

    Obviously, this is nothing more than repackaged Black inferiority dogma. Perhaps this is common among race conservatives; perhaps not. As I said above, I draw a distinction between authentic race conservatism and the “appeal to the rich and prejudiced” variety; BigWOWO’s statement strikes me as the latter. But in moments like this, I’m often alone on this site when I consider this myopic bigotry intellectually dishonest, dependent more on a general disapproval of Black Americans as a people than any reasonable inquiry.

    Frankly King, you don’t have a problem chastising people like ChineseMom when they expose us all to their unthinking prejudice. BigWOWO’s writing the same racist claptrap against Black people; should I be the only one here willing to call this what it is?

  200. Um…did you read where I said “dominant or minority culture or both.”

    All those issues you mention are cultural. I think you’re overstating them, but they’re cultural nonetheless.

    Except for “inadequate sleep.” I’ve never heard that one before. I shudder to think about how much of my money you’re going to spend if people follow that one to its logical conclusion.

  201. jman,

    I don’t think he believes that real life has anything over theory. That’s why I’ve encouraged him to volunteer at poor schools, something which he refuses to do. If he took these fancy theories and tried to apply them, he’d see that not only are his theories wrong, but most of his facts and premises about poor black people are also wrong.

    As Mike Tyson once said, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. Snoopy simply refuses to step into the ring.

  202. Also, I hope everyone knows that I was joking about inadequate sleep. That’s also cultural or genetic. As I said, there are only two possibilities.

  203. … this is nothing more than repackaged Black inferiority dogma
    – snoopy
    Statements such as this quickly kills real discussion.

    …for BigWOWO, poverty, want, hunger, social trauma, police harassment, street crime, unsafe housing, inadequate sleep, lack of housing, etc. have no discernible impact on youth test scores

    Sure, the above might have some effect. But remember, over 70% of Asians are immigrants and many of the points mentioned applied to many of us as well. I was brought up poor and experienced it all except for unsafe housing and police harassment. With regards to the latter, I lived such a “boring” life-style (school–after school activity–work at McDonalds–study and family time–repeat) that most WEEKS I never even saw a single cop.
    Do the kids of immigrants in Korea towns close to urban Black communities in LA get caught in this negative economic cycles as well? I assume that they are subject to very similar conditions.

  204. mmajames:

    Those are very good points, and they are enough to get most curious people to ask, “So how did you do it?”

    Unfortunately, you’re not talking to a curious person. Aardvark was also raised poor. John Doe was not only born poor, but he was born poor in a foreign country!

    That’s my frustration here. There’s no amount of real-world experience that will convince Snoopy. It’s all emotion.

  205. Snoopy,

    This implies that Black Americans possess either dysfunctional cultural attributes or defective genetics for intellectual pursuits. Both of BigWOWO’s argument options require a support for a fundamental inferiority among Black Americans — for BigWOWO, poverty, want, hunger, social trauma, police harassment, street crime, unsafe housing, inadequate sleep, lack of housing, etc. have no discernible impact on youth test scores. Just culture and genes.

    We have been through this a couple of years ago. You forgot? How do you explain that black kids living in rich African American neighborhood don’t do as well academically as Asian kids in the poorest Asian American neighborhood? How do you explain that mean SAT scores of Black kids from wealthiest black family (annul income more than $200K in 2008, more than $70K in 1991) is only at the level of White kids from the poorest White family (family income under $20K in 2008, under $10K in 1991)

    http://www.funnyjunk.com/Sat+scores+with+wealth+comparison/funny-pictures/4891452/
    https://educationrealist.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/satscoresbyraceincome91.jpg

    What else can explain this disparity besides culture or genes?

  206. LOLz. Since James Lamb-Fang likes litmus tests so much, let’s ask the reverse: how many Asian American males does he have for friends? Sure, the excuse of “I have friends who are so and so race” is laughable, but from the Fangs’ social media they have no Asian friends whatsoever, except for a few SJW “colleagues” who are only in it to denigrate Asians further, and it’s always about denigrating AMs and leave the AFs out of their SJW politics.

  207. @bigWOWO,

    Hey, if Snoopy can come here and debate logically and coherently after three years of law school, I’ll consider that money well-spent.

    I think the LSAT and bar exam are mostly jokes designed to filter out people who can pass some basic logic tests. However, from Godel’s incompleteness theorem, even logic can be distorted depending on premises and assumptions.

    In STEM we have the rigors of mother nature telling us what’s passable as science and whether it works or not. However, in sociology it’s all about the feels based on prejudiced dogma.

    Good luck to Mr. Fang and may he even learn something without resorting to constantly playing the race card in classes.

  208. ChineseMom:

    Snoopy remembers. He’s just trying to get a do-over in hopes that the results of the discussion will end up differently. If it’s not genes, culture, or a combination of both that are causing widespread patterns, then what is it? He wants to blame White Racism, but he ignores the fact that that’s cultural too.

    I read your article by Frank Wu. You’ll notice that Frank isn’t coming to you with any words on his experiences with actual immigrants; it’s just a (rough) plan on what he wants to do. Like Snoopy, he hasn’t created an opportunity to engage with these people who are different from him, and so he’s coming from a place of ignorance.

    Unlike Snoopy, he isn’t writing them off…though I wonder why he’s criticizing immigrants without first talking to them. As he said, there are more foreign-born than native-born, so presumably it wouldn’t be too hard to find foreign-born people to talk to.

  209. @ bigWOWO

    As I mentioned, I just don’t have anything to offer you.

    Fair enough. You and Snoopy do have more in common than either of you care to admit.

  210. Re: Blacks in tech

    At Apple, most of the Black engineers are immigrants or their children. And at a Midwestern university that my cousin went to, most of the Black engineering students were immigrants as well. Many of these Black engineers’ families came from poor backgrounds. This is very striking considering that the overwhelming majority of Black Americans are non-immigrants. During the Baltimore riots, I read about an African immigrant there who said that while people die from violence in her home country for political reasons, people die of violence in America for no reason at all.

    Something else I’ve noticed is that Black immigrants (which includes Obama’s family) are accused by “real” slave-descendent Blacks of being “fake” Blacks.

  211. Re: Frank Wu’s notes on Asian immigrants

    Not sure how his article stated anything new. It’s a general fact that every race seeks equality with the race in power but not with other races. And if given the chance, they’d overthrow the ruling elite so they can lord over all other races themselves. It’s the reason why Japanese immigrants would get upset about being denied equal rights in America but never supported equal rights for minorities in Japan. It’s the reason most of them supported Japan’s invasion of China. And it’s the reason Pearl Harbor was bombed. In other news, water is wet.

    I’ve said it already: racism comes down to power. Power is about maximizing your own interests while limiting everyone else’s. Since the end of WW2, Western countries took the historically unprecedented step of becoming anti-nationalist and thus, accepting of immigrants. Immigrants from the third world obviously don’t share the same views but will gladly take advantage of it, anyway.

  212. I’m trying to chillax and catch up, but then clicked on one too many Iron Fist youtube reviews. I’m sure lots of other Asian kids are happy Marvel’s history of anti-AM racism is finally hitting their pocket books.

    Anyhow, with regards to ChineseMom’s borderline racism against “Black Culture,” what exactly is it given African Americans are an extremely diverse community, just like every other demographic out there?

    Seems like Double Toasted culture is more aligned with mainstream social commentaries on fairness and progress rather than the racist Haolewood sponsored hip-hop YG racism:

    https://youtu.be/Vf6yhrHqcbo?t=944

    They also called out Zhang Yimou’s sellout movie Great Wall:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyyX-Pk5BQI

    And Andre “Black Nerd” also called it out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDugT7Mtngo

    Also, I’m calling out James Lamb-Fang and Jenn Fang’s racism and lack of nerd-creds given they never commented on all the more recent mainstream incidents of “yellowface” with these pointless movies. For all the clamor to be recognized as “nerds” the Fangs sure don’t go into the problems with Marvel’s anti-Asian racism.

  213. @Kiwi,

    Every other group seems to maximize their own group’s interests and benefits, except for the Asian SJWs: who only try to maximize their own personal interest and benefits at the cost to other Asians. It’s by playing the house slave they hope to curry favors with the white SJW masters.

    Also, the 1965 immigration policies was due to the projected demographic transition post-WW2 and Europe need to rebuild and lack of population. It’s already inklings of economic transformation to info-tech and the lack of manpower if the US didn’t open up immigration to other ethnic groups it can’t maintain economic supremacy because of competition with the USSR.

  214. Look above, and everyone can see that you treat Ben Carson and Ward Connerly differently from how you treat Aardvark or me. You treat King differently too. — BigWOWO

    Earlier in this conversation I made clear that while both Connerly and Carson present race conservatives, I consider their outlooks different. Connerly’s conservatism does not require White approval in the same manner as Carson’s; though both men advocate positions that I find problematic for the vast majority of Black Americans.

    In contrast, I find the race conservatism you display dependent upon anti-Black prejudice, BigWOWO. For you, race conservative political positions serve to reinforce a social superiority complex you manifest in comparison to Black Americans. This is why you only reference cultural or genetic mechanisms to explain Black student test scores in aggregate comparisons to those from other groups.

    For you, an innate deficiency in comparison to Whites and Asians explains what you term ‘Black underperformance’. Whether this alleged deficiency proves cultural or genetic, the result is the same: a substantive erasure of Blackness as we know it would be required to generate scholastic parity, and therefore acceptance by Whites and Asians. Needless to say, this is incredibly bigoted thinking.

    Further, it’s comically shortsighted. One has to ignore vast differences in social and economic treatment in law and custom between groups to make your claims BigWOWO, and this evidence denial on your part serves a particular political end. To read people here, the poorest immigrants work hard in school and generate amazing grades, so Black students have no excuse.

    Yet when a Black student who generated amazing grades arrives on this site to explain why your position on race differences in scholastic performance illustrates more bias than truth, you shun those rebuttals as so much social justice noise.

    BigWOWO, for you affirmative action presents an unjust government intervention that allows less credible, less studied, less intelligent people to waste our nation’s pipelines to economic stability. Affirmative action in your view stymies the dreams of hardworking, studious Asian Americans in favor of Black Americans, people you believe are, at best, culturally and/or genetically inferior to Asian Americans. To quote culture blogger Phil Yu, That’s racist!

    I’ve never heard Connerly or Carson parrot innate Black inferiority nonsense like the prejudice you write on this blog, BigWOWO. Given this, I would never treat those guys in like manner as I treat you. Connerly’s a race conservative because he’s a center-right libertarian; Carson’s a race conservative because he’s overly enamored with public White praise. You genuinely believe yourself superior to Black Americans, the descendants of chattel slaves in particular.

    King’s immigrant background and race conservative outlook allows him to sidestep this difficulty in you; to me King should explain how he deals with your clear bias against Blacks generally. Aardvark just isn’t important. But the BigWOWO/ Snoopy Jenkins disagreement stems from my disdain toward your clear anti-Black bias, a bias that I believe clouds your judgment on political matters. As Connerly and Carson and King attest, one can disagree with affirmative action without supporting the belief that Black Americans are innately intellectually inferior to Whites and Asians.

    The problem here BigWOWO, is that you disagree with affirmative action because you support the belief that that Black Americans are innately intellectually inferior to Whites and Asians. This is something you should reexamine.

  215. Snoopy,

    Would you mind being a little more specific? I don’t really see ANY difference between what I’m saying and what Connerly/Carson/King are saying. None. I think King and I differ slightly on affirmative action in the workplace (I support it for government but not always for private companies), but that’s really minor. It seems that the only difference is that I’m not Black. You’ll only take advice from a Black person.

    Seriously, point out the differences. We’re saying the exact same thing. Haha…it reminds me of that Comedy Central skit:

    Also, you write:

    The problem here BigWOWO, is that you disagree with affirmative action because you support the belief that that Black Americans are innately intellectually inferior to Whites and Asians.

    Would you mind copying and pasting my words that make you think that I support this view? Other than…your anger at getting whooped by a non-lawyer? I’ve already provided a link that shows exactly the opposite. I’ll post it again in case you missed it:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2010/09/podcast-with-aor-king-and-alpha-on-eugenics-hbd-and-racism/

    Again, all lot of these attacks seem to me baseless. Accusing that Korean guy who defended his store of racism, accusing Peter Liang of racism, accusing Darren Wilson of racism, accusing the cops who arrested Eric Garner of racism, accusing me of racism…it’s not just me, and I know you’re practicing a policy of Equal Opportunity Attack Whitey and Chang. We’re not Black. Asians especially are easy targets of vitriol because we have less political power by which we can fight back.

    But from an ethical point of view, speaking as a common person to a perspective LAWYER, do you have any evidence that I support the views that you think I support?

  216. Kiwi wrote:

    It’s the reason why Japanese immigrants would get upset about being denied equal rights in America but never supported equal rights for minorities in Japan. It’s the reason most of them supported Japan’s invasion of China. And it’s the reason Pearl Harbor was bombed.

    Wait a second…Japanese IMMIGRANTS bombed Pearl Harbor?

  217. But from an ethical point of view, speaking as a common person to a perspective LAWYER, do you have any evidence that I support the views that you think I support? — BigWOWO

    BigWOWO, I think you mean ‘prospective’.

    Prospective means expected or expecting and is used in the context of something that is likely to happen in the future. It is always an adjective. Perspective is a point of view or an attitude. It is always a noun. — writingexplained.org

    But to answer the main question, several times in this conversation you’ve described Black American ‘underperformance’ as dependent on either cultural or genetic factors alone. None of that has been parroted by any other noted Black conservative writer, to my knowledge.

    As I’ve described repeatedly, that assumption on your part reflects a deep-seated belief you hold, that Black Americans are innately intellectually inferior to Whites and Asians. Again, this belief is not parroted by Connerly, Carson, Steele, and other Black conservatives, who base their affirmative action opposition in a desire to remove racial consideration from government and other large institutions and industries.

    Given this, your perspectives on the achievement gap and affirmative action make clear that your opposition to the latter centers around your bigoted explanation of the former. You lack a Black conservative to share your anti-Black prejudice, BigWOWO; there’s an ideological gulf between the person who believes that Black Americans are inherently intellectually inferior to Whites (based on culture or genes) and the person who believes that basic fairness demands colorblind collegiate admissions. Both people can oppose affirmative action, but both need not support the odious social or biological determinism required to support your position.

  218. Snoopy:

    Good catch on my mistyping. You’ve got what it takes to become a paralegal! Or a proofreader!

    Now let’s work on the logic because that’s what’s going to make you a good lawyer.

    I asked you to copy and paste my words for a reason. And you didn’t. Can you copy and paste where I said it was genetic? Or that it’s innate? Can you show me People’s Exhibit A?

    If you can’t, you owe me an apology.

    But to answer the main question, several times in this conversation you’ve described Black American ‘underperformance’ as dependent on either cultural or genetic factors alone.

    Again, I didn’t say genetic factors. I think it’s dependent on cultural factors. That’s what ChineseMom has said as well. And yes, that’s exactly what King, Carson, Steele, Nutter, and all the rest of the people we’ve discussed are saying.

    You turn around the culture, and all the problems will disappear. Nothing innate or genetic about that.

  219. Aardvark:

    Anyhow, with regards to ChineseMom’s borderline racism against “Black Culture,” what exactly is it given African Americans are an extremely diverse community, just like every other demographic out there?

    I just want to make sure we’re on the same page. Aside from the description of “Black Culture” as a monolith, and maybe aside from her style of delivery, I think we’re on the same page when it comes to the issues of affirmative action, underperformance, underrepresentation, and everything else.

    Am I correct on this?

    I’m trying to understand where we share common views. ChineseMom is 100% correct about the racism against Chinese immigrants, and I want to make sure that we don’t have similar misunderstandings.

  220. Again, ChineseMom is a strong supporter of affirmative action. I’m a firm proponent of eliminating affirmative action. King supports it only in hiring; I support it in some areas of hiring.

    But none of that is really important. What’s important is that we agree on facts and that we can understand each other’s opinions and where they come from.

    That’s the problem that we run into with SJW’s. They don’t believe in objective fact or objective observation.

  221. Ah, Snoopy, I get it. I see where you ran into your logical problems with genetic vs. cultural.

    Here’s a practice exercise: It’s either AM or PM in Portland. It can’t be anything else, but I’m looking at my watch and it’s 1:08 PM. I declare that it’s 1:08 PM but that it can only be AM or PM.

    Now did I just say it’s AM?

  222. BigWOWO, do I detect a note of envy from you in regards to my acceptance to law school? Recognize that you have nothing you can teach me about logic or how to practice law.

    Seriously, my facility with logical reasoning proved effective enough to gain acceptance into a top-tier American law school. This same logic points out repeatedly in this thread that your insistence on blaming ‘Black underperformance’ on only two possible factors (culture or genetics) requires a determinism that strikes me as prejudiced.

    To argue that ‘Black culture’ in whole or in part contributes to the achievement gap argues that Black American cultural distinctiveness harms Black American scholastic output. Were it possible to disaggregate Black cultural influences from the effects of environmental and political influences on Black youth, you would still need to determine the point when Black cultural influence harms Black studiousness in the aggregate. This is not possible, especially given your indifference to the scholarly literature on the subject.

    To argue that ‘Black genes’ in whole or in part contribute to the achievement gap argues that Black American genetic distinctiveness harms Black American scholastic output. More than simply writing off any possibility that Black students may compete in the global marketplace, all things being equal, this option suggests that Black intellectual capacity proves inferior to that of Whites and Asians. To support this claim, you need to determine the genetic mechanism that impedes Black American neural networks from the efficiency displayed by Whites and Asians. Again, this is not possible, especially given your indifference to the scholarly literature on the subject.

    My problem is that both options are clearly racist, yet you insist that both are valid explanations for not only the achievement gap, but for ongoing resistance to affirmative action. You prize your anti-Black prejudice over scholarly literature, basic logic, and common sense.

    BigWOWO, you present a false dichotomy: to suggest that ‘Black underperformance’ in comparison to Whites and Asians must results from either cultural or genetic factors ignores the many other alternatives that may explain the achievement gap. As I’ve said repeatedly, you improperly deny the possibility that environmental or social or even financial factors could alter student scholastic performance; your major argument in this conversation rests upon a logical fallacy.

    But no matter. Black Americans like myself put the lie to illogical prejudice about our intellectual capabilities daily. No, you aren’t a eugenicist; you just believe that innate Blackness (whether cultural or genetic) holds Black Americans back from the scholastic success enjoyed by Whites and Asians. If you consider this distinction noteworthy you make clear how easily the ‘me-first!’ race tribalism you endorse devolves into intolerance.

  223. An interesting article by an Chinese American SJW elite. The author is very arrogant, racist and ignorant about immigrants. I think Chinese immigrants have made an impact on these Asian American SJWs, made them embarrassed, irrelevant and look bad in the circle they want to be accepted 🙂 . They feel threatened.
    – ChineseMom

    Hmmm, a “Private Note To Asian-American Activists…”. Did he first publish this in AAPI sites (if it meant for their eyes) or is the target audience in his head actually mainstream whites? — He admitted that this was the case for his coming book about Vincent Chin anyways. Why is that I always get the feeling that commentaries about Asian Americans from these SJWs always have white audiences in mind foremost? — even though they would lead their articles off with words such as “My fellow Asian brothers/sisters ….”.

  224. Snoopy:

    You’ve got me confused with Kiwi. He’s the one whose envious of you, but not because you’re going to law school; it’s because you’re a Protected Minority whom everyone feels sorry for.

    To argue that ‘Black genes’ in whole or in part contribute to the achievement gap argues that Black American genetic distinctiveness harms Black American scholastic output.

    Yeah, but for the fiftieth time, I didn’t say that. If I did, post it up. If I didn’t, you owe me an apology. C’mon, Snoopy, man up. I didn’t say that. I’m asking you to post it up, but I know you can’t because I never said it. So just go ahead and apologize. Be a man.

    BigWOWO, you present a false dichotomy: to suggest that ‘Black underperformance’ in comparison to Whites and Asians must results from either cultural or genetic factors ignores the many other alternatives that may explain the achievement gap.

    Let’s make this easy. First let me quote ChineseMom:

    We have been through this a couple of years ago. You forgot? How do you explain that black kids living in rich African American neighborhood don’t do as well academically as Asian kids in the poorest Asian American neighborhood? How do you explain that mean SAT scores of Black kids from wealthiest black family (annul income more than $200K in 2008, more than $70K in 1991) is only at the level of White kids from the poorest White family (family income under $20K in 2008, under $10K in 1991)

    http://www.funnyjunk.com/Sat+scores+with+wealth+comparison/funny-pictures/4891452/
    https://educationrealist.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/satscoresbyraceincome91.jpg

    What else can explain this disparity besides culture or genes?

    So let’s open the floor. If you think it’s something that isn’t culture or genes, let us all know what it is. As ChineseMom said, we already went over this two years ago.

  225. Also, I don’t really consider getting into law school a major achievement. There’s just so much at play–who your parents are, whether you get bonus points for being of a certain race (and as we’ve discussed before, this is significant), whether you’re a legacy, whether you get bonus points for extracurriculars, etc. I feel this way even in my own aspirations–I have more respect for the dude who speaks Japanese and delivers a powerful speech without schooling than the dude who gets a PhD in Japanese from Harvard.

    You’ll notice that I always refer to Dr. Ben Carson’s separation of twins and his post as head of pediatric neurology. I don’t say, “Wow, that guy graduated from a top school.” To me, that’s meaningless since lots of people graduate from top schools. Lots of stupid people graduate from top schools. But stupid people can’t separate conjoined twins.

    That’s not to say that I don’t congratulate you, James. But I see this as a step to something possible, not as something big in itself.

  226. One more comment: you’ll note that I also don’t say anything about Ben Carson’s appointment as Housing Secretary. To me, stuff like college acceptance or political appointments are so arbitrary that they mean nothing. Now if he does something good as Housing Secretary, I would compliment him on that. But just getting into a position or going to school…to me that sets the bar really low.

    Keep in mind that this is coming from someone who has at times advocated skipping school:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2012/12/dropping-out-of-college-vs-just-not-going/

    But that’s just me. That’s not to say that there’s anything wrong with disagreeing with me there.

  227. @ bigWOWO

    Wait a second…Japanese IMMIGRANTS bombed Pearl Harbor?

    Obviously, no. If you were reading my comments closely (and once again, you’ve demonstrated you haven’t), you would have understood that Asian immigrants carry racist attitudes from their home countries to their adoptive countries.

    The fact is neither you nor Snoopy have anything to offer. Where Snoopy sees racism in almost everything, you see next to no racism in anything. The only commonality is neither of you believe in doing anything about actual Asian isssues. As much as you like to see each other as polar opposites, you both are just two sides of the same coin. You’ve known each other a lot longer than I have either of you, so in a way, it makes sense. It is what it is.

  228. @ aardvark

    Also, the 1965 immigration policies was due to the projected demographic transition post-WW2 and Europe need to rebuild and lack of population.

    If it were that simple, Japan would have opened its borders long ago. Immigration policy has more to do with race. In Japan, kokutai ideology maintains that Japanese are a special race and need to protect their “Japaneseness” by keeping their country “pure” of other races. John Doe is an excellent example of that mindset, with his attitude towards Eurasians. In contrast, countries like Germany allow millions of immigrants to pour in from Third World countries because Westerners have given up on maintaining nationalist ideologies. But with Trump and Brexit, that may all change.

  229. Japanese are the most racist Asians, as you know from WW2. They rather make robots and automate everything and worship white people in all their media than help other Asian neighbors; let alone atone for WW2 atrocities.

    Germany has sincerely learned from its past and does everything it can to be the world’s most democratic country right now.

  230. I believe in Affirmative Action in the workplace because it breaks up old, stale and lazy habits. The easiest thing to do is to pull directly from one’s own environment. If we need a secretary, just ask around and get one who looks, sounds, and lives like you do. And if most of those who can hire are white, then it just perpetuates the favoring of fellow Whites for employment. Affirmative Action gives some incentive toward realizing that you might have to go outside of your environment and hire someone who does not look like or live like you do. This incentive is important in a society that was built upon the idea of using non-Whites as lower-class laborers to the White majority.

    In education it is important to get all groups to perform at the same levels of academic achievement. The emphasis should be on the parity achievement, not a parity in outcome, regardless of the uneven levels of achievement.

  231. “We’ve gone over quite a lot about how many (mostly white) people who claim to be ‘left-wing’ can be just as bigoted towards asians (asian-looking men especially) as anyone on the far right, they’re just better at hiding it. And sometimes they don’t even hide it like the the oscars ceremony where a bunch of prominent american liberal role models launched unfounded bigotry towards asians for the world to see. And yes, I definitely understand that “liberal” areas like the SF Bay Area can be pretty fucking bigoted towards asian-looking men both in terms of dating and career glass ceiling. And to add insult to injury there’s obviously the phony asian female ‘progressives’ we all know about who join these white ‘liberals’ in their rhetoric.
    All that being said, this hypocritical treatment by many liberals (who claim to promote universal tolerance toward all minorities but are instead selective) is probably a big reason why it strangely seems you have too many reactionary asian/hapa men who join the white-dominated alt-right anti-sjw brigade present around the internet. I dislike that these asian/hapa men decided to go that way, but that’s probably the reasoning.
    I took a different route. I went even further left. Reading actual leftist literature and discussions, it’s pretty interesting to see that most of them have the same misgivings against today’s phony modern liberals that many of us asian/hapas do. Many leftists also dislike how these liberals are only selectively, rather than universally, progressive. Many leftists are also disgusted at the mainstream liberal (obviously including phony asian ‘progressives’ too) support of corporate neoliberalism mixed with non-intersectional identity politics that often defines their actions and results. I know many here regard these phony anti-asian ‘SJW progressives’ as leftists, but they really aren’t. And they really aren’t even SJWs too, because many actual ‘SJWs’ would pick out their flawed fake liberalism just as much as we can.
    I still think everything being said, the actual left are our natural best allies considering they’re just as much against the white supremacy that many fake liberals and also many WMAF couples push. Obviously phony progressive corporatists will try to gaslight and otherwise shut down our arguments, but go further on the left (various types of socialists, be they moderate socialists, anarchists, communists, etc) and you see much of the same arguments against white supremacy/neo-colonialism, phony liberals, and other topics that we discuss. They’re just doing it from a more universalist standpoint whereas we tend to approach these topics from the hapa/asian standpoint.”

    “I didn’t even know you could go any further left than SJWs (still don’t think so) but it was a pretty smart route to explore. I actually agree with many aspects of SJW activism (to some degree): calling out micro-aggressions and rape culture, respecting transgender identities, pro-mental healthcare, Black women’s natural hair movement, etc. So I still consider myself a bit of an SJW, or at least I almost became one. Unfortunately, their “you’re either with us or you’re against us” mentality is what drove me away. On top of mislabeling half-white criminals of color as full white, the idea that Black people can’t be racist was the last straw for me, even as I tried for months to rationalize that idea. I knew I couldn’t trust Asian American SJWs, as they are too female-oriented and therefore insist that Asians are “privileged”. Both the anti-asianness and anti-whiteness within the SJW community were quite toxic for me (Eurasians were actually being told to check their white privilege by people who knew they were mixed).
    I know about the “real leftists” that you’re talking about. They are the ones who would say “All Lives Matter” or something of the sort and actually mean it, while fake White liberals only care about appearing non-racist. I do agree that some of our best allies are on the moderate left, while some conservatives/right-leaning people can be great, too.
    Could you tell us where online could we find these potential allies?
    permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply
    [–]hISpvGl0F64c9BCukZKBwmaw hapa son, wish i chose a real username[S] 11 points 2 months ago*
    It is pretty easy to go further left than these mainstream fake liberal ‘SJWs’ (which includes a lot of these asian-american ‘progressives’). One big thing about them like you mentioned is the constant focus on identity (and in a seemingly non-intersectional way) compared to issues of economic justice and intersectionality. I mentioned intersectionality because a fake anti-asian ‘liberal’ will just say we’re full of crap because of male privilege or whatever, because they only focus on one identity many of us have (male) while excluding the other ones that people most often judge us more by (asian/hapa). A more real leftists sees that there are many qualities one has and just because they’re male, being asian we’re also very negatively affected by the system and have valid reasons to speak against it.
    I definitely am behind justice against bigotry towards minority identities and agree that we need a lot of action on that front too, but like you mentioned a lot of them focus only on parts of it at a surface level just to appear good but at the end of the day still support the same corporatist oppression as any right winger, they instead just want the oppressors to be more diverse rather than white men.

  232. Zhenshina,

    That “Black people can’t be racist” thing has been among the most destructive ideas that has come out of the Far Left. Again, it’s all about personal responsibility.

    King,

    Actually, the more I hear your ideas, the more I think we agree more than disagree.

    1. In academics, as you said, all groups need to perform at the same level. It’s the only fair way of doing it. It’s also the only fair way that employers can make a decision on whom they want to hire.

    2. In hiring, I think we’re the product of our own industries.

    So I’ve worked in a few different areas, with most of my career being in mortgage sales. In mortgage sales, there was some subtle racism against Black people, but from what I could see, there was no racism in hiring Black people, at least not for the frontman/frontwoman jobs. That is to say that if you were a Black person with the right credentials, you’d probably be more likely to get hired than a similar Whitey or Chang. Why? Because there is a lot of money to be made in the Black community, and it’s generally accepted that Black customers are more likely to buy from Black salespeople and that Black salespeople would know where to find Black customers (this is obviously not always true, since some Black people only like to read about other Black people from the safety and comfort of that big Ivory Tower). This helps diversify the client base, which is very important from the perspective of regulations. So from my perspective, there was no reason for affirmative action in financial sales.

    In IT tech, the company I worked for was quite diverse. Black people did everything, and they went far. One Black woman learned UNIX all by herself and became the chief UNIX lead, and another Black woman became head of the NOC. There were (I think) five Black guys in my section, and they were almost all highly capable in IT. The company eventually went under because of the incompetent White CEO, but while we were up, there was no reason for an affirmative action policy because we had LOTS of minorities.

    In software (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Salesforce, AND smaller software companies), it’s a different kind of setup. You can see what mmjames wrote above. Despite what the Snoopys and Jacksons and Sharptons say, and despite the fact that these companies often find themselves in the crosshairs of SJW activism, there is virtually no racism against Black people in these kinds of companies. Most of the workers are moderately liberal (though not SJW liberal), and they would naturally go URM if they could. Rather than it being a matter of racism, it is a matter of there not being a pipeline of qualified candidates with good credentials. It’s not just hard for African Americans; it’s hard for ALL Americans, which is why Americans of all colors complain about not being hired by these companies in favor of the H1B. Most of these jobs require college degrees, and the companies prefer specialists rather than generalists–which means looking at the top comp sci graduates here, or looking overseas. These companies tend to have lots of affirmative action–they’ll bend over backward to get URMs in the door–but the problem is that affirmative action policies are so strong and there is so much pressure to hire URMs, that these companies usually do one of two things:

    1. Hire Nigerians and sponsor them for an H1B. These Nigerian programmers are usually REALLY good and worth every penny, or
    2. Hire URMs who are not qualified in order to make the company look good. These people struggle in the environment, and it’s not because of racism. It’s similar to what we see at elite colleges (based on the GPA numbers presented by Espenshade).

    Of course this doesn’t apply to all URM hires–there are strong employees of all races. But it happens often enough, which one would expect, given those numbers that we’ve discussed with respect to comp sci graduates.

    That’s mostly why I’m mostly against affirmative action in hiring, although not 100%. In some industries, it’s a problem with the pipeline, not the hiring. In looking at #2 above, I think people need to ask whether this a good long-term strategy. I think #1 is an excellent strategy–it debunks racism while getting some different races in the mix AND bringing over some gifted immigrants–but I don’t know if that’s going to satisfy the Social Justice Warriors.

    As a funny aside, Ben Efsaneyim recently linked this South Asian American software CEO who talked about “racism” in his industry:

    https://medium.com/message/the-tech-diversity-story-thats-not-being-told-9a36fb40530f#.l39fwpxb5

    Of course if you go to the Fog Creek Software site and look at the pictures, you’ll see that Anil also has hired zero Black people. I think there’s one South Asian dude in the pictures. Clearly despite Anil’s chiding and insults against Asian Americans, there weren’t enough Black people in NEW YORK CITY to allow him to walk the walk based on his own professed beliefs:

    http://www.fogcreek.com/careers

    Now in certain other private fields like commercial art or publishing or media, it probably makes sense to have some kind of affirmative action policy, especially given that there are untapped markets that people are passing over. As you said, without making POLICY changes in these areas, changes will never come. I support affirmative action here.

    Then there are other fields where policy changes MAY make sense. Law is one of these fields. I think it would make sense for affirmative action in these areas, but I don’t know enough about these fields to comment.

  233. Indian FOBs in “IT” are some of the most racist anti-East Asian people I’ve met, and they’re blatant about it since “culturally” they just don’t care. But yet they constantly bemoan about British Imperialist treatment, but never even heard of the Opium Wars.

    https://www.city-journal.org/html/diversity-or-excellence-15057.html

    This author is missing the point about US education system isn’t meant to create independent thinkers and intellectuals, but rather sheeple that conforms and be brainwashed by the system. It’s far cheaper to import foreign graduate students and H1B workers rather than spend the money on social infrastructure.

    Anyhow, NYC should actually put their money where their mouth is and spend on “URMs” in under-served communities rather than just politics and bickering and dumping on Asians. But of course, to actually implement social progress and change would involve risk and spending money where it’s actually needed instead on the cronyism corruption of NYC government.

    It’s just political bickering as usual, and Asians are the easiest targets and they won’t go after legacy white students.

  234. @ WOWO

    I think there are still a lot of companies who have a legacy benefit from the American apartheid era. They were basically formed in a vacuum of competition from other races and cultures because the defacto rules of business did not allow for non-whites to succeed on the grand level.

    Gerations later, it’s not fair to say, “OK now is your chance! Get out there and outperform Coca Cola or McDonalds” The advantage genie is already out of the bottle. So it only makes sense that adjustments have to be made if anyone is now ever going to catch up. So you incentivize minority businesses and hiring. (AKA Affirmative Action). That makes sense to me.

  235. The fact is neither you nor Snoopy have anything to offer. Where Snoopy sees racism in almost everything, you see next to no racism in anything. The only commonality is neither of you believe in doing anything about actual Asian isssues. As much as you like to see each other as polar opposites, you both are just two sides of the same coin. You’ve known each other a lot longer than I have either of you, so in a way, it makes sense. It is what it is. — Kiwi

    I disagree with this, in large measure because I support increased political participation from Asian Americans. It’s not clear to me that BigWOWO does. However, I don’t believe that increased Asian American political participation benefits Black Americans like myself in any way, so my support for increased Asian American political participation stems from the idea that America works both more justly and more efficiently when all Americans participate in civic life.

    We need vastly improved voter participation from Asian Americans; when reactionary voices speak against expanding health insurance or argue that illegal immigrants vote in Presidential elections, we need Asian Americans to explain their experiences with our health care and electoral systems, to illustrate what works and what does not. And liberals like myself have to be prepared for reactionary voices within Asian America who respond to today’s newcomers with a derision only Sean Hannity could love.

    I prefer that people of color involve themselves in American civic life, but I’m not a race nationalist. I expect voters to recognize themselves as members of distinct cultural and racial communities, but not to govern every public aspect of their lives in collusion with the mainstream political opinion of those communities. You present yourself in this space as an Asian American nationalist, Kiwi; where I believe we disagree is the degree to which such nationalism proves useful to advance civil and political rights for Asian Americans generally.

    At some point coalition politics prove necessary for social movement advancement, and race or ethnic nationalism stands in start contrast to such perspectives, as the 1st-gen Chinese Americans in the article I link above learn now. Most Asian American political groups endorse sanctuary cities, and recognize the threat to social order and Asian American public safety found in President Trump’s immigration stances. The 1st-gen reactionary opposition to sanctuary cities unveils yet again a strain of overt conservatism within Asian America that requires address.

    At some point, someone needs to pull the conservative Chinese American first-generation immigrant aside and explain how their sanctuary city opposition results in more people maimed, beaten, and deported by federal immigration personnel, a result that endangers people of color generally, given the White supremacy that influence so much of American public life.

    So in your interest to promote and advance Asian American issues Kiwi, perhaps you could spend some time trying to discern whether the arch-conservative stances promoted by some 1st-gen Asian American populations have helped your cause.

  236. James Lamb-Fang is SJW anti-Asian racist. Any sense of the word “liberal” is a bastardization of true liberal ideals and progressive thought.

    The fact simply being married to an AF gives him the gall and ego to talk down to Asian Americans and telling Asian Americans how to think and how to feel on issues, lest you be called “anti-Black racist” by the Fangs is indicative of the Strom Thurmond level of paternalistic condescension. SAD!

  237. Snoopy,

    At some point, someone needs to pull the conservative Chinese American first-generation immigrant aside and explain how their sanctuary city opposition results in more people maimed, beaten, and deported by federal immigration personnel, a result that endangers people of color generally, given the White supremacy that influence so much of American public life.

    Could you explain how could sanctuary city opposition result in more people maimed, beaten? If law requires deportation of illegal immigrants, what’s wrong with deportation? If you don’t like it, why don’t you change the law.

    As far as I can see, Democrats policy of supporting illegal immigrants is for the purpose of getting more Latino votes, not really for the caring of humanity. Besides illegal immigrants, the beneficiaries of this policy are Democrats politicians and upper middle – class who use illegal immigrants as cheap labor. In my area where it is not easy to find illegal Latinos, people hire black or white people to do their yard work, house cleaning, home remodeling and etc. Whereas my friends and relatives who live in California and big East coast cities hire Latinos to do these kind of job at much lower price. So in my view, this policy is hurting working class Blacks and Whites. In long run, I think Democrats probably will drive more white and black working class people to GOP. This Black Trump supporter is one good example:
    https://twitter.com/Pamela_Moore13/status/845053689702309889

  238. Here in the 626 the Chinese FOBs and ABC and other Asians hire Asian illegal “immigrants” to do menial labor jobs. That’s progress!

  239. aardvark,

    Are you sure there are enough Asian illegal “immigrants” to hire? 20 year ago, there were a lot of Chinese students and their spouses working in Chinese restaurants illegally, but now you barely can find one. Chinese restaurants in your 626 area used to hire Chinese or Korean only. It was about 10 years ago on my trip to LA, I was surprised to find that they hired a lot of Latinos.

  240. Could you explain how could sanctuary city opposition result in more people maimed, beaten? — ChineseMom

    Immigration officials rarely preserve the well-being of people deemed to reside in the United States illegally in practice. Reports of elongated detentions, stress positions, medical treatment denial, and other hazards abound from people subject to American custody.

    Sanctuary cities attempt to prevent federal government overreach in this arena by denying requests from the federal government to detain undocumented immigrants. Further, the legal process is not as simple as the law ‘requires deportation of illegal immigrants’; I encourage you to check out the Washington Post article I’ve linked above.

    Further, immigration concerns need not be partisan issues, but both major parties have crafted stances on immigration designed to appeal to certain voters. The Democrats do not have a policy of ‘supporting illegal immigrants’; the last Democratic President dampened multiple border violations in ways his predecessors did not by redefining removal policy, and his targeted removal approach sought criminals, not hardworking people with established community ties. Still, immigration rights activists continue to take issue with President Obama’s immigration record.

    In contrast, much of the modern conservative stance on undocumented immigrants reflects a hostility to this population based on racial and linguistic differences. Republican Party nativism during Presidential elections hopes for voter support by demonizing immigrants, and the spike in hate crimes documented since President Trump’s election displays the human cost paid when Americans normalize intolerance.

    The problem here is that government sanctioned violence against a particular group or class of people proves dangerous when unmoored from basic ethics. To oppose a sanctuary city is to endorse local communities where federal ICE personnel scour public life in search of illegal immigrants to detain, assisted by the same municipal law enforcement that requires community support to foster public safety. The violence that normally accompanies such detainment encourages undocumented persons to hide from all government, whether federal, state, or local. This leads to social service breakdowns and law enforcement concentration in low income, minority communities.

  241. @ChineseMom,

    10 years ago most Chinese were still brainwashed/infatuated with the 2008 Olympics propaganda. Now that the honeymoon is over and reality sets in, there are tons of Chinese all trying to get here.

    Do you know what are the top 3 “mistress villages” in the 626? Or where to find all the pregnant anchor baby parents trying to give birth here in the SGV?

    True, while most restaurants have Mexican/Hispanic/Latino workers, there are still other menial labor jobs that require Chinese speakers. I’ve met a few Mexicans who speak fluent Chinese and lots of Asians who speak fluent Spanish here, but nonetheless it’s much more likely “illegal” Chinese immigrants are going to fill in the roles for Chinese speaking positions. It’s basic logic.

  242. James Lamb-Fang just can’t get away from the SJW LIEberal propaganda talking points and paternalistic condescension. Mexicans and other central American Hispanics/Latinos are smart and are free willed agents of their own destiny.

    There are lots of recent “stats” of how Mexican “illegals” have actually gone down since Mexico’s economy have picked up in the past 10 years, thanks to global trade and general rise of Global South nations with the general economic rise of BRICS countries.

    Most “illegals” here in the SW states in recent years are from El Salvador and other destabilized countries the CIA helped to orchestrate.

  243. “attempt to prevent federal government overreach in this arena by denying requests from the federal government to detain undocumented immigrants.”

    I’m sorry, but a more Orwellian example of “Doublespeak” could hardly be offered. How is enforcing the standing immigration law of the country a government overreach? And aren’t “undocumented immigrants” simply people who have broken immigration laws and are therefore in the country illegally? Why all the euphemisms?

  244. aardvark,

    10 years ago most Chinese were still brainwashed/infatuated with the 2008 Olympics propaganda. Now that the honeymoon is over and reality sets in, there are tons of Chinese all trying to get here.

    Do you know what you are talking about? If you not sure, go home and ask your parents. Don’t just assume things that you have no idea about.

    but nonetheless it’s much more likely “illegal” Chinese immigrants are going to fill in the roles for Chinese speaking positions

    Are housing cleaning, lawn mowing, home remodeling the roles that need Chinese speaker for Chinese FOBs and ABC? Do you personally know any Chinese FOBs or ABCs hired Asian illegal “immigrants” to do menial labor jobs at their home?

  245. @King,

    By it’s very nature of what Trumps regime plans on for ICE to INTRUDE into private lives of the public WITHOUT due process and warrants is considered government over-reach. Indeed, Sheriff Joe Arpaio would look like Mary Poppins compared to the Trump regime’s planned UNAUTHORIZED invasion of privacy of US citizens by harassing the public (mostly based on skin color) for citizenship status.

    While it is true that “undocumented” immigrants simply by their nature have broken the law by overstaying their visas or “illegally” crossed the borders, you still would have to make the distinction between what types of “crimes” they’ve committed. The NPR LIEberal spiel is that they commit far less crimes than native born Americans, however it’s for violent offenses.

    Let the punishment fit the crime, as the legal system should be.

  246. ChineseMom,

    Were you even in China/Beijing during the run up to the 2008 Olympics? Because I was there and seen firsthand the psychosis that went on.

    By the same logic, are you in the 626 like I am and live here and pay taxes here like me?

    Are housing cleaning, lawn mowing, home remodeling the roles that need Chinese speaker for Chinese FOBs and ABC? Do you personally know any Chinese FOBs or ABCs hired Asian illegal “immigrants” to do menial labor jobs at their home?

    Yes. Some LEGAL Chinese FOBs prefer to hire Chinese speakers, that’s the James Lamb-Fang touted “tribalism” at work in some 626 places. I know of several “illegal” FOBs who overstayed their visas and are working under the table for Chinese and white employers.

    Obviously, I’m not going to name names and you’ll just have to take my word for it, lest you’re a James Lamb-Fang in reverse and only spew your own prejudices about Chinese being middle/upper class high-tech workers BS.

  247. I have to agree with King.

    Snoopy, how is enforcing existing laws an example of government “overreach?” It’s the same deal with the language you use in other areas. If you’re a cop, how is shooting a guy for trying to grab your gun an example of (I think your term was) “state-sanctioned execution?”

    All this doublespeak.

    As for me, I’m not surprised that lots of Chinese immigrants support cracking down on illegal immigration, regardless of my own personal stance. The point is that unlike these Asian SJWs who can’t speak a word of Chinese, I understand where these immigrants are coming from. Many of these people waited years to get into this country, dealing with all the legal hurdles and expenses.

  248. @bigWOWO and King,

    “Enforcement” is a slippery term, since there are tons of laws on the books that don’t get “enforced” everyday – depending on how much of a douche the cop feels like being.

    Obviously James Lamb-Fang is being his usual Chicken-Little SJW tantrums again; however, the procedures of ICE is problematic when it goes around UNJUSTIFIED and UNWARRANTED asking law abiding citizens to prove their citizenship status willy-nilly. This is tantamount to violating the Bill of Rights on unreasonable search and seizure.

    Obviously, once there’s been trials and prosecution of actual crimes and immigration status is brought up, then ICE can do its job and follow the established immigration laws. There’s no disputing this aspect of immigration, but it’s the “random” questioning of brown people that any decent person can’t get behind in a democracy.

  249. aardvark,

    Were you even in China/Beijing during the run up to the 2008 Olympics? Because I was there and seen firsthand the psychosis that went on.

    Yes, I was in Beijing that summer. Many immigrants who lived in the US for years still don’t have much understanding of this country. You think that just being in China for a couple of weeks would make you understand China and psychosis of Chinese?

    By the same logic, are you in the 626 like I am and live here and pay taxes here like me?

    I happened to live in LA for many years and am quite familiar with your 626 area. What is your point? Anything I said is wrong? .

  250. How is enforcing the standing immigration law of the country a government overreach? — King

    The short answer here involves the fact that federal immigration agents often rely on local judicial and law enforcement systems to capture and detain undocumented immigrants, even though those personnel often have no knowledge that an individual has broken any law whatsoever. It’s not always easy to determine whether an individual resides in the United States illegally, and the repeated desire of federal ICE agents for local police to detain and transfer individuals ICE believe violate our civil immigration statutes force local law enforcement to ask as de facto immigration agents.

    This means that when undocumented immigrants face exploitation by employers or domestic violence by spouses, many refuse to report these crimes to local police, fearing deportation. In the aggregate, without focusing on the less-than-ideal treatment many undocumented immigrants face in ICE custody, state and local governments find a reasonable tension between support for enforcement of federal law and complicity in a system that encourages silence before injustice. In response, many cities have declared themselves sanctuaries, and directed their officials not to comply with federal requests to detain and transfer undocumented immigrants.

    Put another way, immigration enforcement that encourages less safety in a cities’ neighborhoods is no immigration enforcement worth defense. Certain cities and towns have rejected the premise that they should personally direct their personnel to comply with ICE requests for detention and transfer, or to train police officers to inquire about a person’s immigration status. This is a reasonable response.

  251. If you’re a cop, how is shooting a guy for trying to grab your gun an example of (I think your term was) “state-sanctioned execution?” — BigWOWO

    It is reasonable to support the notion that police have the right to defend themselves when they determine themselves to be in mortal danger, as do we all. The problems arise when it is not reasonable to conclude that a police officer was in mortal danger, even though the officer herself may feel she is.

    But no matter how reasonable people may disagree on such matters, the state trains police officers in deescalation techniques and the reasonable use of force. I use the term ‘state-sanctioned execution’ to describe instances where law enforcement officers kill civilians without due process, in circumstances where the law enforcement officer’s life is not threatened. Usually in these cases, the officers involved face next to no lasting administrative or criminal penalties.

    Eric Garner and Akai Gurley and Oscar Grant and Philando Castile and Alton Sterling died in such circumstances, as have many, many others. Most citizens support the police involved in such matters, and since that reaction cannot be divorced from anti-Black prejudice within a White supremacist nation, it’s clear to me that much of that public support for officers so involved occurs from people who cannot imagine themselves threatened by police in any way. It represents a total lack of empathy for American citizens murdered by people sworn to serve and protect them.

  252. James Lamb-Fang the racist hypocrite wrote:

    Eric Garner and Akai Gurley and Oscar Grant and Philando Castile and Alton Sterling died in such circumstances, as have many, many others. Most citizens support the police involved in such matters, and since that reaction cannot be divorced from anti-Black prejudice within a White supremacist nation

    It’s always about your tribalist tendencies to make yourself and Black community issues the center-piece of any discussion. Which is why I exactly call James Lamb-Fang the Trump of SJWs.

    Akai Gurley was an ACCIDENT and to constantly harp on Liang as white just glosses over the many, many racist attacks against Asians by Black criminals. Full Stop!

  253. ChineseMom,

    I lived in China for many years because of personal reasons and got out of there as fast as I can, because I totally get what the country is about and why people are so desperate to leave. You living there for one summer gives you insight into contemporary Chinese society?

    Your own hypocrisy of your own words reeks to high 7th ring of Beijing! SAD!

    I happened to live in LA for many years and am quite familiar with your 626 area. What is your point? Anything I said is wrong?

    Ok, then tell me what’s the most popular hangout spot where pregnant mistresses walk around in Alhambra/MPK?

  254. Snoopy:

    I use the term ‘state-sanctioned execution’ to describe instances where law enforcement officers kill civilians without due process, in circumstances where the law enforcement officer’s life is not threatened.

    I don’t think any of those instances took place without due process. Actually, scratch that. NONE of those took place without due process. You yourself have acknowledged your dissatisfaction with the court outcomes, but it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen just because you didn’t get the outcome you wanted. You’re pushing fake news.

  255. Snoopy,

    Each of those instances got a trial. Here’s what “due process” means:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process

    Again, now that you’re going to become a lawyer, you’re going to have to use legal definitions. Not “I’m angry at Whitey and Chang and will therefore say whatever I want” definitions. But the real, dictionary, legal definitions that the courts use to conduct their business.

  256. Netflix’s OJ Simpson mini-series is awesome! The 13th is also must watch. James Lamb-Fang should watch both to learn how to be the next Johnnie Cochran! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  257. “I don’t think any of those instances took place without due process. … You’re pushing fake news.” — BigWOWO

    I understand that your anti-Black bias impedes your cognitive function, BigWOWO, but this should be simple enough, even for you — the actions taken by the officers who killed the men referenced above were reviewed within administrative and judicial systems, to allow the officers in question due process. But the victims themselves were killed without such administrative and judicial courtesy.

    Oscar Grant was not killed after his due process rights as a citizen in custody were upheld. Grant was shot in a subway station because his due process rights were violated by the police who detained him. Are you paying attention?

    Eric Garner was not killed after his due process rights as a citizen in custody were upheld. Garner was choked by police who proved indifferent and unconcerned toward his plaintive “I can’t breathe!” cries. Are you paying attention?

    Akai Gurley was not killed after his due process rights as a citizen in custody were upheld. Gurley bled out after catching a bullet from a paranoid rookie cop, who then argued with his partner about how to dodge blame for the crime as the life slipped from Gurley’s body. Are you paying attention?

    Once Castile and Sterling died from gunshot wounds caused by overzealous, irrational cops, the general public became so immune to these police malfeasance stories people had to post full video of these men’s last moments to hope for media attention, or live stream the state-sanctioned execution on Facebook. Are you paying attention?

    Or is the concept of respect for Black lives so foreign to you that you have difficulty focusing on the victims in these cases? Everyone respects the rights of men like Daniel Pantaleo and Peter Liang and Johannes Mehserle; the problem is that their victims expect the lesser justice standard they receive, in large measure because people like you can’t muster outrage when police maim and kill Black people.

    You always search for a reason to justify police action’s against Black Americans BigWOWO. That’s racist. What’s more, it’s intellectually dishonest, and if your race conservatism was anything more than a thin veneer for anti-Black prejudice, then the color of the victims in these cases would not obscure your recognition of those denied due process before their lives were stolen by the very officers sworn to protect and serve them.

  258. def James Lamb-Fang ():
    while(1):
    if your_opinion != (SJW && Fangs):
    print(“Anti-Black Racist!”)
    print(“Racial Conservatives!”)
    else if your_opinion == common_sense:
    print(“You’re biased and lack cognitive functions because you don’t follow the SJW dogma talking points!”)
    else:
    print(“You need to grovel to the Fangs’ cult of personality or you’ll be banned and labeled! Your one and final warning!”)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantrum:

    A tantrum, temper tantrum, meltdown or hissy fit is an emotional outburst, usually associated with children or those in emotional distress, that is typically characterized by stubbornness, crying, screaming, defiance, anger ranting

  259. Aardvark:

    Computers are logical. Snoopy speaks an entirely different language. He doesn’t understand either/or statements. He doesn’t respect logic. Law school will require that he change his tune.

    Snoopy,

    They got due process. Sorry. They killed the victim, sometimes within reason, sometimes not, and then they got due process. That’s just a fact. That’s the way due process works. You’re saying they killed them without due process, but that’s simply not true. Sorry, it’s common sense. It’s also simply how the law works.

    Now if you’re saying that a cop has to get a verdict or trial before making an arrest or (even weirder) having an accident, and if you’re trying to imply that that should be the norm in a civilized society….well then, that’s just the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard, even more ridiculous than your statement that a shopowner has no right to physically defend his property. This is exactly the problem with the Black Lives Matter movement. White people get killed all the time when they attack cops or refuse to obey lawful orders. They get killed in accidents. I’m not exactly sure what you’re angry at, unless you’re arguing that Black people deserve…what…an entire different legal arrangement where cops need a judge’s permission before even approaching a Black person? I think THIS is racist.

    If you think Peter Liang had some kind of psychic abilities that enabled him to commit a “state-sanctioned execution” by ricocheting a bullet and hitting a Black man that he didn’t even see because he somehow knew that Black man would be standing in that path, you’re giving Chang too much credit. If a Black man doesn’t have these kind of psychic abilities, I don’t know why you’d think Liang would. Unless you’re just out to get Liang. Trust me, Snoopy. I’m an Asian man, and I don’t have those kinds of psychic abilities. I’m assuming most Asian people don’t. If I’m wrong, prove me wrong.

    Also, I know you’re not studying judo or medicine when it comes to Eric Garner, but first of all, that’s not a chokehold. It’s a lock. Second of all, if a person says, “I can’t breathe,” it means he can breathe. Again, this is true whether that person is Black, White, or Asian. Unless you’re arguing that Black people somehow have magical tracheas, it can’t be done. We’re physiologically all the same.

    Again, this is the problem I have with Black Lives Matter. It’s the same problem I have with your arguments for affirmative action. You’re making these racial arguments for special privileges for one group over another. I’m saying that the law should treat us all the same because we ARE all the same.

  260. No, BigWOWO, you’re not. You’re saying that you take no issue when police officers kill young Black people without reason, and then escape public sanction for those acts after biased judicial frameworks exonerate the officers involved. You’re saying that none of us should take issue with police who kill unarmed Black men without cause, after having the state spend resources to train police officers in deescalation techniques.

    BigWOWO, your opinion here is as racist as it is inhumane.

    The point of reasonable use of force is to provide state responses that are both proportional to the threats posed by alleged criminals and humane, so that the accused have the opportunity to defend themselves against any possible charges. No reasonable citizen believes it just when a citizen is killed by police officers for a minor, nonviolent offense, for complying with police instructions, or for doing nothing at all.

    The simple, easy-to-understand point I raised before suggested that the police officers involved in the killings of Eric Garner and Akai Gurley and Oscar Grant and Philando Castile and Alton Sterling and other people of color failed to respect the basic human rights of those victims. They ignored due process: Officer Mehserle’s pistol should never have been raised given the conflict in which he took part. If Peter Liang didn’t treat public housing projects like ISIS strongholds in Fallujah or Call of Duty multiplayer, Akai Gurley may be alive today.

    Further, no one suggests that White citizens are not killed in like fashion by overzealous police, though we should be clear about the fact that in most circumstances the Black men fatally victimized by police in these instances have complied with police orders. Black men aren’t out in the world attacking cops, just as most White citizens would never dream of such activity.

    What has been claimed is that the easy support for police in practically all circumstances that you and others express contribute to a public culture where police-involved killings of Black people are treated as normal and justifiable in practically all circumstances — even to the point where certainly Chinese Americans perversely argue that members of their community, like Officer Peter Liang, should escape public sanction for the killing of an unarmed, innocent Black man in such fashion as they view White police officers get away with murder.

    It is completely true that the men I mentioned were killed without due process, just as it is true that the men who killed them enjoyed due process to determine if further sanctions should apply given the dead citizens they caused. The disconnect we have is that you wish only to enjoy the privileges you perceive White people enjoy; you never ask whether those privileges are reasonable or just. I do ask those questions; in a broad sense it’s why I’m headed to law school.

    Frankly, I think Peter Liang was an idiot. He discharged his gun when he didn’t need to, from fear and tension. But instead of trying to save Akai Gurley’s life, he tried to deflect blame for his death. None of that is morally forgivable, but it’s a different moral problem from the Chinese Americans who defended Liang’s actions. Those folk were simply racist. Like you in this conversation, the pro-Liang protesters did not believe that Black men had any right to life Asian men need respect.

    In this way, these protesters sought parity with White male injustice, an informal, unspoken equality between Whites and Asians against Blacks, and sometimes Latinos. This is bigotry masquerading as a political directive, and no one of reason and humanity could possibly support the pro-Liang position.

    BigWOWO, the only saving grace people like you enjoy is the fact that you maintain strict minority status within your community. Most Asian Americans do not support such heinous acts against Black people, or anyone else. The fact that people like you fail to convince your own people should make clear to you that your perspectives are flawed. Then again, I can’t assume you have the capacity for reasonable thought when Black people are concerned. Your racism gets in the way.

  261. Snoopy:

    It is completely true that the men I mentioned were killed without due process, just as it is true that the men who killed them enjoyed due process to determine if further sanctions should apply given the dead citizens they caused.

    No, it’s not true. If a judge and jury and trial was involved, that’s due process. Just because you’re angry at Whitey and Chang doesn’t mean you can misrepresent the facts. What you just stated above is demonstrably false, and you know it’s false.

    I’m just wondering what you get from repeating these falsehoods. Certainly it doesn’t help your cause here. Nor has it convinced anyone in the mainstream. Unlike Trump, you’re not President of the US, and you don’t have a political reason to repeat things that are untrue. So why are you doing it? Is there some kind of psychological satisfaction you get from saying it? Do you not see the people it hurts from this relentless crying-wolf and cry-bullying/lie-bullying that keeps coming from the Far Left?

    You have to face the truth, Snoopy. Yeah, you can go off and call people “racist” while beating that ol’ victimology drum. But that’s all irrelevant if you can’t accept simple facts, such as the FACT that all those cases were given due process through the court system, or the FACT that the definition of “execution” doesn’t include accidental discharges of guns or accidental physical damage caused by the attempted restraint of a man who was intentionally resisting a lawful order.

    In other words, go ahead, keep on calling people “racist.” I know that’s the go-to technique of the Far Left. But maybe you can elevate the name-calling by at least basing the accusations on fact.

  262. Let me also just put this out there–I have trouble functioning in a system where inequality is promoted as a social good. That’s my major issue here. If someone takes inequality and champions it as a desired value in society, I have a problem with that. It’s not right.

  263. I haven’t called people racist. I’ve denoted actions and ideas racist. We’re having a ‘what you did’ conversation, not a ‘who you are’ conversation.

    There is a difference.

    Further, you benefit from a system where inequality is promoted as a social good. Were you interested in dismantling said system, you should be interested in the critique against misuse of force by police I present here. Oscar Grant died because a police officer did not display concern for his physical safety, in violation of his basic rights as a citizen. To pretend that Grant enjoyed due process because his assailant never found his rights violated after he pulled the trigger mocks the tragedy of Grant’s death.

    Philando Castile complied with the officer who shot and killed him, up until the moment of his death. To suggest that Castile enjoyed due process, to imply that Castile’s rights were not violated presents a total absurdity, one that stems from your complete inability to consider violent actions by police against Black men improper, in any sense. I consider that idea racist.

    Your issue is not with a system where inequality is promoted as a social good, BigWOWO. Clearly you benefit from that system now. Your issue is when people critique the system from which you benefit, and its enforcers, to remind everyone that we owe a moral obligation to people harmed, maimed, or otherwise killed by those empowered to use force to support and maintain this unequal system.

    I don’t care if you are a racist, BigWOWO. But I will hold you accountable for the racist ideas you espouse about Black Americans here.

  264. @Snoopy

    Do you participate on any blogs or other media sites that are “Black-focused” versions of this blog and if so, would you be able to point out ones that are NOT what you would label as”conservative”? What I have in mind are sites that not only acknowledge and talk about present and past unfairness towards Black people but also identify “weaknesses” in Black culture and how to address these weaknesses with solutions that are more or less under the complete control of Black folks themselves?
    My personal opinion of Asian sites from this one to more radical ones like /r/aznidenty and /r/happas is that apart from lots of uncontrolled venting (as happens in the latter sites) there is a LOT of introspection about weaknesses of Asian culture (ie tough love) and things to do to address these weaknesses. Obvious weakness that come to mind are too much focus on education, money and status more attention needs to be paid towards social-skills development, parenting and race unity (less white worshipping).
    In short, would a Black Bigwowo also be considered “conservative” and do you participate in those sites?

  265. I think mmajames has the right approach–bring Snoopy back to a Black context.

    So what do you think, Snoopy? What do you say about those Black sites? I’ve been on one of them:

    http://www.blackfemaleinterracialmarriage.com/

    I’ve also watch David Carroll and Oshay Duke Jackson’s YouTube channel. These guys are also what one would call introspective, critical of both Black culture and White culture.

    Are these people in the wrong?

    As for the rest of Snoopy’s hollering and raving and dropping r-bombs, I don’t really see a difference here between my feelings about Black people and police or White people and police. Accidents happen, sometimes for no reason other than bad luck. Bad things often happen when people don’t listen to the police. I’ve been saying the same thing no matter what the race of the cop/perp. It’s worth pointing out that Snoopy doesn’t see this in the same way, which is why he’s silent about the Darren Illardi case. Illardi happens to be Black, and therefore the “law” (as Snoopy interprets it when talking about Peter Liang) shouldn’t apply to him, at least not according to Snoopy. To me, this is the textbook definition of racist. But again, I don’t see the point in name-calling. I just stick to the facts.

  266. James Lamb-Fang isn’t all about blaming whitey and Chang, he’s all about blaming only Chang. Asians are the easiest scapegoats and the SJWs are on over-drive.

    I don’t even see any “nerd creds” on the Fangs’ cult of personality echo-chamber that is Reappropriate where dissenting opinions are banned, like the ugly Berkeley SJWs.

    They don’t even call out the blatant media racism against Asians right now with all the propaganda machine on hyper-drive. James Lamb-Fang is only interested in condescend and denigrating Asians for his own ego.

    Reddit has some interesting news articles every now and then, but a lost cause as far rational discourse.

  267. Sigh. It’s all very hurtful stuff.

    The unfortunate truth is that for every ten Asians that point out the hurtfulness of the double standard, there is one Asian American SJW who will tell him, “I agree! We Asians are guilty! Lock up Peter Liang, give the Nobel Peace Prize to Michael Brown, and let me bend over so you non-Asian justice warriors can have your way with me!” He’ll ignore the ten Asians and listen to that one SJW.

    I just don’t know what to do anymore.

  268. re: due process and police killings

    It’s a fact that the police get away with killing most of the time because the prosecutors basically work for the police. Also, when the police say they’re “investigating”, they’re just investigating themselves instead of having an independent party review them.

    Police in the United States managed to escape prosecution when facing allegations they violated civil rights an incredible 96 percent of the time. This is almost the exact opposite of the conviction rate for everyone else, as normal citizens are prosecuted at a rate of 93 percent.

    New Study Shows Even If Cops Commit a Crime on Video, 96% of the Time they Aren’t Prosecuted
    http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cops-civil-rights-prosecutions/

    While Blacks are disproportionately killed by police, SJWs always leave out the fact that Natives are more likely to be killed by police in order to make the issue a “Black” thing. They also never mention that Blacks are over 20 times more likely to be killed by other Blacks. And it’s not as if police who kill Whites or Asians are prosecuted, either.

  269. I hate to exaggerate, but Asians are in a kinda similar position as Armenians. Jewish activists have fought blood, tooth, and nail to block every attempt to recognize the Armenian genocide because they want to maintain the “uniqueness” of the Holocaust and the incomparability of Jewish suffering. Blacks are in a similar position as Jews because they want to maintain the “uniqueness” of chattel slavery and the incomparability of Black suffering. Welcome to Oppression Olympics 101.

    Nationalist governments do the same thing when they feed their people propaganda depicting their country as a victim of other countries. It explains the Japanese obsession over Hiroshima but apathy over Nanjing. It also explains the Chinese obsession over Nanjing but apathy over Tibet. Victimization narratives work because they mobilize the masses by stirring them up into a nationalist frenzy. Black victimization has simply become the centerpiece of the modern American SJW movement. Nothing new here.

  270. The only way to counter the harmful work of the Asian SJWs is to actively tear them down. The easiest way to do that usually is to expose their own anti-Blackness. LLAG was easy to call out because he buys into the condescending trope that “all Blacks in history were slaves”.

    I remember a few years back another Asian SJW posted a graphic of European slave trade routes going around Africa to Asia and he told everybody that it was proof of anti-Blackness in Asia. It was not long before people pointed out that Europeans actually enslaved Asians, too.

  271. is LLAG being paid by some SJW puppet masters? That’s the only way I can think of how he does his constant rants and still pay the rent.

  272. @ aardvark

    If there’s one thing I learned in psychology, it’s that many people really do believe in the things they do. It’s not always about money. Hitler really believed the Jews stabbed Germany in the back during WWI. He was not paid. The 9/11 attackers really believed the WTC was a center for global Jewish finance. They were not paid (although 72 virgins is certainly a bonus).

    In this case, the SJWs really believe Asians are colluding with White supremacy in a secret anti-Black conspiracy. It’s petty but history repeats itself. This is a war of ideology. The only way to fight propaganda is with counterpropaganda.

  273. MMjames, there are a number of decent blogs out there, but were I to direct you to a useful Black conservative site, it would be Glenn Loury’s vlog on Bloggingheads, The Glenn Show. Loury is the Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences and Professor of Economics at Brown University, and a frequent conservative voice on race and social inequality.

    Often, Loury will engage John McWhorter in conversation on his show, and in this space public intellectuals debate economic and social policy from right of center perspectives. Plus, the archives go back to November 2005, so you can review commentary on Bush II and Obama era race and public policy concerns.

    I strongly recommend this material. Even though I rarely agree with Loury or McWhorter, they treat these concerns with respect. Academic observation and existing social science literature matters to these scholars.

  274. In this case, the SJWs really believe Asians are colluding with White supremacy in a secret anti-Black conspiracy. — Kiwi

    This is bizarre. Nothing could be further from the truth. Seriously, people who are concerned with high rates of homicide in urban Black communities or police violence against low-income urban residents of color are simply not at all focused on Asian Americans within any sort of ‘collusion theory’.

    People simply don’t sit around thinking about Asians all the time, Kiwi. Plus, serious commentators do not engage conspiracy theory.

    What’s clear is that people with wealth from all backgrounds exhibit more support for the police, both within communities of color and generally within the American population. Wealthy Chinese Americans, for example, rarely discuss problems with cops. Low income Chinese Americans, in contrast, have a history of protest against police malfeasance worth consideration.

    Further, people interested in social justice analyze social injustice from a systemic perspective today. This is why BigWOWO’s charges about the Darren Illardi case lack merit: literally no one has suggested here that Black police officers should not be held accountable for malfeasance against civilians. The entire point of the activism that surrounded the Freddie Gray case involved public pressure against Black and Latino police officers, because the activists involved recognize the criminal justice system’s complicity in Gray’s death.

    One could replace every White police officer in America with a Black or Latino officer and many of the same concerns about police brutality and unequal treatment would persist. Militarized police techniques that allow undertrained and mentally unfit law enforcement personnel to roam urban spaces with open contempt for Black and Brown residents present the concern these activists address within their communities.

    Yes, there are times when locally focused activists fail to reflect upon the concerns other groups in other places have with law enforcement. Certainly, more public discussion can and should reflect on the plight many Native and Asian American populations have with police.

    What’s clear though, is that no one from low-income Black American backgrounds erects barriers to prevent those stories from finding general audiences. Vietnamese Americans face real concerns with police, as do Ecuadorian Americans in Connecticut, or Mexican Americans in California and Texas. When those stories fail to reverberate within mainstream corporate media, the fault lies with mainstream corporate media, not Black Americans. Diversity and inclusion remain a serious problem in America’s newsrooms, overly staffed with Ivy-minted White twenty and thirty somethings.

    When those people fail to reflect on issues in your community, it makes sense to promote the stories you care about through your own networks, as many of you do. It does not make sense to pretend that Black Americans are the reason the stories you care about from your community fail to enjoy wider distribution.

    But without question, the public effect of the Black Lives Matter movement has been more general public focus on police tactics and malfeasance. It’s also fair to recognize that this public focus has made it less likely that the general public will ignore the next time the press reports that an officer roughed up a Navajo man or choked a Colombian migrant. So if people wish to critique the apparent focus on Black victims of police injustice, they should recall that they are just as capable of writing their local newspaper or local congressional representative to register discontent about the non-Black victims of police injustice who receive less media coverage.

    Certainly, if Chinese Americans can protest in large numbers in favor of a police officer they can protest in large numbers to hold police accountable for violent action against civilians. If they wish. The choice is up to you.

  275. @Kiwi,

    So about that Chinese-French guy who was killed by the Paris cop and the ensuing protests by Chinese-French… nothing from Reappropriate as usual. ^_^

    In all those other cases you mentioned it’s about “their own” demographic groups as being victims against “other” demographic groups, whereas LLAG have no problems throwing East Asians under the bus, never Filipinos from what I’m seeing.

    Stockholm Syndrome then?

  276. Snoopy,

    Wealthy Chinese Americans, for example, rarely discuss problems with cops. Low income Chinese Americans, in contrast, have a history of protest against police malfeasance worth consideration.

    My impression is that most Chinese American SJWs are either well off themselves or from well off families, your wife, for example. Low income Chinese American are often the victims of Black crime and Black violence targeted at them. From what I heard, they often complain that they don’t get enough helps or protections from police, and of course don’t have much sympathy for people like the “gentle giant” Mike Brown.

  277. Snoopy,

    Certainly, if Chinese Americans can protest in large numbers in favor of a police officer they can protest in large numbers to hold police accountable for violent action against civilians. If they wish. The choice is up to you.

    Chinese Americans didn’t protest in large numbers in favor of a random police officer. We protested because we refuse to be the victim of racial politics. Had Peter Liang not been an Asian or Akai Gurley not been a Black, Liang would have not been charged.

    What worse is that Liang had been set up as the scapegoat at very beginning. The New York Daily News reported fake news story two weeks after the incident that Liang called his union boss while Gurley lying on the floor blood to death, painted him as a heartless and selfish person. This lie was widely reported by the MSM, even during the trial while few new outlet reported correction.The reporter who made up this lie got a job at DA Kenneth P. Thompson’s office after the trial.

    If you think that Chinese Americans shouldn’t stand up for Liang, then you are just another tribalist, don’t really stand for social justice.

    Also in my view, BLM helped a lot in getting Trump into the oval office. I don’t think Chinese immigrants will ever be with BLM, our values and believes are too different.

  278. @ChineseMom,

    So where’s the local hotspot for pregnant mistresses and anchor parents here in the 626 of the I-10?

    Have you seen some of the noveau-riche FOB Chinese here with their Lamborghini and Ferrari? I don’t see none of them protesting like that beautiful ABC Jess Fong:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm_uf2b9FAs

  279. We protested because we refuse to be the victim of racial politics. Had Peter Liang not been an Asian or Akai Gurley not been a Black, Liang would have not been charged. — ChineseMom

    The problem with this is that you ignore the normative concern presented by Akai Gurley’s death. You suggest that the particular races of the officer and his victim lead to the formal criminal charges the officer faced. ChineseMom, I suggest that Liang should have been charged, given the clear indifference to human life he displayed.

    The difference between us is that I recognize the overwhelming evidence of of systemic bias and institutional racism within overly militarized American law enforcement. You do not. Your only concern is a perceived loss of status or ethnic pride if you believe White men can get away with murder when you cannot.

    Certainly Asian Americans should stand up for Peter Liang. But when he was wrong, that presented an opportunity for Asian Americans to stand up to Peter Liang, and every police officer who feared judgment for his callous and inhumane actions more than the actions themselves. ChineseMom, you defend a man who argued with his partner about escaping blame for shooting Akai Gurley as Akai Gurley’s final breaths escaped his body, someone who did not attempt life-saving measures as Gurley bled to death in the projects as a direct result of Liang’s decision to fire his gun.

    You refuse to be a victim of racial politics; I care more about the Americans who lose their lives to police officers rendered unaccountable by the uncritical support for the thin blue line you espouse. It’s true; our values and beliefs are too different: you care about how you look in public, I care about stopping police from killing innocent people.

  280. aardvark,

    I lived in China for many years because of personal reasons and got out of there as fast as I can, because I totally get what the country is about and why people are so desperate to leave.

    No wonder. So can I safely assume that you came to the US after middle school, and probably had been left with grandparents for several years? I have been telling my friends and relatives not to send their sons to study abroad until after college, because environment here not good for Asian boys, especially FOB Asian boys.

    Have you seen some of the noveau-riche FOB Chinese here with their Lamborghini and Ferrari? I don’t see none of them protesting like that beautiful ABC Jess Fong:

    Are you sure those are Americans? Don’t assume every Asian face you see is American. As you said here, even your parents are not American yet….

  281. Snoopy,

    The problem with this is that you ignore the normative concern presented by Akai Gurley’s death.

    We didn’t ignore that. We also didn’t ignore that everybody in power need a scapegoat, and an Asian man is a perfect one. Liang was set up from the very beginning. That fake news story from New York Daily News is the proof. The collusion between that reporter and DA Thompson should be investigated.

  282. Snoopy,

    You refuse to be a victim of racial politics; I care more about the Americans who lose their lives to police officers rendered unaccountable by the uncritical support for the thin blue line you espouse.

    Our definition of “unaccountable” is very different. That is what set our values and beliefs to be different.

    It’s true; our values and beliefs are too different:

    I’m glad that you can acknowledge that our values and beliefs are different now. Do you know that values and beliefs are the foundation of a culture? That why I said many times that so called the anti-blackness in Asian community is actually the cultural differences. Our cultures are totally different, but you had refused to accept this.

    you care about how you look in public, I care about stopping police from killing innocent people.

    Are you sure protesting for Liang made us look good in public? We all thought that stand up for Liang would make us look bad in public, especially when most of us are FOBs without much experience in fighting for ourselves here,, under attack of SJWs and not good at public speaking. That why many people in WEchat discussion were against doing public protesting.

    I also don’t think that you care much about stopping police killing. Otherwise, you will advocate for Black people to follow police order too. Because most of these killings can be avoid had Black victims followed the police orders. Even I was treated badly once when I didn’t follow the police order during a routine traffic stop. I didn’t interpret it as police racism. I learned the lesson and always do what they asked me to do since then. I understand their job is dangerous, they are on constant alert and accident can easily happen. I can’t understand that after so many tragic incidents, so many black people still don’t learn the lessons.

  283. @ aardvark

    Stockholm Syndrome then?

    No, it’s brainwashing. Just say the word “racism” in front of any random group of Americans and at least 9 times out of 10, I bet you the first image that pops into their heads is of a White person being mean to a Black person. Americans have a narrowly one-dimensional and simplistic view of race relations that anything breaking out of that stereotypical mold falls off their radar.

    SJWs lack the awareness and maturity to see the world outside of the rigid framework of White racism and Black victimhood.

  284. @ aardvark

    For that reason, racism against Whites and “honorary Whites” like Asians is accepted by SJWs because it’s “punching up” while racism by Blacks is also accepted because it’s seen as “antiracism”. The Black jury acquittals of OJ Simpson and Davon Neverdon prove my point.

  285. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    The entire point of the activism that surrounded the Freddie Gray case involved public pressure against Black and Latino police officers, because the activists involved recognize the criminal justice system’s complicity in Gray’s death.

    You conveniently left out the fact that Black civilians were complicit in Gray’s death because the officers who killled him were acquitted by a Black jury. Likely, it had to do with the officers being Black as well.

  286. Because most of these killings can be avoid had Black victims followed the police orders. Even I was treated badly once when I didn’t follow the police order during a routine traffic stop. I didn’t interpret it as police racism. I learned the lesson and always do what they asked me to do since then. — ChineseMom

    You seriously do not grasp the problem with this, do you?

    Multiple videotaped incidents display Black Americans being shot after fully compliance with police orders. Philando Castile followed police order to the letter and was still shot and killed.

    Further, the police can be wrong. You act as if citizens should never find fault with police direction in any sense. Understand, we are citizens, not sheep.

    But your assumption that Black people somehow do not behave in compliance with police directives is completely false. Seriously, that’s preposterous. Akai Gurley certainly didn’t die because he failed to comply with police. He died because the police were incompetent, cruel, and inhumane.

    The meaningful point here is that the criminal justice system allows such incompetence, cruelty, and inhumanity to kill citizens with anemic sanctions against the deputized perpetrators, if any. Try to understand that blaming victims for the harm that befalls them does not speak well of your morals and values, ChineseMom.

  287. Snoopy,

    You seriously do not grasp the problem with this, do you?

    Multiple videotaped incidents display Black Americans being shot after fully compliance with police orders. Philando Castile followed police order to the letter and was still shot and killed.

    What is your LSAT score?

    I suggest you making an effort to figure out the basic logical mistake you made here. You can use your skin color to get into a law school or get a job after graduation, but can’t depends on that to pass the bar exam or win a case, unless you just want to be a “professional black” which will be a waste.

  288. ChineseMom, with all due respect, before you inquire about my LSAT score as you accuse me of a logical mistake, let us examine this exchange. First, you made a claim:

    I also don’t think that you care much about stopping police killing. Otherwise, you will advocate for Black people to follow police order too. Because most of these killings can be avoid had Black victims followed the police orders. … I can’t understand that after so many tragic incidents, so many black people still don’t learn the lessons.” — ChineseMom

    You argue here that Black Americans who have been victims of police violence could sidestep such a fate were they simply willing to follow police orders.

    I disagreed with your assessment, and charged that in several instances, Black Americans who were shot by police complied with police directives fully. The killings of Oscar Grant and Philando Castile come to mind. There are others.

    So I made clear that your claim was factually inaccurate, a polite way to suggest that you do not know what you are talking about. Because you clearly do not.

    Further, I submit a larger point, that the deaths of innocent, compliant citizens by police during routine encounters imply failures in the criminal justice system itself. While each unanswered death proves heart-wrenching and tragic, the actual problem here involves the systemic treatment of people of color by police who act in their name.

    From a logical perspective, your original claim that ‘most of these killings can be avoid had Black victims followed the police orders’ assumes that Black victims precipitated their own deaths through non-compliance.

    You have to support your claim of Black noncompliance, and you have not done so, ChineseMom. Meanwhile, I refuted that claim. But from a moral perspective, it doesn’t actually matter if a citizen is belligerent or docile in a police interaction, ChineseMom. A combative citizen no more deserves to die from a policemen’s bullet than does his meek neighbor.

    Every weekend, scores of inebriated college students run afoul of the police after athletic contests. Many of them engage police with commonplace profanity and sarcastic indifference to following police orders. They are not shot. They are not killed. Most return to their lives of relative safety and comfort, and some repeat the process the next weekend. Clearly, compliance with police orders is not a factor in these police-involved deaths of innocent American citizens.

    So your claim is wrong. Now, you can assert that my skin color assisted my entry into law school, you can pretend that my skin color will assist my legal employment prospects. You can inquire about my LSAT score, and you can pretend that I’ve somehow committed a logical mistake in refuting your uninformed claim.

    Frankly, you can imply that I lack the intellectual aptitude to pursue law. It doesn’t matter. I still beat your stupid argument into the dirt. Or, put in terms you may understand:

    I suggest you make an effort to figure out the basic research mistake you made here. You can use your immigrant background and advanced age to browbeat American-born Chinese about cultural authenticity or assert moral authority over people you do not know, but you can’t depend on that to win an open debate or make a supportable claim. No matter. You just want to be another isolated immigrant who can’t speak to people outside of your WeChat/ World Journal quarantine, and that’s not a waste. It’s just not important. — Snoopy Jenkins

  289. Snoopy,

    Do you understand the meaning of the word “most” and what it implies? Here is what I said:

    Because most of these killings can be avoid had Black victims followed the police orders. …

    This is your interpretation:

    You argue here that Black Americans who have been victims of police violence could sidestep such a fate were they simply willing to follow police orders.

    Why do you have to reinterpret my original words? Are they that difficult to understand? Do you think your interpretation is accurate?

    And this is how you tried to refute me:

    I disagreed with your assessment, and charged that in several instances, Black Americans who were shot by police complied with police directives fully. The killings of Oscar Grant and Philando Castile come to mind. There are others.

    Based on wrong interpretation, your argument is useless here. Do you have any idea how to refute a statement with the word “most” in it?

    With this kind of reading comprehension and logical reasoning abilities you presented here, how could you survive the law school or bar exam? I’m pretty sure that you didn’t get high LSAT scores.

  290. ChineseMom, you do realize that even if you suggest that people like Castile and Grant are exceptions, you still “argue here that Black Americans who have been victims of police violence could sidestep such a fate were they simply willing to follow police orders,” as I stated above. I didn’t misinterpret your argument. You just made a bad argument.

    “Most” doesn’t grapple with the fact that compliance with police directives doesn’t save lives. “Most” doesn’t deal with the moral concern I raise above, that “it doesn’t actually matter if a citizen is belligerent or docile in a police interaction”, since “a combative citizen no more deserves to die from a policemen’s bullet than does his meek neighbor.” You wish to hang your entire silly argument around the word “most”, when that means you still suggest that Blacks somehow don’t follow police directions, a claim you have not proven.

    My restatement of your point is and has always been accurate. You think that Castile and Grant are execptions because you erroneously believe that Blacks don’t follow police commands. But every public commentary about Black families and law enforcement puts the lie to that claim. Black families, as has been widely reported, give their children “the talk” to educate them about what to do when dealing with police they should expect will refuse to view them as human. All families do not have the talk with their children.

    Castile and Grant and the many, many young brothers like them are not exceptions. They are not. They are the norm. Black families socialize their children to treat police as worthy of absolute respect and total authority, because we can’t afford mistakes. Maybe your childen can, I do not know. I can’t. I have to treat police with unceasing deference, in the vain hope that his bad day does not become my last day.

    But you don’t know any of that, because you have not supported your false and frankly insipid claim, ChineseMom. You know obviously nothing of my LSAT score, but your continued statements about it express a palpable envy of my success. Simply put, if you think that Black people who comply with police orders are the exception, prove it. You are obviously wrong about all this, but if you need to embarrass yourself further, feel free.

  291. Snoopy,

    Take a good look at this list and count how many of these killings involved with non-compliance of police “orders”
    https://www.buzzfeed.com/nicholasquah/heres-a-timeline-of-unarmed-black-men-killed-by-police-over?utm_term=.vsGjEaEKW#.lcqvw9weY

    Are they over fifty percent? If so, can we say that “most of these killings can be avoid had Black victims followed the police orders”? When most of these famous incidents had something to do with non-compliance of police “orders”, can we safely conclude that overwhelming majority of killings by police can be avoid had victims followed the police orders? I don’t expect you understand the logic here though.

    BTW, don’t assume that I think these killings are justified. I don’t even consider Michael Brown should be killed.

  292. Black families, as has been widely reported, give their children “the talk” to educate them about what to do when dealing with police

    I don’t understand what is a big deal about this. Shouldn’t it be their first priority as parents to educate their children about the safety? I don’t think Black parents talk to their kids enough considering the rate of black non-compliance of police “orders”. And I don’t think black community and leaders (including Obama) care much about young black men’s life considering how they reacted to Michael Brown’s death.

    I gave my kids this kind of talk too after they got their driving permits and many other talks. When my son’s third grade teacher told me that he occasionally pointed finger gun at other kids and he shouldn’t do that, I gave him a serious talk even though I didn’t think it was a big deal at the time.

  293. ChineseMom,

    I fixed it.

    Snoopy/ChineseMom,

    So I’ve been out all day, even though I’ve been dying to respond. The conversation has gone way past where I was hoping to respond, but I thought I’d like to make a few points.

    1. I think it’s fair to remind everyone that Snoopy has two sets of logic. He has real logic, which is the logic he uses in his real life when it comes to paying bills, applying to college, getting a paycheck, etc. Then he has Snoopy logic, which he uses to excuse black criminals, attack Asian immigrants, and pin the tail on Whitey and Chang. It’s highly possible that he uses real logic when applying to school and taking tests. It’s possible that his LSATs are high. It’s kind of like the creationist Bible Thumper who got a PhD in bio by writing a dissertation on evolution: “I wrote what they wanted to hear.” That said…

    2. Snoopy, do you realize how your advocacy hurts you? If there were one set of standards for people of all races, you wouldn’t be a target of these questions. If there were one set of standards and no bonus points for race, there would be no reason to question how you got into school. I’m not saying I agree with the question; I’m just saying that equality would fix all of this.

    3. Snoopy, I think your emotions are once again getting in the way of your understanding of what ChineseMom is saying. Yeah, Akai Gurley was completely innocent. We all grant you that, even though we’re still wondering why you’re so angry at Peter Liang while remaining completely silent on Darren Ilardi (we’re not saying you’re supporting Ilardi; just wondering why you’re silent.) But most of these cases that you’ve mentioned in the past year involve either noncompliance or just generally risky behavior. Oscar Grant, whom you mention above, was supposedly resisting arrest. Eric Garner was resisting a lawful order. Tamir Rice pulled out a toy gun that looked very real. Michael Brown was trying to grab a cop’s gun. Sandra Bland was refusing to obey a lawful order. Do you see a pattern here? NONE of these people deserved to die. But one’s risk for death goes way down if one doesn’t fight against cops.

    I think you should check out some of Oshay Duke Jackson’s vids. He’s a 230 lb. Black man who says that yes, he’s extra careful when dealing with cops, and yes, he believes that cops treat him worse than they treat White men. But he also points out that nothing happens to him because he’s extra careful; the best way to stop these senseless deaths is to stop acting senselessly. That’s kind of the same thing that ChineseMom is saying.

    (And PLEASE…don’t go off on ChineseMom while ignoring Oshay. The person with the hammer sees everything as a nail, and the person with the SJW mentality often sees every Chang as an enemy. PLEASE try to be fair here.)

    I’ve checked out Glenn Loury before and remember liking his stuff, although I can’t think of any specifics off the top of my head right now.

  294. ChineseMom,

    There are sixteen dead Black people on the Buzzfeed list you cite. Of those, three possessed mental health concerns that could have compromised their ability to follow police orders when confronted. Another four could be considered noncompliance cases, given the article’s synopses. So, using your evidence, you are still wrong.

    In the broadest possible sense, it is clear that not more than fifty percent of the cases mentioned involved citizen noncompliance with police orders. People like John Crawford stood in a Walmart buying a BB gun when he was shot and killed. Tamir Rice was playing with a toy gun in a park — reasonable activity for a twelve-year-old boy. Eric Harris was killed by a seventy-three year old reserve deputy officer who allegedly mistook his own gun for a Taser.

    But literally the first victim cited on the Buzzfeed list you liked is Dontre Hamilton, a young man who was fatally shot fourteen times by a police office in a Milwaukee park. Hamilton, who had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, had been accused of disturbing the peace.

    This example makes clear that your “follow the police orders” standard serves to justify police action at the expense of Black lives. You make no amends for people who, given mental health concerns, may not be able to follow police orders in the manner police expect. A number of the people on this list may have had a compromised ability to comply with police directives, given their mental states, a common problem without regard to race.

    But not every person with mental health concerns ends up in a memorial list following police encounters. The moral point here, as I said before, is that they still do not deserve to die. If you agree, noncompliance does not matter. Concerns with Black noncompliance with police orders prove inconsistent with your support for the idea that these killings are unjustified.

    I don’t think Black parents talk to their kids enough considering the rate of black non-compliance of police “orders”. — ChineseMom

    What rate? What data do you have on this? Compared to what? This isn’t WeChat: you can’t allude to a false or nonexistent statistic and pretend your allusion is fact.

  295. BigWOWO:

    Anyone here is welcome to believe that my acceptance to law school operates on different standards that other students. You are all free to be wrong. There is no reason to question how I’ve entered school now, and the only people who do so are those who deny Black intelligence because of their overt prejudice against Black people. No matter. Quoting Michelle Obama, “when they go low, we go high.”

    Further, most of the cases on the Buzzfeed list ChineseMom cited do not involve noncompliance with police orders, given the information provided in the list. From sixteen cases, seven at the most can reasonably suggest noncompliance, and three of those cases involved people with mental health concerns. So not only was ChineseMom mistaken, but she also displayed difficulty with basic counting. Sad.

    The reasonable point here is that Black people, like all Americans, deal with police in reasonable, respectful ways. The difference is that when we do, we still run the risk of being harmed or killed, having nothing to do with our actions at the time. This risk is not shared with all other Americans to the degree Black Americans navigate. Further, whenever we speak out about this risk, we are told that the tragic police-involved circumstances in which members from our community die are our fault, because we “didn’t follow police orders”, or some other bullshit excuse.

    Look, if Oshay Duke Jackson decides to step-and-fetch for police to keep himself alive, he is more than welcome to do so. But the best way to stop senseless deaths from police is to re-evaluate how police are hired, trained, and perform their duties. It is not just to suggest that Black Americans can’t act in the same manner as other Americans: it’s not risky behavior to walk out of your door in an apartment complex like Akai Gurley, or purchase a BB gun like John Crawford, or ride in the passenger seat with your girlfriend like Philando Castile or play with a toy gun at twelve like Tamir Rice.

    It’s fair to suggest that were these people anything other than Black, they may still be alive today. Behaving in a meek, compliant manner did not save their lives. They died for no other reason than police fear, and it’s morally reprehensible to justify that fear after the fact through assertions of senseless, risky behavior from Black Americans when that same behavior would not and is not considered risky from people from other groups.

    The actual problem with American police is that people with ChineseMom’s inhumane callousness toward Black Americans are hired to police Black Americans, people for whom they hold implicit bias and outward contempt. Like ChineseMom, they display faulty logic — they mistake Tasers for guns, shoot Black people, and justify their killings with fear and loathing of Black victims. Seriously, were ChineseMom a few decades younger, she would make an awesome cop. Just like Johannes Mehserle.

    And by the way BigWOWO: Oscar Grant was lying on his stomach with his arms behind his back when Officer Mehserle shot him in the back. He was no threat to anyone and entered that position by complying with police orders. Grant was not resisting arrest, and he paid for that compliance with his life.

  296. The person with the hammer sees everything as a nail, and the person with the SJW mentality often sees every Chang as an enemy. PLEASE try to be fair here. — BigWOWO

    Try to be fair? ChineseMom argues that most Black Americans fail to comply with police orders during police encounters — a claim she routinely fails to support — and then argues that I will make a poor lawyer when I disagree with her bogus assessment, you ask me to be fair with her?

    BigWOWO, I’ve been more than fair. It is fair to suggest that ChineseMom has no clue how Black Americans behave with police, just as it is fair to suggest that ChineseMom fails to grasp the most basic objections to her immoral and bizarre views. To be fair, we should point out that the word “most” does not effectively mitigate her obnoxious assertion that Black victims of police violence precipitated their own deaths.

    Fairness should involve telling elders like ChineseMom that their unjustified prejudice toward Black Americans cannot find support with facts she does not give. After massive prompting she offered a Buzzfeed rundown of Black victims of police violence, and from that article it’s not possible to conclude that more than half of the victims presented failed to comply with police orders.

    BigWOWO, you’ve defended ChineseMom’s overt prejudice for some time. It’s your blog; do what you want. But understand that I’ve been nothing but fair. ChineseMom makes an immoral, false, and disgusting point when she states that Black Americans do not comply with police orders.

    No one deserves to die because a police officer finds them non-compliant, but any rational review of the evidence available does not allow the conclusion that Black Americans do not on the whole comply with police, or that noncompliance should reasonably threaten death.

    ChineseMom’s completely absurd. Nutty as squirrel shit. It would be funny were she not so bigoted.

  297. Snoopy,

    Anyone here is welcome to believe that my acceptance to law school operates on different standards that other students. You are all free to be wrong. There is no reason to question how I’ve entered school now, and the only people who do so are those who deny Black intelligence because of their overt prejudice against Black people. No matter. Quoting Michelle Obama, “when they go low, we go high.”

    How do you know she’s wrong? Were you part of the admissions committee that admitted you? Did you admit yourself?

    Michelle Obama was talking about dignity; she wasn’t talking about falsely claiming dignity as means to ignore real numbers. A Black person doesn’t need the same numbers as an Asian person. It’s undeniable, and it has nothing to do with prejudice. There’s no reason to pull out the race card. It’s just a fact, supported by the numbahs. As I was saying, there’s a simple fix for this fact–make it NOT a fact. How do we do this? Equality. Get rid of affirmative action, and we’ll all be working by the same standards.

    Again, waving a real-looking gun is risky behavior (Rice). There were numerous reports that Castile wasn’t acting all holy and compliant like you said. Oscar Grant was shot by accident and didn’t deserve to die–yes–but there was a reason he was belly-down on the ground in the first place, and yes, reports indicate that he had resisted arrest immediately prior. The numbahs have shown that Black men are less likely to be shot by police (though more likely to be treated roughly), mostly because police are afraid of being Darren Wilsoned. That’s why guys like Oshay Duke Jackson and David Carroll advocate better behavior as a means of generating better outcomes. Cops can improve procedures, but that’s not really where the main problem comes from. That’s why Oshay Duke Jackson and David Carroll say what they say.

    No one deserves to die because a police officer finds them non-compliant, but any rational review of the evidence available does not allow the conclusion that Black Americans do not on the whole comply with police, or that noncompliance should reasonably threaten death.

    Again, you’re committing ANOTHER serious logical fail here, which I think is why ChineseMom brought up your LSAT score. I defended you here because I realize that you’ve got an entirely different method of dealing with Black issues vs. non-Black issues, but I can see why this lack of logic with Black people can get annoying to non-SJW’s. Most Black Americans DO comply with the police. I’ve not said differently, nor (as far as I know) has ChineseMom. But in the cases of most of these “examples” you bring up, most of the people who got shot or who died were either not complying or were engaging in risky behavior. And yes, deny it or not, the crime numbers are not evenly distributed. These are simple facts. If you don’t like it, let’s work to change it.

  298. bigWOWO said:

    The numbahs have shown that Black men are less likely to be shot by police

    The author of that study used police self-reporting, which is known for its incompleteness because police departments aren’t required to gather data on people they shoot. A Black person is 3-4 times more likely to be shot than a White person, so there is a bias.

    WHAT THE DATA REALLY SAYS ABOUT POLICE AND RACIAL BIAS
    http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bias

    But if we want to get into probabilities and agonize over the rate of deaths, unarmed Blacks are 40 times as likely to die in a car accident than in a police killing. The only reason for Black Lives Matter protests is because the police rarely get prosecuted, but like I said, police who kill Whites don’t get prosecuted either.

  299. I think when discussions of “race” and “numbahs” come into play, there’s a distinction between absolute numbers and the percentages % of per capita per group or whatever proportions.

    Indeed, white people are the largest total population numbers so anything involving comparisons of “largest numbers of” has to include percentages and normalized per capita demographics.

    Meanwhile, Harvard does seem to play social engineering very well and none of the racist SJWs go after white legacy students…

    http://observer.com/2015/06/asian-americans-are-indeed-getting-screwed-by-harvard-but-not-how-they-think/

  300. The Far Left’s obsession with police killings is eerily reminiscent of the Far Right’s obsession with terrorism. You’re more likely to die from choking on your own food than from either threat but nobody agonizes over whether they’ll survive their next meal.

  301. Kiwi, I disagree. The Far Left is not obsessed with police killings. The minority Left in this country recognizes the violation of civic order presented by both phenomena, while most Americans only view terrorism as a problem. For most Americans, terrorism is a very real, if remote threat. Police involved killings only happen to ‘Other’ people.

    Law enforcement officials work for government. They exist to ‘serve and protect’ citizens, and act in our name when they arrest people. They exist to preserve public safety and private property.

    Many terrorists and terrorist cells work outside governmental authority and control; so much so that when terrorists receive government support and aid we call them ‘state-sponsored terrorists’. The distinction matters, because actions taken by governments express the will of their people as articulated by their ruling powers.

    This is never more true than in democratic republics like the United States, where individual citizens exert so much influence over their elected officials, in comparison to citizens within who live under other governmental forms. So when police focused militarized night raids on inner city American communities or violate personal space in random drug searches on inner city American street corners, the inescapable conclusion is that public will allows such violent impositions to persist.

    Thus, when police maim and kill American citizens without administrative or criminal sanction, we are left to conclude that the American public chooses this outcomes, however tragic it may be for individual victims and their families. Add to this the influence of White supremacy within our body politic, and Americans get to ignore multiple examples of citizens (often citizens of color) killed by police for no reason at all. The police who end these innocent lives escape prison, and nothing ever changes.

    Everyone recognizes that terrorism violates the theory behind our civic order, but rarely do people admit that police-involved killings of unarmed, innocent civilians do so as well. When Black Lives Matter raises this point, they are accused of selective outrage at best and racism usually, even though the argument on civic violation remains sound.

  302. @Snoopy
    I checked out the most recent episode involving Loury and John McWhorter. Seems like they take stances very similar to Bigwowo and some other posters here. Thanks for the link, BTW.
    However, what I am more interested in how “Liberal Blacks” go about self-critique and self-improvement (with “self” applicable also at the community level). Asians, Whites, (citing just 2 examples) governments and corporations all go through these exercises whether they are left or right leaning. They would disagree on their findings and solutions but I believe they all go through the exercise. I am curious about the left-leaning Black POV.
    Also, going back to the topic of why more Blacks don’t take a shot at a career in SW engineering – you cited one significant reason is that Blacks would get assigned to “support”-type work. My feeling is that this isn’t that prevalent, at least in private industry. But after thinking about this some more, even if we assume that Blacks are steered towards support work, then I would assume that the ones who quit would have lots of ambition and options and that they would end up being accountants, doctors, lawyers etc. But how about the majority that don’t have these options – staying in tech still gets you that attractive pay cheque. Therefore I still don’t understand why more Blacks don’t pursue this option since improved economics greatly lessen if not solve most problems.

  303. I actually think SJW protected URMs have a leg up in STEM startups if the racist corporate ladder isn’t their thing. I’m also trying to do startups and get my own projects going at some point.

    From my reading and research and speaking with startup founders and investors, the government does give tax breaks and preferences to “minorities” if they start their own businesses.

    So contrary to the racist SJW rhetoric of only Asians taking black people money from the government, it’s quite the opposite in many ways for STEM fields because that’s what the government (rightfully) is trying to pushing as their social engineering pet projects.

  304. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    Police involved killings only happen to ‘Other’ people.

    Most civilian deaths caused by police are White and almost always, the police are not prosecuted. We can focus on the 3.5x rate of deaths for unarmed Blacks but personally, I would pay more attention when driving or eating since that’s way likelier to kill you.

  305. Kiwi,

    That study came from Harvard Professor Roland Fryer. It’s the most accurate information out there.

    mmjames:

    I checked out the most recent episode involving Loury and John McWhorter. Seems like they take stances very similar to Bigwowo and some other posters here. Thanks for the link, BTW.

    That doesn’t surprise me. I noted above (when we were talking about Ben Carson) that I can say something, and Snoopy/Jenn/SJW’s will attack me for being racist and hating on Black people. A Black person can say the EXACT same thing, and they’ll politely disagree, but they’ll take note of the subtleties in the Black person’s position and praise that same Black person. That’s why I think it’s crucial that more Black people speak up. SJW’s have no respect for Asian men. They will never listen to Asian men, even if we’re saying the exact same thing as Black men. As Asian men, sometimes we have to just step aside and let them fix the problem.

    From what I’ve seen, tech is among the most egalitarian of high-paying industries. A lot of this discussion could be resolved by actual stories. Where are these millions of unemployed Black engineers with comp sci degrees who had to leave Silicon Valley because of White Racism? If Snoopy has some info that we don’t know, he should share it.

    By the way, Snoopy, I recently met someone who is a reserve cop. We had a long discussion about Whose Lives Matter. I know we’ve pestered you (to no avail) about volunteering in the inner city schools, but if school tutoring isn’t your thing, you could also volunteer as a cop. You get to carry a gun, and you’ll be able to (literally) step in the shoes of a cop. This might be an interesting avenue to explore during your down time. You’ll be able to see what cops really go through–the snap decisions they have to make and the stress they go through.

  306. I don’t know if you’re going into criminal law or civil rights law, but either way, I think working as a reserve cop could be beneficial for your law career. I used to field questions from lawyers as “someone in the field” of mortgages because they wanted to know how things actually operated. If you had firsthand experience in law enforcement, it might be helpful.

  307. Kiwi,

    Saying “Get Out” is an intelligent film sets the bar really really low. “Moonlight” and even the new “Birth of a Nation” has more interesting things to say than Peele’s potboiler. And I’m not saying it because I’m hating on the fact he’s rumored to direct the live-action Akira movie…

    Like how Antoine Fuqua and Spike Lee have been anti-Asian racists in their movies…

  308. Yeah, I already read the link. Unless there’s something specific other than the “self-reporting” that you mentioned, I didn’t see anything that really sold me on the argument that the study was flawed. Also, I think calling police reports “self-reporting” is strange–isn’t it still the best data out there? Do you think they’d lie?

    Fryer’s research sounds right to me, and it’s still accepted by most people.

  309. tech is among the most egalitarian of high-paying industries.

    This is very true. It has to be this way because in so many areas, tech is all about cut-throat competition – Winners take all. Look at AMD. They are number 2 in the world for CPUs and also number 2 in graphic chips (GPUs) but in most years, they still lose money. Samsung is always number 2 to Apple for smartphones but their profits in this area is miniscule (probably losing money in some years). Unless the best is put in the position to do their jobs, the company loses out (big time) in the long run and they know it. This is why POCs converge on tech. There is reduced racism.

    As I mentioned before, this one industry where if more people join the workforce, new jobs are created and the demand for worker even increases. This is not true for all years (like the early 1990s, early and late 2000s) but I think for the majority of years over my career. I also think this is the reason why there is generally little resentment from whites towards North American Asians for taking “their” tech jobs.

  310. @mmjames,

    I also think this is the reason why there is generally little resentment from whites towards North American Asians for taking “their” tech jobs.

    To the contrary, I think most Haoles in the mainland knows they don’t have the mental capacity for STEM jobs and/or takes too long to learn the technologies involved.

    From my experience in STEM (hardware and software design), lots of Haoles can’t cut muster when it’s time to walk the walk. They can talk the talk all they want and there’s insane office politics to deflect blame (to me, the Asian scapegoat), but ultimately it’s about results and logically designed and tested instruments.

    This is one area where Asians can excel because it’s not just BS politics and empty rhetoric tantrums like James Lamb-Fang, but actual results and the test data that’s absolute and final say on if the projects work or not.

  311. @mmjames:

    There are all manner of debates within the community on the more efficient political and economic course of action to uplift sectors within. Everything from barbershop conversation to formal conferences are used by Black scholars, lawmakers, clergy, community activists, nonprofit leaders, criminal justice personnel, parents and teachers to discern whether liberalism itself actually benefits Black Americans. One of the reasons Bill Cosby gained such prominence in the community before his disgrace became widely known was his ability to reach reactionary elements within Black America that shunned systemic explanations for individual, person-focused uplift.

    Without question, the up-from-bootstraps conservatism Cosby and many others within the community favor finds support from outside the community, in large measure because it treats racism as immaterial at best and as a known quantity usually. Non-Blacks need not find exposure to critiques of their behavior or systemic privilege with this approach.

    Case in point — I presented material upthread that points to difficulties in diversifying the tech sector; in recent days, Uber finally released a scathing report on its diversity concerns that make clear the problem’s persistence.

    In the United States, the numbers are starker for racial minorities, the data shows. Uber employees identifying as Asian make up 30.9 percent of the ride-hailing company’s U.S. workforce and hold 47.9 percent of technical roles. Meanwhile, black employees make up 8.8 percent of the U.S. workforce and just 1 percent of technical roles. For Hispanics, the breakdown was 5.6 percent and 2.1 percent, respectively.

    According to the data, nearly 50 percent of the company’s U.S. workforce and 46.2 percent of employees in technical roles identify as white.

    Employees at the director level and above are less diverse than the staff at large. Just 22 percent of Uber leaders worldwide are women. In the United States, 20.1 percent identify as Asian, while 2.3 percent are black and 0.8 percent are Hispanic. — Steven Overly, “Uber finally releases data on employee diversity, and the results aren’t pretty“, Washington Post, March 28, 2017

    So the systemic problem is real, mmjames. It’s not something people can suggest does not exist because they personally haven’t noticed how few Blacks and Hispanics code alongside them. The unwillingness to consider this problem real is what allows diversity concerns within the tech sector to persist, and it is not at all clear that a flood of new Black computer science majors who present themselves and their coding abilities to tech companies would find employment in a tech sector that has yet to grapple with their systemic diversity concerns.

  312. Snoopy,

    I think that kind of WAPO story makes many black people be stupid and angry. Liberals have been using this kind of tricks to keep black people on Democratic party’s plantation. The key data they omitted is percentage of black people has applied technical job at Uber and percentage of black students major in CS graduated from college each year. I bet those numbers are less than 1% and the 1% in Uber probably affirmative action hires too.

    You live near Yale and taking some classes there, right? Go to some Yale computer classes or STEM classes to see what percentage Black students are in those classes. There are about 10% of black students in Yale, if there are less than 10% black students in STEM classes, then it tells us something about the system, Black culture and affirmative action in college admission.

  313. @snoopy

    One of the reasons Bill Cosby gained such prominence in the community before his disgrace became widely known was his ability to reach reactionary elements within Black America that shunned systemic explanations for individual, person-focused uplift.

    Couldn’t we acknowledge that there are many racial impediments but at the same time critique and search for strategies that can uplift the community while staying a non-conservative? Again, it seems most Asian American sites that talk about race will do self-critique and improvement strategies regardless of political leaning. Heck Jenn Fang obviously has no problems criticizing Asian culture; especially relating to FOB and Asian men.


    So the systemic problem is real, mmjames. It’s not something people can suggest does not exist because they personally haven’t noticed how few Blacks and Hispanics code alongside them.

    Snoopy, *no one* is suggesting that the lack of diversity isn’t a problem – remember, I started this off by calling for more Blacks to enter tech! The low percentage of Blacks is ultimately an “effect” and us “conservatives” are wired to examine possible “causes”.
    One of the obvious possible explanations of course is a high rejection rate for Black candidates. But the article I found in a previous post claims that the acceptance rate for Black candidates are higher than for Asians and even for Whites (at least in Seattle). Also, if you do a simple google for “50 year old software engineer” (a very neutral search), immediately, you can find volumes of complaints about rampant age discrimination and anecdotal stories of how older applicants (some from top universities with mountains of experience) claiming that they have drawers full of rejection letters and few offers for interviews. So are Black candidates rejected similarly? Honestly it isn’t nearly as easy to find evidence. I found this article : http://www.ibtimes.com/black-coder-hire-can-unemployed-programmer-justin-webb-find-job-silicon-valley-2229519
    after googling “looking for employment as a black engineer programmer”. At first I thought is was exactly what I was looking for. But after reading the article I wondered why more Blacks don’t get into programming because reading through my “immigrant” lenses, I actually thought “Well that was easy”. To quickly summarize, a 39-year old, self-taught Black programmer found himself out of work after working for more than 10 years (sometimes with 6-figure salaries). He found himself spending a large sum of money to upgrade his programming skills in one of those SW boot-camp outfits. At the same time he was going through an expensive divorce and was experiencing a money crunch problem to support his kids and his own rent. Ultimately he found his 6-figure job within 3 months or so even though the article framed it as a difficult journey. IMO, it was difficult because of his personal situation and age and less to do with him being Black.
    So is it more the case of a low Black application rate (as Chinesemom seems to be suggesting) or does it have more to do with acceptance rate?

    The unwillingness to consider this problem real is what allows diversity concerns within the tech sector to persist, and it is not at all clear that a flood of new Black computer science majors who present themselves and their coding abilities to tech companies would find employment in a tech sector that has yet to grapple with their systemic diversity concerns.

    I think this is a case of trying to use an “effect” to shoot down possible “causes”

  314. ChineseMom,

    I need to once again commend you on the tough love you show Snoopy. I don’t know if he realizes it, but he’s very lucky to have you as a mentor. If Snoopy would go into tech companies and get his hands dirty rather than analyzing these companies from afar, he’d see what you’re talking about. I think in 100% of these cases regarding Snoopy’s opinions, things would change dramatically if he got his hands dirty. I’ve already recommended that he become a volunteer tutor and a reserve cop, but it also wouldn’t hurt for him to work as a diversity coordinator at a tech company. He would see that even with the race-based bonus points (which are often substantial), it’s not easy.

    mmjames:

    I agree! I don’t know of any field that is more egalitarian. Sure, there are the usual politics that take place in any field, but people are mostly graded on results. And as you said, more workers often creates more jobs. I think it has to do with the quality of the products, where better products creates more demand. Think of how much tech we have in our lives these days. It’s only going to grow.

    I also should point out that not only is the tech field about cut-throat competition, but it’s also a field where there are low barriers to entry. That’s part of what makes it so cool. These days, you don’t even need a degree since they’ve got those three-month coding bootcamps.

    It doesn’t work like this in most other industries. I remember reading about Theranos, and how Elizabeth Holmes was using a hacker’s mindset to revolutionize the healthcare industry. There were basic elements of medical knowledge that Holmes didn’t have, and experts mostly doubted the validity of her claims. Still she persisted, arguing that she was doing things differently, stacking her Board with political insiders rather than doctors or health experts. She eventually became a billionaire, but her company is in shambles, mostly because you can’t hack an industry that requires live experiments and biolabs the same way you can hack a silicon machine. Computers, on the other hand, are perfectly hackable. You can buy a $500 machine and learn about how they work. You can attend a coding bootcamp, and you can get a job making six figures right afterward. It’s cheap to get in, and people are graded on results. I know people who have done it.

    Heck Jenn Fang obviously has no problems criticizing Asian culture; especially relating to FOB and Asian men.

    Haha! True, but it’s also true that she sees herself as apart from that–she doesn’t criticize fellow feminists, unless they’re porn-making Asian American feminists (as opposed to Ivory Tower feminists). It’s important to draw this distinction because if you or I criticize Asian culture, it’s introspective. We’re usually criticizing the men, which is what we are. If an Asian feminist criticizes Asian men or FOBs (and to be fair, she’s not the only one), it’s Pin the Tail and Blame Someone Else.

    It’s been said many times on this board, but Snoopy only looks at the outcomes. He accepts the “good” outcomes (Black people dominating the NBA, Black guys popular with women, Black women not as popular as Black guys) as market forces that everyone just has to learn how to deal with, while he blames all the “bad” outcomes (fewer Blacks in tech, fewer Blacks getting good academic test scores) on Whitey and Chang’s racism. We ALL agree that there are fewer African Americans in tech. We all say that it makes sense to look at the causes. But Snoopy already KNOWS the cause, and he KNOWS it’s because of Whitey and Chang’s racism, not because of anything Black people do differently. This is why there’s a disconnect.

  315. @ bigWOWO

    Do you think they’d lie?

    Not lie, but I don’t think it’s thorough or complete, either, not least because there’s no law directing police departments to keep a comprehensive list of all police killings. Independent sources like Innocent Down might be better if one wants to look into bias. In any case, Fryer only examined Houston, so even if they practice no bias, it may not be nationally representative.

    Still, even if you agreed with me, Blacks are probably hundreds of times more likely to die from cars, food, drugs, suicide, gangs etc. but there’s no existential panic over those threats to life. There’s no way police killings is the main thing holding back Blacks.

  316. It’s been said many times on this board, but Snoopy only looks at the outcomes. He accepts the “good” outcomes (Black people dominating the NBA, Black guys popular with women, Black women not as popular as Black guys) as market forces that everyone just has to learn how to deal with, while he blames all the “bad” outcomes (fewer Blacks in tech, fewer Blacks getting good academic test scores) on Whitey and Chang’s racism.

    I’ll say it again because of how important it is: Racism comes down to power. And power is about maximizing your own interests while minimizing everyone else’s. Germans thought Jews were unfairly “privileged” because Jews were “overrepresented” in medical and law schools. Thus, Germans felt they were “punching up” by removing Jews from major institutions in order to make room for themselves. SJWs and Snoopy are no different when they accuse Asians of the same privilege in tech, never mind that Blacks get higher pay and more promotions than similarly qualified Asians.

    Anybody who remembers that many of the most vicious attacks on Jeremy Lin came from Blacks should understand that Blacks will certainly not extend the same courtesy to other races that they demand of everyone else. The SJWs have repeatedly accused Asians of just this sort of behavior ad nauseum. Let’s be consisentent and condemn guilty parties across the board.

  317. Let’s be consisentent and condemn guilty parties across the board. — Kiwi

    If we are seriously interested in consistency here, the hyperbole that compares me to anti-Semitic Germans should cease.

    Reviewing the most recent comments here, many people deny implicit bias’ impact in tech companies, largely because they personally don’t believe they experience racial bias there. Uber’s recent self reporting supports this, as it’s a place where White and Asian American men predominate, especially in technical and executive roles.

    I get it: people don’t wish to feel bad about the power they enjoy. So perhaps the best way to be consistent is to be honest about the sort of power dynamics we’re actually talking about. Case in point:

    It’s been said many times on this board, but Snoopy only looks at the outcomes. He accepts the “good” outcomes (Black people dominating the NBA, Black guys popular with women, Black women not as popular as Black guys) as market forces that everyone just has to learn how to deal with, while he blames all the “bad” outcomes (fewer Blacks in tech, fewer Blacks getting good academic test scores) on Whitey and Chang’s racism. — BigWOWO

    This is complete horseshit. Since when is “Black people dominating the NBA” a good outcome? Further, why would that even matter? Who cares if some Black men enjoy social popularity, even with women — none of that affects the substantive material concerns that arrest African American economic uplift today.

    But it’s telling that BigWOWO runs to these meaningless social observations to establish Black success. His rundown of “bad” outcomes includes the sort of phenomena that impedes individual navigation of global markets, like lower Black employment in the tech sector or the achievement gap. I can’t speak to BigWOWO’s motivation to equate these phenomena, but it is clear to me that some stuff actually matters, since it affects individual economic stability and group economic strength, and other stuff really does not, because it’s only linked to the superficial or the interpersonal.

    Clearly, the tech sector has work to do to promote it’s employment opportunities to all qualified Americans. But the assumption that tech companies should not be characterized negatively on diversity concerns is laughable. When ChineseMom reads a Washington Post article on Uber’s recent self-reported diversity metrics and assumes (with no data whatsoever to bolster her claim, again) that:

    “The key data they omitted is percentage of black people has applied technical job at Uber and percentage of black students major in CS graduated from college each year. I bet those numbers are less than 1% and the 1% in Uber probably affirmative action hires too.” — ChineseMom

    … she makes clear that she simply doesn’t understand the problem we’ve discussed here on workplace diversity in the tech sector. Her impulse to blame a dearth of Black American employees at Uber, especially in technical roles, on the supply side of this equation again attacks Black people for what amounts to an industry concern. Tech companies do not have the reputation for square dealing many people in this conversation assume, especially in matters of race and gender difference. These can be highly sexist workplaces, dominated by White men who view themselves as normal and everyone else as deviant.

    It is not sensible to assume that anyone should want to work amid such social conditions. What the higher percentages of Asian American employees and management at Uber should tell us is that the tech sector does have some room for diversity. Just not enough. To blame the people who are literally absent from these companies in more than token percentages for the demographic profile of these institutions forgets the power enjoyed by those who do the hiring, and the power lacked by those who seek work.

    So if we are to recall Kiwi’s point about power, ChineseMom is quite incorrect: the severe lack of women, Blacks and Latinos at places like Uber cannot be a simple supply concern, as Uber retains all the power in the situation. They could scour computer science departments at HBCU’s for Black talent, and offer scholarships to young female engineers at Cornell or MIT or Georgia Tech, to aid their later recruiting. Were they so inclined, they could have released these numbers much earlier, to bring public interest to this problem.

    Instead, whatever their hiring practices, they’ve resulted in an overwhelming White and Asian male employee base, especially in technical and management roles. To say I only care about outcomes is just stupid: the problem here isn’t the final numbers, but the process that leads to such monochrome employment. That process affects more than the companies’ hiring practices: their CEO’s Trump-supporting statements as of late have convinced many within Uber’s urban Millennial base to reject the car service for Lyft, and other transportation means.

    A more diverse work environment could have convinced Uber’s CEO that the companies’ customer base would reject such overt support for this President, that an apolitical public stance at best was the more sensible option to maintain profits. But the boys’ club at Uber didn’t alter their CEO’s thinking. Lower profits have.

    The first step in solving a problem is the recognition that a problem exists. It is not clear that everyone in this conversation recognizes low non-Asian American male minority employment in the tech sector as a problem. But comparatively low application rates (if that’s even happening) do not explain the low recruiting of and abysmal employment prospects for non-Asian American male computer science graduates. Evidence has been presented here that makes clear that the tech sector is not a welcoming environment for all; if people to continue to deny that point, they continue to perpetuate the problem they refuse to see.

  318. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    The point you’re deliberately ignoring is that if the playing field were level, we’d see even more Asians in important tech positions and possibly even fewer Blacks. I already linked a study finding Blacks to be better paid and better represented in tech management positions than similarly qualified Asians.

    The anti-Semitism comparison is valid. Your rhetoric about Asian “overrepresentation” in tech is no different than German rhetoric about Jewish “overrepresentation” in medicine or law. But while it is no longer politically correct to bash on Jews, it’s still open season on Asians. Let’s talk about Black overrepresentation in sports, music, entertainment, and social movements.

  319. Wow, Snoopy. Talk about puffing on the victimology crackpipe.

    Everything you said is just so factually off that I don’t even know what to say. The ridiculousness of your statements prompted a tough-love response from Kiwi, a response which is factually correct and which you should listen to. If they had a level-playing field, the numbahs would be even more Asian.

    Again, show me where these unemployed Black comp sci grads are hanging out. Show me. You make it seem like Black comp sci grads graduate MIT and head to the welfare lines. It just ain’t happening, Snoopy. They’re mostly EMPLOYED.

    They could scour computer science departments at HBCU’s for Black talent, and offer scholarships to young female engineers at Cornell or MIT or Georgia Tech, to aid their later recruiting.

    Why does everything with you always come down to “Mo’ free stuff and benefits for Protected Minorities!” or “Hold my hand!” I’m kinda curious as to where you got this habit.

    Oh man. I was never a Hootie fan during the day, but as I’m listening now, it’s actually not that bad.

  320. I’m going to revisit those old posts on masculinity, but I think there’s probably some relevance here.

    My son recently captained his team to first place at the Elementary School State Chess Team Championships. We were the #3 team in the state to start with. #1 was the expected favorite, and #2 didn’t have enough players to qualify. After #3, there were about 30 teams that qualified for the finals. Based on ratings, my son was the #3 highest rated player in the entire field, which meant that he was expected to win most of his games. It’s a five round event, and for the first three rounds, it was expected that my son would be battling guys who were 500 or more points below him.

    What final advice did his coach give him before the championship? Did he give any technical advice? No. He just said, “You should have a smooth ride for the first three rounds, and maybe the whole tournament. Just don’t expect that they’re going to hand you the trophy just because of who you are.” My son went 5-0, including a win over one of the players who had a higher rating (the #1 player on the #1 team).

    You’ve kind of got a reverse thing going here, Snoopy. You have this philosophy that seems to border on giving trophies, jobs, or money based ONLY who on people are. That’s where the disconnect is. For most of us, the bulk of the work takes place BEFORE the competition. You just expect people to give you free stuff because of who you are. Most of us can’t accept that kind of setup.

  321. No one suggested anything about ‘overrepresentation’. My argument has been clear: the processes used to determine employment in tech companies result in a preponderance of White and Asian American males. To consider those processes effective in generating a diverse workplace is laughable, and the resultant exclusion of women, Blacks and Latinos make these tech companies at best tone deaf when they deal with their consumer base in the real world, as Uber’s recent woes attest.

    If your needless knee-jerk nationalism must contort a sensible conversation on diversity and inclusion into a hyperbolic conversation replete with Nazi comparisons, that makes clear that you are not able to discuss this topic seriously, Kiwi. I do not think and have never said that Asian American men were overrepresented in tech companies. I don’t believe a term like ‘overrepresentation’ makes any sense here, because it implies some sort of racial employment equilibrium that could not possibly involve the corporate liberty to hire whom one wants. But current practices simply do not allow an inclusive diversity that reflects any public reality. That’s a concern for some of us.

    Apparently not you guys, but some of us. See Kiwi? I disagree with your overly simple argument, without comparing to you Nazis at the same time. Who knew?

  322. I read this article a couple of days ago but it came across as so patronizing for Blacks and Latinos that I decided not to bring it up for fear that it would inflame our discussion. But with Snoopy’s last post, I suspect that he would rather enjoy it. Please browse through it if you have time.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/upshot/dont-blame-recruiting-pipeline-for-lack-of-diversity-in-tech.html

    Much of the article seems to suggest that Blacks and Latinos are outside of the “network” that Whites and Asians have access to and therefore are at a severe disadvantage when it comes time to applying for jobs. Therefore it is incumbent for Tech companies to go out of their way to search for hidden Black talent. This is what Snoopy suggested in his last post.
    Firstly, I’m not aware of any “network” outside of the plain old internet. As probably everyone here knows most big companies have an online presence where they advertise openings for both experienced and new-grads. They also have tons of company literature available. If you are serious about a career in Tech, you should be checking out these sites. New grads have it easy nowadays.
    When I started my career, there was no internet and I had to physically go to the library to research companies and find out what they are all about. If there is a coming interview, I would study their products just to be able to feign special interest in what the company does. I believed everybody did that. There is big competition for good positions and the onus is on the job-seekers to prepare themselves as best as they can. In the document I linked, a Black engineer who has started his own business says that he had never heard of Silicon Valley until he was 24. Another Black woman engineer (in another article) admitted she thought Silicon Valley was a physical city. …. I’m sorry, but you’ve got to do research and more research. It’s a new career you’re trying to get into; not a summer job.

    The article also mentioned that some Blacks were discouraged from applying because they were aware that there were few Blacks in the company and therefore would feel like “token” workers. Now imagine how that person would feel during lunchroom discussion if all his coworkers were talking about how they had to survive a full day (and possibly more) of grueling interviews with the company before getting hired but he himself just breezed right in because he benefited from some special form of affirmative action.

    I don’t know. Tech seems to magnify the differences between the the left and the right.The left wants a higher level entity to enforce diversity while the right wants to make the playing field as level as possible to ensure that the most qualified people gets hired and everyone gets a fair shake.

  323. MMJames, I posted that article in this thread about a week ago. Thanks for reposting; people should take the time to read about the challenges to tech sector employment faced by members of different communities.

    That being said, the article references the social networks Blacks and Latinos and women do not often enjoy that allow easy transition into tech sector employment. If people are not willing to examine the impact of these networking webs (and those who lack access to them) in this conversation, it will be difficult to understand why substantively different obstacles persist for women, Blacks, and Latinos to enter tech careers.

  324. BigWOWO, As I said above, the numbers are less of a problem than the process by which the numbers emerge. No, I doubt Black computer science grads from MIT find use of public assistance, but I can’t speak to the tech sector employment statistics of computer science grads from Hampton or Morehouse or Norfolk State.

    Yes, many Asian American males work for tech corporations. Still, these corporations have workplace diversity concerns. At present, there is no reason to believe that hiring practices at these firms do not provide a level playing field for applicants, just as there is no reason to believe that some of the criteria used to evaluate applicants involve discussions of corporate “fit”, an intangible metric that often references the expected cultural affinity with existing workplace culture possessed by a particular applicant.

    Without question, women, Blacks and Latinos often score low on corporate fit evaluation sections for predominantly White and Asian male workplaces in ways that White and Asian males would not. The only question left asks whether tech companies like Uber place too much emphasis on metrics that result in the hiring choices that allow for a mostly White and Asian male workplace. This need not bother people in this conversation who’re happy with employed and semi-economically stable Asian Americans; but it’s fair to question hiring practices that easily find room for White and Asian American men, and have next to no room for anyone else.

    In short, you guys take no issue with the tech sector because you feel members of your demographic can find success there. You could care less about the systemic fairness under which hiring practices operate; you only care if people like you have an avenue to success, even if that success halts your progress at middle-management under White male superiors whom you’ll never overtake. No matter. It’s Whitey and Chang forever! I suppose you’ll never leave the model minority opium den, huh BigWOWO?

  325. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    No one suggested anything about ‘overrepresentation’. My argument has been clear: the processes used to determine employment in tech companies result in a preponderance of White and Asian American males.

    Now you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. If there’s a preponderance of Asian males in tech, then obviously you see Asians as overrepresented. I’ve proven it before and will say it again: If the playing field were level, there would be more Asians in important tech positions and maybe even fewer Blacks. Blacks are paid more than than similarly qualified Asians in tech. If there’s a bias, it favors the success of Blacks more than Asians.

    “The percentage of whites, blacks and Hispanics who are executives is the same as their percentage in engineering roles. Asians, meanwhile, are about half as likely to be managers as they are to be coders and hardware hackers.”

    http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/opinion/yang-tech-diversity/

    “But researchers at the American Institute for Economic Research found that Asian tech workers on average made $8,146 less each year than white workers in 2012, $3,656 less than Black employees, and $6,907 less than those who identified as “other.”“

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/new-numbers-reveal-asian-wage-gap-tech-n223196

    Whether you like the Nazi comparison or not, we should also look into the “preponderance” of Jews in medical and law schools and how that was racist because it excluded working class Germans. But hey, we all know you’ll never go there due to modern norms about political correctness. Meanwhile, we should look into the preponderance of Blacks in sports, music, entertainment, media, and social movements and how that’s racist for shutting out Asians.

  326. Reading through Snoopy’s comments, it becomes clear that his brand of social justice advocacy is about furthering his own group’s interests and using other races as his pawns to that end.

  327. While the Far Right and the Far Left are famous for disagreeing strongly on the existence of White privilege, both sides seem to agree that “Asian privilege” exists.

    It makes sense. Punching up is morally permissible only against privileged groups and because the Far Right is mainly White and the Far Left is mainly Black, this means Asians are an acceptable punching bag for both ends of the political spectrum.

  328. mmjames:

    Firstly, I’m not aware of any “network” outside of the plain old internet. As probably everyone here knows most big companies have an online presence where they advertise openings for both experienced and new-grads.

    HAHAHA! So that’s why these software engineers can’t get their foots in the door at Google and Amazon. They don’t know how to use the internet! But Snoopy assures you that even though they’ve never been online, they’d be great assets for these internet companies.

    Jokes aside, I agree with you. From everything I’ve heard, aside from the top positions, it’s all electronic these days.

    What you said about the old days is also similar to what I said above. In most cultures, a newbie is expected to WORK for his opportunities. I’m from the same kind of background; before the internet became big, I did all kinds of research and networking to try to get in the door. Snoopy flipped it around so that the employer is expected to WORK for the new hire. It shouldn’t be so surprising that most companies probably prefer to go with the “traditional” route of hiring people who actually work rather than people who simply warm the seat for a paycheck and threaten a discrimination suit if they don’t get what they want.

    Snoopy:

    BigWOWO, As I said above, the numbers are less of a problem than the process by which the numbers emerge. No, I doubt Black computer science grads from MIT find use of public assistance, but I can’t speak to the tech sector employment statistics of computer science grads from Hampton or Morehouse or Norfolk State.

    That’s the thing–you can’t speak to either the grads from MIT or Morehouse because your hands are squeaky clean. Have you ever worked at a tech company? Have you even set foot at one of these software companies? Please answer me on this. mmjames and I have both worked at tech companies. If you have relevant experience, please share.

    You say that there’s no reason to believe that there isn’t a level playing field, but you’re speaking from a place of complete ignorance–there’s no reason to believe that ONLY because you don’t accept or have those reasons. There is plenty of affirmative action at ALL of the big companies, and they advertise it. And yes, the policy gets abused.

    Again, point me to the unemployed comp sci superstars, Snoopy. They’re probably hanging out with the people who skip meals to buy test prep books. Somewhere in the Twilight Zone.

    In short, you guys take no issue with the tech sector because you feel members of your demographic can find success there.

    There you go with the mind-reading again. Snoopy, the Asian Whisperer. You failed to notice that we also take no issue with the NBA, where members of our demographic find little success. I can’t speak for the others, but I take no issue with either, since I generally support meritocracy. I’ve never been one to expect the trophy just because of who I am. That kind of entitlement only exists among the SJW’s.

  329. Snoopy,
    I’m being honest that I was shocked by what you and the article implied are the responsibilities of hiring companies in order to balance diversity. We are so far apart on this. Remember, the hiring manager is often the same person whose ass is on the line to deliver on time with very limited resources. His number one priority is hiring the team that can deliver. Notice that each year, those fancy iPhones just keep getting so much more powerful. Well his job is to make sure this happens each year. Does it make sense for him to devote more time to scour America just to locate Black talent when there are already huge stacks of resumes on his desk? Hiring managers are looking for “risk-takers”, “people who think outside-of -the-box” and “self-starters”, not individuals without the seeming passion to understand the industry.
    Having said that, based on the limited articles that we’ve looked at, it seems to me that on balance, the lack of Blacks in tech has less to do with rejection and more to do with lack of applying. And if I’ve missed some evidence to the contrary please point them out.
    I’m guessing that you might take offense to this but I’m just being perfectly frank. We’ll be probably have to agree to disagree on this one.

  330. @Kiwi,

    I’ve called it out many times before: James Lamb-Fang is anti-Asian racist troll along the ilk of Strom Thurmond. His constant cry-bullying of “you anti-Black racists” if you don’t grovel to his brand of SJW rhetoric is only to further his own self-associated demographics.

    His cry-bully “tribalism” attacks is to deflect attention from himself who’s only interested in pushing social and political agendas to advance his own associated demographic. Indeed, I never seen the Fangs stick up for Native Americans whatsoever, because even the SJW racists can’t gain more political power with the low numbers, as opposed to the largest minority groups of Blacks and Latinos and some Muslims as their talking points.

    Put it this way, if there’s to be affirmative discrimination in schools, be consistent with the SJW racists in Haolewood and sports: affirmative action for Asian applicants instead of the new racist whitewashing/yellowfacing/racebending controversy of Peele hit up to direct Akira. Haolewood is smart: team up with Blacks to keep Asians down.

    And James Lamb-Fang is a troll, because once again he’s hijacking this forum and all discussions to be about his racist political agendas. SAD! T_T

  331. “I’m being honest that I was shocked by what you and the article implied are the responsibilities of hiring companies in order to balance diversity. We are so far apart on this. — MMJames

    ‘Responsibility’ may be too strong. Instead, I believe corporate entities require diverse employees in order to generate efficiency and promote goods/ services to customers. Diversity is a requirement for an effective business model within a global economy, not a hindrance.

    Certain companies recognize this; others do not. Uber finds itself with months of bad press and dwindling ridership in large measure because at its highest levels, the company did not understand its core customer. I argue that Uber’s overwhelmingly White and Asian American male workforce led to that misunderstanding of the typical Uber rider, and further claim that a more diverse workforce would have been more likely to advise Uber’s CEO against the public statements and volunteer work that alienated so many of Uber’s core fans.

    So it’s not that corporations have a responsibility to seek and hire diverse talent. Rather, the profit motive drives corporations to seek and hire diverse talent just as the profit motive drives corporations to reduce inefficiency and minimize waste. This isn’t social justice, it’s basic capitalism — to sell within a global marketplace, it helps to have employees who understand the global marketplace.

    What we see with defenses of the diversity lack in the tech sector is the assumption that it doesn’t much matter who writes Apple smartphone operating system code or develops updates to Twitter’s website. You, BigWOWO and others here expect people interested in tech sector employment to present themselves for evaluation by tech companies, without any expectation that they will be evaluated fairly in any sense. In large manner, that is what happens today.

    But it’s also true that companies like Uber have largely resisted diversifying in every sense. My fear is that female, Black, and Latino coders apply to work at Uber and other tech companies, only to be turned down for unknown reasons that do not reflect any reasonable evaluative fairness standard. In Uber’s case, the company has become less profitable over time. One need not establish proactive measures to recruit and reclaim diverse talent, but corporations should realize that when they do not, other companies will.

  332. In Malaysia, the Malay majority practices “affirmative action” against the Chinese and Indian minorities by limiting their access to education and employment with racial quotas. The Malay get away with it by selling the anti-Semitic trope that Chinese are economically “privileged” and thus, any attack on them is “punching up” instead of discrimination.

    Among Blacks and Latinos, Asians are an even smaller minority (5% Asians vs 30% Blacks/Latinos) and because Whites are too powerful a majority to attack, Asians are the weaker scapegoat that “underrepresented” minorities can get away with attacking because Asians are “privileged”, which makes attacking them “punching up”.

  333. Contrast poverty rates in Malaysia and Indonesia (also extremely racist country) with that of Singapore, with far less natural resources.

    Technocracy isn’t such a bad idea, as opposed to the nepotism/cronyism/kleptocracy of the SJW agenda.

  334. Snoopy,

    You are still working backwards assuming the lack of Blacks in tech is due to racism. Why can’t you provide direct evidence? You can easy google evidence of age discrimination in tech because tons of older unemployed workers claim that they have sent out hundreds of resumes and never receive any nibbles. Bill Gates previously and now Mark Zuckerberg have indicated that younger is just smarter. But you know what, when faced with obvious discrimination, older workers react by sending even more resumes (ie, they know they need to step it up and they DO). Asian Americans know they face racism when it comes to entrance into top colleges so they step it up even more by SAT preparation and increased outside -school activities. This behavior makes perfect sense to me so when I don’t see similar behavior from Black graduates, I’m skeptical. Tell me how I’m wrong with this.

    I didn’t bring this up before because my work experience has been restricted to the Ottawa and Toronto areas so I’m afraid to generalize. Maybe Bigwowo or Aardvark can chime in. But from what I have seen, almost all the female tech workers are immigrants. You have white female engineers from Serbia and Russia and POC female workers from East Asia, South Asia and Iran but ALMOST NO westernized versions of the above. By your logic you would conclude that native to America women were discriminated against versus their peers who speak with accents. Let’s get real here. Do you think I would stand a chance if an Anglo white female with exactly the same work experience as myself were applying for the same position?

  335. MMJames,

    Perhaps you simply aren’t exposing yourself to evidence of tech company indifference to Black and Latino applicants. I presented evidence of this in this thread; you later re-quoted an NYT article I linked to this effect. At a certain point, you and those who agree with you should examine where their skepticism toward the idea of tech indifference or hostility toward diversifying its ranks with Black and Latino employees stems from an ideological source.

    But more to the point, you are more comfortable recognizing responses to workplace prejudice where the victim responds to prejudice with hard work that does not call the bigoted behavior into question. Elderly workers who redouble their resume sending and Asian Americans who increase their SAT prep and after-school activities both respond to the prejudice you say they face through efforts that do not confront the systemic concerns presented by the oppression you believe they endure.

    That’s telling, because it makes clear that you find a worthwhile response discrimination in an industry to involve actions that do not disrupt the industries’ governing principles. No one has to consider the ethics of age discrimination if people affected only respond to that discrimination with more of the same hopeful behavior. If Asian Americans believe themselves to be victimized by racism in the college admissions process (at best a dubious proposition, but whatever) and respond to that perceived discrimination by improving test scores and adding extracurricular activities, they do not challenge the discrimination itself in any way.

    They simply try to minimize its effects in their individual lives.

    It’s certainly not accurate to suggest that Black computer science graduates do not improve their resumes or approach tech companies in large numbers to seek employment. But there’s no reason to believe that these accomplished people should continually present themselves to an industry that normally hires and promotes White and Asian American men to the exclusion of other groups.

    And yes, I think you’d stand a strong chance when compared against a White female with similar credentials, MMJames. If most tech companies of comparable size enjoy worker demographics similar to Uber, it’s clear that more Asian American men were hired than women, especially in technical areas.

    People can pretend that the only sensible response to bigotry involves quiet respectability, but Black Americans invented respectability politics, and there’s a point when simply being the best around at something still does not allow someone to gain acceptance into the position they seek. The world is not fair.

    But when people and/ or corporations don’t accept employees from diverse backgrounds, that ideology may hinder the profit motive. Uber’s overwhelmingly White and Asian American male workforce couldn’t stop it’s CEO from alienating its’ core demographic. Without question, Uber would benefit from more workplace diversity. But Uber would need to be a decent fit for more people of color than the Asian American men who currently work there to attract more race and gender diversity. So far, they show no signs of altering course.

  336. mmjames:

    Snoopy can’t provide evidence because there is no evidence. Some of these companies want a “diverse” workforce so badly that they offer huge cash incentives for referrals of “diverse” candidates. If Snoopy knew of a candidate pool and wanted to get rich quickly, he could bypass law school and work as a recruiter. He could say, “You know what? You don’t need to pay me a salary. Just give me $5,000 for every recruit I find you.” The problem is that he himself wouldn’t be able to find recruits.

    Whether we’re talking about Ottawa, Toronto, New York, Boston, or the Bay Area, it’s all the same. What you say about Ottawa and Toronto culture is EXACTLY what I’ve witnessed in this country.

    Snoopy,

    Sometimes I read your diatribes and can’t help thinking: it must be nice to be you. You’re never hindered by truth, reality, logic, or any social expectations. You just say whatever’s on your mind. You’re like Donald Trump without the business experience.

    Now I hate to point this out, but Google, Facebook, Amazon, and all these other targets of Jesse Jackson’s rage are already quite efficient. It’s in their business interests to hire whoever is best; it’s not in their business interest to spend money looking for something that is already working quite well. You and Jackson like to keep talking about how bad or clueless these tech companies are. Well if these tech companies are so clueless, why are you advising Black people to work there? Why are you using their products? Why are we NOT complaining about their products?

    I think a little humility is in order here, Snoopy.

    I argue that Uber’s overwhelmingly White and Asian American male workforce led to that misunderstanding of the typical Uber rider, and further claim that a more diverse workforce would have been more likely to advise Uber’s CEO against the public statements and volunteer work that alienated so many of Uber’s core fans.

    Let me give you one more newsflash to digest. Almost any Black person or Asian person close enough to the CEO will not be a SJW. As ChineseMom said, you can get a job or promotion because of your race, but you’re not going to get any kind of decision-making or serious advisory role just because of your race–companies don’t get rich by hiring complainers or victimologists. Most Black (or Asian) people who are high up will be temperamentally more similar to a White CEO than a Black Shrieking Girl or DeRay McKesson. I hate to disrupt your fantasy, but that’s just the way the real world works.

  337. ChineseMom:

    I can’t believe I’m letting Snoopy get under my skin with his delusions, deceptions, and hallucinations, but do you remember a few years back when I said that Snoopy would not be a good role model for inner city kids, even if he volunteered (as many of us have done)? This is why. This is NOT the kind of masculinity that the Black community–rich or poor–needs. Gaming the system, misrepresenting facts, engaging in fantasy–these kids are living in single parent households and struggling. They need strong leadership grounded in tradition, not the typical “gimme some” that we see from the Far Left.

    I think this is exactly why Snoopy has never volunteered. He knows at a subconscious level that it’s not a good fit.

  338. There are some serious discrimination issues against Asian applicants at these tech firms. I’ve already posted one recent article in Canada where they even started to look into discrimination based on names alone. They’ve not done anything in the USofA about these discrimination against Asians, but plenty against Black and Hispanic/Latino applicants. However, the reality is Asians are extremely discriminated against from my own experience, particularly by Indians (FOBs).

    Also, Asians are stereotyped as STEM sweatshop coolies and not “management material” (good old boys), so there’s tons of discrimination in the form of bamboo ceiling for advancement. I’ve mostly seen mid-level managers and not corporate board members – mostly whites.

    However, the Fangs’ brand of racist SJW would go after the powerless scapegoats because they can since they’re racists.

  339. According to social attitudes surveys conducted by the ADL, Americans are more opposed to having an Asian supervisor, CEO, or president than a Black one. I think it mainly has to do with Blacks being seen as Americans and Asians being seen as foreigners. The rhetoric from SJWs that Asians are more privileged than Blacks when it comes to leadership positions is total bullshit.

  340. Why are we NOT complaining about their products? — BigWOWO

    When have we ever known you to complain about something brought about by White people?

    BigWOWO, your basic argument is that companies should be able to hire whomever they wish. I do not disagree with that argument. I too believe that companies should be able to hire whomever they wish.

    So if companies choose to seek out a more diverse workforce to stay competitive in the global marketplace, I applaud their efforts. You pretend this effort is problematic. This is our disagreement.

    I think that large institutions, including corporations and universities, should enact whatever means they deem just to seek the diverse populations they desire. You believe that when large institutions seek diverse populations, people like you are negatively affected. You can’t prove it, but that’s your belief.

    So let’s call this what it is. I believe that large institutions should enjoy the freedom to choose who should join their ranks. If this involves internal programming to recruit women, Blacks, and Latinos, that’s fine, because corporations and universities in my view should be able to pick who they want within, to stay competitive. Competitiveness today requires diversity, BigWOWO.

    It’s also just fine when these same companies do not hire women, Blacks, and Latinos — they have only themselves to blame when they make mistakes that cost profit. Just ask Uber.

    But since you view higher education and corporate employment as links to upper-class living, you wish these spaces reserved for people like yourself. You assume people like yourself are harder-working and more intelligent than outsiders, but all that ethnocentrism stems from the immigrant tribalism that demands for your people all the open slots in selective colleges and universities, and all the open slots in high-paying intellectual employment.

    Let’s call this what it is: you wish your people alone to enjoy all the social and cultural capital enjoyed by the wealthiest Whites. You want White people to shout ‘Whitey and Chang!’ alongside you. The difference between us is that I do not seek White approval or envy White people. You cannot say the same with honesty, BigWOWO. Your politics do not make sense without centralizing a desire for Whiteness.

    You applaud a hiring structure where White and Asian American male programmers find employment easily, but female, Black, and Latino programmers find employment rarely. To assume that the White and Asian American male programmers are simply better at programming is a clear mistake, but you don’t care, because it flatters your worldview. You also ignore the fact that in these same companies, Chang almost never manages Whitey.

    If you what to be second fiddle to White America, almost White but not quite, be my guest. I will not join you; I have too much self-respect.

  341. Amazingly, the original Model Minority stereotype was actually conceived by liberals, not conservatives. Snoopy’s anti-Asian racism makes even more sense from that angle.

    The fact that similarly qualified Blacks are paid more than Asians and twice as likely to be promoted in tech is interpreted as a form of “Asian privilege” just goes to show how far out of touch SJWs are with reality.

  342. I am surprised that Snoopy has not yet attacked the high numbers of foreigners in tech as “immigrant privilege” or as discrimination against Americans. After all, it’s the same logic he uses to argue that Asians are privileged racists for being in tech. On the other hand, it’s interesting that the preponderance of Blacks in sports, music, media, entertainment, politics etc. is not seen as a problem for diversity.

  343. Kiwi,

    In his book America the Beautiful, Ben Carson talks about Black guys in the inner city whose main m.o. is to try to get one up on the Man. Snoopy is the wealthy version of this. He doesn’t care as long as he’s “winning.” I think that’s why he ignores logic and relies on emotion. It’s painful to watch. It’s very sad.

    I used to think it was tribalism, but I’m starting to change my tune. It’s something far more than just tribalism.

    Snoopy,

    No, you completely misunderstand my position. I’m saying that companies don’t have a responsibility to lower their standards to admit more “diverse” populations. They can do whatever they want. If they think it will net them more sales, they should go ahead and do it. But it shouldn’t be forced. Nor should it be expected.

    Also, while I think diverse opinions (as opposed to just race) make a stronger company, you have yet to present any evidence that an employee base is stronger just because it’s blacker, or more Asian, or more White, or more anything race-based. We’re still all waiting for your evidence.

    We’re also waiting for your hidden cache of unemployed black guys with CS degrees.

    We can continue waiting though. I think we’ve already shown that there’s nothing there.

    You also ignore the fact that in these same companies, Chang almost never manages Whitey.

    That’s totally false, spoken again like a guy who has never set foot in tech company. Sorry, it just ain’t true. False. Hogwash. Nonsense. Lots of Asian managers work at large tech companies, and some of them make more money than you could imagine. Actually, I know a tech manager at a large tech company who is younger than me. He just quit to start his own VC tech firm that he’s starting with some other Asian dudes. They’re seed-funding it with their own money. I know you won’t believe me, but he wasn’t forced out by Whitey. He had accumulated enough money in his managerial position, and it was time to become a bigger player.

    If you what to be second fiddle to White America, almost White but not quite, be my guest. I will not join you; I have too much self-respect.

    You’ve actually hit the nail on the head here, Snoopy. I actually agree with you. You have wayyy to much “self-respect” to take orders from a White man.

    But I don’t define “self-respect” that way. If I apply for a job, I WILL take orders from a White man, Black man, or Asian man, or a woman, or an LGBT person, or anyone from any of your protected classes, and I see nothing shameful about that. You’re welcome to your own outlook. But I hope you understand that this lack of “self-respect” makes me a better employee than you. If you and I were both computer programmers, why would a CEO hire you over me? Why would he hire a guy who is too proud to take orders, who wants to lecture him on his White and Asian privilege, and who sees himself as an immediate equal before the ink is dry on the contract? I know you’d by dying to sue a manager who took me over you, but it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with attitude. It’s clear from this exchange that we just had.

  344. Snoopy,

    I’m going to invite you to self-reflect here. Don’t you think it’s strange that what you call “self-respect” is something that so many regular people eschew? Even among those who won’t be subordinate to a boss, very few people disrespect those who can. You really should think about that.

  345. @ bigWOWO

    It’s something far more than just tribalism.

    It’s oppositional culture. It’s a mindset that involuntary minorities adopt in every society, which leads to anti-social attitudes and behaviors like gangs, drugs, violence, crime, poverty, unemployment, dropouts, single moms, ghettos etc. which a lack of resources alone cannot explain. It’s all because they interpret their place in society negatively.

    Not sure how much sociology or psychology you know, but I read that low caste status groups are more likely to accept deviance because they feel that in a society they don’t belong to, there’s no point in following the rules of a system they don’t trust. In short, they think they have nothing to lose.

    Immigrants don’t fall into this mindset because they see their new country as a land of freedom and opportunity. Ben Carson is a voluntary minority because he considers his slave ancestors immigrants. While inaccurate, it explains how he had the focus and drive to succeed like he did.

    Most middle-class Blacks are also oppositional, like Snoopy. It explains why their kids don’t do as well on tests as class reductionists would predict.

    An example of just how bad oppositional culture can get is OJ Simpson’s acquittal and the huge support he had among Blacks. They distrusted the justice system so deeply, to the point of supporting a morally wrong verdict.

    Fun fact: The main reason Japan has such a low crime rate is not because of the country’s wealth, but because of Japanese nationalism. In an ethnically homogenous society, almost everybody feels like they belong, so deviant behavior like littering is looked down on strongly and universally.

  346. The post-60s wave of Asian Americans have been all about personal success. Now Asians have experienced successes together with SCA-5 and Peter Liang (thank you FOBs) despite Asian SJW sabotage attempts. The future is looking good for Asian Americans.
    Mexico has embraced innovation and productivity in recent years. I remember watching a specialty segment on our national TV news network (CBC) on the state of Canadian manufacturing. Like in America, much of our manufacturing base has atrophied and work has gone to Mexico. Several industry experts says Mexico should no longer be looked at as cheap labor but a source of innovation and value added services. I have every reason to believe this attitude will spread to Latino communities in America. I wonder how Snoopy would feel when Latino successes accelerate to the upside.

  347. Kiwi,

    I agree with you on Snoopy’s oppositional attitude. I vehemently disagree with all the other statements you’ve made regarding Ben Carson, the Japanese, “voluntary minorities” (a paradigm I don’t buy), etc. But that’s not important. The important thing is that yes, we agree on Snoopy’s oppositional culture, and yes, there’s some sort of attitude that gets in Snoopy’s way.

    Mmjames,

    I agree with you 100%.

    You know, as much as we dog Snoopy, he sometimes does succeed in teaching us something. Yesterday while I was studying kanji, I thought about the fact that the kanji for “samurai” (侍) is also the same kanji for “to serve, to wait upon.” (侍る) If you look at the dictionary, you’ll see that the word combinations all have something to do with subordinate roles:

    http://tangorin.com/general/samurai

    侍女【じじょ】lady attendant; maid
    侍医【じい】court physician
    侍従【じじゅう】chamberlain
    シ 内侍【ないし】maid of honor; maid of honour
    さむらい 侍【さむらい】warrior (esp. of military retainers of daimyos in the Edo period); man in attendance (on a person of high standing)
    侍気質【さむらいかたぎ】samurai spirit
    侍蟻【さむらいあり】Polyergus samurai (species of amazon ant)
    はべる 侍る【はべる】to wait upon; to serve

    We often think of samurai as being super-masculine, but among the Japanese it seems that the defining trait of who they are is their ability to SERVE. Chinese culture also has strong ideas of allegiance to causes or people. If you look at African immigrants, many of them practice the same kind of moderation and duty.

    I think this is where we clash so strongly with SJW’s. Where we tend to be okay with serving, they see that as a form of weakness…unless, of course, we’re serving THEM, which is the way they think it should be. But because the cause they stand for is so plagued with inequality, anger, and racism, few of us (thank you FOBs) would ever serve them or their cause.

  348. the kanji for “samurai” (侍) is also the same kanji for “to serve, to wait upon.

    Some Asian American intersectional feminist will probably scour Japanese translation dictionaries and note that with a few keystroke modifications here and there that the word would look awfully close to the kanji for wife-beating or some shiite like that.

    LOL would an Asian kid be afforded the same “punching up” antics as one of the SJW protected minorities?

    Are you kidding me? The entrance officer would more likely say “Here in America we speak English so learn it first and answer the questions properly”

  349. @mmjames,

    Was it Tan or Kingston-Hong who made up the radicals for “slave” (奴) is the same as for “woman” (女) in Chinese? Maybe in the 60s/70s where Chinese ignorance is rampant they can get away with that, but even these days where WILLFUL ignorance and intolerance by the regressive leftists makes it SAD the Fangs can’t even pass basic Chinese 101 class.

    Also, I’ve said it for years: despite the regressive leftists (NPR) screaming from the mountaintops “post-racial America” the reality is nowhere near true MLK dream land.

    https://www.facebook.com/SteveKuzj/videos/1287265758020185/

  350. aardvark,
    Maxine Hong Kingston didn’t made it up and wasn’t completely wrong on that. I don’t know her exact words, but my suspicion is that she just didn’t explain it correctly. Had you known a little bit more about Chinese history or literature, you would have known what she was talking about.

  351. Snoopy,

    If you what to be second fiddle to White America, almost White but not quite, be my guest. I will not join you; I have too much self-respect.

    I’m not quite sure what you mean by “White America”. Isn’t Affirmative Action a handout from “White America” to minorities? You don’t have problems or any self-respect to ask for handouts from “White America” or take handouts like your Cornell and law school’s admission, but have too much self-respect to earn what you want from “White America”?

    Again, this is tell us about our culture differences, which in my view is the root of your so called “anti-blackness” in Asian American community. In Chinese culture and Chinese society, people would feel shameful or embarrassed to ask for handouts. And for those who do that, them don’t get much respect.

    I still vividly remember how nervous and embarrassed I was when I first accompany my then six years old daughter to sell her Girl Scout cookie in our neighborhood, I’d rather to buy all of them myself. I only accepted this kind of activity after I realized that people are used to it, it is a good way for kids to raise money for their activities and be independent and it is also good for my kids to develop their interpersonal skills. I consider this is good part of American culture (White America). Most of Chinese immigrants have been through similar experience like I was with their kid’s school fund raising.

  352. ChineseMom raises a very good point. In Chinese culture–both the new and the old–taking handouts from someone is as bad as or worse than taking orders from someone. Unpaid debt is also really bad and is a matter of shame. The shame extends not just to the individual, but to the individual’s family. Again, it’s the same cultural difference that I alluded to. It’s all a matter of how you see things. In our culture, taking handouts is shameful, not a form of one-upping the Man, even though it might look like the Man is losing since money is leaving his pocket and going into the pocket of the guy taking the handout.

    I guess it’s a matter of perspective.

  353. ChineseMom, affirmative action is not a handout to anyone from anyone. Your question illustrates a severe lack of knowledge about how affirmative action works and why it exists today. In broad strokes, affirmative action exists so that large institutions do not overlook talent from social sectors they historically shunned or ignored. Further, no quotas are used, no point systems are employed in a consequential manner, so it is not possible to regard affirmative action as a handout to anyone.

    Simply put, anyone who calls affirmative action a handout has no business in an affirmative action debate. Further, you have no ability whatsoever to assume that my admissions to Cornell or my law school have anything to do with affirmative action. It’s plainly bigoted to make that assumption, frankly. Not that I expect any better from you.

    BigWOWO, Asian Americans have received cultural support in this country for as long as the model minority myth gained currency. Simply put, false assumptions about the meek, mild-mannered Asian American male contribute to his high employment in the tech sector by White men. Such assumptions do not generally follow female, Black, and Latino potential workers, and their low incidence in the tech sector may reflect some of these biases.

    Most Asian Americans reject the model minority frame as unworkable and inaccurate. You and your supporters appear to crave such framing, BigWOWO. It’s as if your highest ambition is to work as middle management for a White owned and operated corporation to gain economic stability, so long as you never challenge White politics or White prejudice at any given point. I suppose the phrase ‘second banana’ takes on a whole new meaning in your hands, no?

  354. SJWs attribute the high representation of Asians in tech to privilege, not education, skills, or hard work. Do SJWs also attribute the high representation of Jews in German medicine and law to privilege, not merit?

  355. mmjames:

    It’s an emotional release for him. Trump goes through it too.

    Snoopy,

    Affirmative action is a handout. If you don’t think that free bonus points for race is a handout–well, that pretty much proves ChineseMom’s point about the way in which you culturally view free stuff vs. the way Chinese people see it. And again, you only do this with Black people. If there were some system in place that allowed (mostly rich) Asian people to cut in front of the line, you’d be all over it.

    Simply put, false assumptions about the meek, mild-mannered Asian American male contribute to his high employment in the tech sector by White men.

    If we’re talking about the demographic as a whole, are they false assumptions? I mean, the crime rate among Asian Americans is lower than most other demographics. The average credit score is higher. The college graduation rate is higher. The test score average is higher. Asian people in general are willing to submit to a hiring supervisor, unlike you, who see submission to a White supervisor as a form of weakness and shame.

    So is it really “false?”

    Such assumptions do not generally follow female, Black, and Latino potential workers, and their low incidence in the tech sector may reflect some of these biases.

    There we go again with the mindreading!

    It’s as if your highest ambition is to work as middle management for a White owned and operated corporation to gain economic stability, so long as you never challenge White politics or White prejudice at any given point.

    Well right now, I’m challenging Black prejudice. I do challenge White prejudice as needed.

    Many Asians actually serve in upper management, a fact that I mentioned earlier. But even then, what’s wrong with aspiring to middle management? That’s what I don’t get. You get angry at these tech companies for not hiring Black engineers (whom you somehow can’t seem to locate), and then at the same time you insult those who are aspiring to the very positions that you feel should go to these same Black engineers (who you still can’t locate). Makes zero logical sense. Then again, much of what you say makes zero logical sense.

  356. But even then, what’s wrong with aspiring to middle management?

    What is wrong with being in entry management?
    What is wrong with working at the trenches?
    The way Snoopy talks, you think these are worst than collecting welfare or stealing. Sheesh.

  357. Everything is wrong with being middle management when you have the capabilities to lead. I tend to believe that Asian Americans have all manner of leadership qualities that should not be held by by simply prejudice. The so-called bamboo ceiling is a real phenomenon, and I would expect people to understand that the meek ‘go along to get along’ perspective BigWOWO espouses don’t not often critique the workplace discrimination Asian Americans face.

  358. Snoopy wrote:

    Everything is wrong with being middle management when you have the capabilities to lead.

    “Lead.” Last time I checked, that’s exactly what middle managers do. That’s MOSTLY what they do. I guess Snoopy has never been a middle manager. Guess he doesn’t know any middle managers. Like poor Black people, I guess you don’t see many middle managers hanging out with college liberals reading Ta Nehisi Coates.

    At tech companies, it’s a little more complicated than just “workplace discrimination.” You’ll notice that there are lots of Indian American (who are technically Asian American) CEOs, including at places like Google and Microsoft. These aren’t middle managers.

    Now if we’re talking about East Asians, I could get into why it’s not just the simplistic calls of “White Racism!!!” that influences how things turn out, but I don’t think Snoopy is interested in hearing the truth. I could talk about that with aardvark or mmjames, but they work in the industry, so they already know what I know. So I guess we’ll just leave it at that.

  359. At tech companies, it’s a little more complicated than just “workplace discrimination.” You’ll notice that there are lots of Indian American (who are technically Asian American) CEOs, including at places like Google and Microsoft. These aren’t middle managers.

    This has been something that I’ve pondered a bit but I don’t think I have many solid answers. Only a few thoughts/observations. Having worked only in Canada but often in companies with American HQs, I’ve observed the following:
    – Asians do significantly better in America than in Canada when gauged by presence in upper management
    -ABC/CBC Asian don’t fare that well when in comes to top positions. A lot of the folks at senior director level and above are FOBs. I think westernized Asians in general are more concerned about work/life balance and there are fewer members willing to sacrifice their lives to show how much of a 24/7 type of worker they are (and willing to openly push others to work similar hours). A lot of the Asians in top positions are SOBs and are expected to act like “goons” to keep to keep the grunts working hard. Also, there are relative few ABC/CBC PHDs compared to FOBs.
    -Canadians (POC and nonPOC) don’t have that “I must be best in the world” attitude. There are many smart Canadians who started their won companies but were content to be bought out by FB/Microsoft/Google/Cisco. Consequently there are very few large Canadian companies and relatively fewer high profile CEOs period.

    I also feel that one of the reasons there are fewer East Asians in top positions in America is because Asia does have companies like Hauwei, Baidu, HTC, Samsung etc, so some of talented individuals who received Western education might be tempted to go back and work at home for greater opportunities. I don’t believe India has any many similar companies.

    I tip my hat to those POC who tried and reached top positions. They are often universally hated (and feared) by the grunts and and are often only one mistake from going down. There is no shortage of whispers from White folks such as “Him promoted to VP is mind-boggling”.

  360. I’d argue that it is the SJWs who are the true anti-Black racists. By creating the fake narrative of Asian anti-Blackness, they’re perpetuating the white racists’ fabrication of the model-minority myth of Asian HOUSEHOLD incomes (with multi-generational households) in order to be complicit with and deflect attention away from true white racism against Blacks.

    And like already been pointed out here: white “liberal” SJWs make the paternalistic co-dependent narrative of Blacks needing their social policies and to keep voting for the racist regressive left to keep the Black community down with social programs, rather than developing true self-autonomy with wealth generating enterprises for Black youths’ futures.

    Thus, by scapegoating Asians (the smallest minority group they can target) with racist media imagery it’s easy to understand how these acts of heinous violence occur and how it’s complicity of the Asian SJWs (who are often married to WMs) that allows said violence to occur.

  361. Pingback: Justice Department may eliminate affirmative action | bigWOWO

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *