Gingrich is a joke. What isn’t a joke is his ridiculous statement that the Jan06 committee be jailed especially Liz Cheney. This for doing a job investigating sedition and treason against our Democracy? Gingrich is a bloody clown, but a dangerous clown.
As I have said elsewhere, conservatism as an ideological enterprise seems to go bad. Just as progressivism as an ideological enterprise seems to go bad (which I have not talked about much to date, but probably should).
If you look at the history of both in America, there is a lot of ugly. Even more if you expand the scope to outside of America.
Both are too focused on change--the conservatives as something to be resisted at almost all cost and progressives as something to be expedited at all cost. Neither lives in the actual moment. These (increasingly) seems top be a problem in American Culture at large. No one seems to be present in the here and now.
Both are, in the end authoritarian... because they cannot get what they want without being so. They both, in the end wish to create a uniform culture (at least uniform in the ways that count). And, again, you need to be authoritarian to get that.
We can look at conservatism and we can see evils that we know (because they are rooted clearly in our past). It is somewhat more difficult to see the evils of progressivism, as that is a more recent phenomenon and there are not so many examples--but there are some pretty bad ones--pick pretty much any revolutionary movement starting with the French revolution.
What's wrong with me? I'm a smart white woman and I could have been making millions over the past 20 spouting nonsense.
I could have started my own racist, gun loving online rag and raked in the cash from idiots. It's apparently easy money. As someone once said "there is a sucker born every minute".
Outstanding article by Joshua Tait--an absolute must read. I have been puzzled for a while by the scarcity of attention to Franco and the Spanish Civil War amidst the comparative energy focused on the affinities between Hitler/Nazism and trumpism/far-right authoritarianism in today's United States. Thank you for this vital historical lens.
Gotta love good old Newt, the self-declared superior intellect of the GOP, the self-serving genius [sic] who molded the Grand Old Party in his image, yadayadayada, all when Newt couldn't even get tenure as assistant professor at then backwater West Georgia College. Gingrich saw the writing on the wall. His academic balloon was popped. He was going nowhere fast. So he found his salvation: the cesspool of the Republican Party. Gotta hand it to Newt. He's a genius at being a total F N loser. And an unabashed fascist.
All proof that it does not take brains to wallow in the gutter.
Newt is also a recent convert to traditionalist Catholicism. His wife was trump's ambassador to the Vatican. See: Joshua Tait's indispensable article, referenced in Charlie's newsletter.
This is how the right has laundered their misinformation for years. Slowly from one fringe source to another. It bubbles up. Until it ends up in the freaking WSJ.
Where are the "good" GOPers like Hogan, Romney, Murkowski, and Collins on these issues? If they'd just quit the GOP and be independent like King is, they'd ate least have show they have some dignity
The problem is that if they speak up they will be voted out of office. I believe Cheney's one of the best and smartest Republicans, but she will probably not be voted for when she's up for election. And Kinsinger, her fellow Republican on the Jan 6th committee, says his family refuses to speak to him, even his parents! I can't imagine choosing a scumbag grifter like Trump over my own son.
That is exactly what Trumpers want good Republicans to do. They want good Republicans out of their party and out of their way so their corruption can't be stopped. The minute those elected Republicans leave the GOP, any influence they have to stop the Trump craziness is gone. I don't know why a lifelong Democrat who only turned Republican a year before running President gets to define in perpetuity what the Republican Party stands for. There is going to be a conservative political party, so isn't it better for conservatives to stay in the GOP and work to fix the problems instead of struggling for relevance as an independent or a Democrat? Absolutely. I'm with former GOP Chair Michael Steele on this topic. I think remaining a Republican doesn't mean you don't have dignity. I think Liz Cheney could not be showing more dignity right now.
The problem is that these people already have no influence, even if they remain in the party... if they CAN remain in the party. I doubt that they can. Most of them seem to be retiring or not running for re-election.
Perhaps. But when the building is burning to the ground, you need all hands on deck to do what can be done to either save the building or the surroundings or both.
Conservatives kowtowing to white supremacist authoritarians is dignified how? Quit the party and form a new one dedicated to ideals, not racism and a culture of personality
This guy sounds a lot like a reflection of Al Sharpton and every poster on the Daily Kos. He is not mainstream Republican at all. In terms of radicalism and his penchant for saying absurd things (like "all whites are implicitly biased against blacks" and the "US is a systemically racist country") which seem to be now mainstream beliefs in the Democrats party, he is way outside the lines of normal and standard for the Republican party.
Racism is inherent in human beings. It is built into us. It is an evolutionary mechanism. You can call it something besides racism (because it encompasses more than race). racism is merely the most highly visible contemporary manifestation.
We have an inherent preference for those who are like us--whether it be "race" or social status, or culture. Physical similarity is a signal of genetic similarity and cultural or social status similarity also works because the brain wiring for the whole thing is simplistic (it elides general similarity into genetic similarity).
The US HAS been a systemically racist country. We are still dealing with aspects of that. To deny that is to deny much of US history and culture.
Some people run their mouths about stuff in order to gain a following or get money or power. The misuse in that fashion does not invalidate the general observation that EVERYONE is racist to a greater or lesser degree--meaning that they will give preference to those who are most like themselves. The ultimate expression of this is nepotism.
I think it would be safe to say that most intelligent people with some decent education (and honesty) would recognize this--and so the thought that" 1) the US has been systemically racist and we are still trying to fix that and 2) people are racist are general beliefs that have validity--thus tarring the Democrats who have these beliefs is not actually tarring them.
Whites get more attention in this regard because, gee, they have held political, economic, and social power for most of the history of this country and have openly displayed their racism.
There is a common indicator of psychological dysfunction and/or cognitive dissonance (requiring cognitive behavior therapy). It is the propensity for a person to project historical events to being a current source of problem.
"The US HAS been a systemically racist country."
I think the problem with the progressive badge is that criticism is a required stock and trade and hence a progressive can never really admit to progress or else there would be no more need for a progressive project.
There is copious historical evidence of darkness and human malevolence. But then in 2008 53% of the nation voted for a black president.
The US was once a systemically and institutionally racist nation. Thankfully the Republicans went to war to abolish slavery, and then the Republicans ended Jim Crow and passed civil rights legislation. The next step is for the Republicans to defeat the Wall Street embedded Democrats that are destroying black economic opportunity. That will be civil rights 2.0 progress that progressives will find a way to criticize.
There are about 140 true white supremacists after Robert Byrd passed away... and 33% of them are Democrats, 33% of them are Republicans and the other 34% are anarchists. Find another meme.
"Racism is inherent in human beings. It is built into us. It is an evolutionary mechanism."
No it is not. Tribalism is. Cultural bias is because of tribalism. There is no inherent evolutionary benefit to racism (bias against others based on physical appearance). And the fact that Asians in America are the leading socioeconomic group dashes this fake theory of implicit racism all to hell.
Humans are predatory pack animals. They form tribes as a way to better attain and control the available resources. They fight other tribes when the other tribes compete for the same resources. Weak leaders attempt to carve out power by fomenting tribal conflict. People will align themselves with the tribe in power as part of a natural survival instinct... even when the tribe is warlike and nasty.
But this isn't racism. The Republican party has had a more diverse set of presidential candidates than has the Democrats that seem to be stuck on old white liberals. But I would not characterize the Democrats as racist because of this. They are tribal and their tribe is comprised of the people that adopt the worldview of the liberal progressive.
The secret sauce of the US being the most successful and most diverse country on the planet was because we demanded everyone be one tribe, one culture. We are not fighting any race wars today, we are fighting a cultural-tribal war.
CULTURAL bias is tribalism, which is an outgrowth of the natural tendency to preference the similar, which is rooted in evolutionary biology. maybe you should do some reading in evolutionary theory and evolutionary psychology/behavioral economics?
The fact that Asians succeed where others do not speaks to the nature of their culture and how it fits into American culture (specifically the work ethic and emphasis on education)... and of how that culture is perceived by the dominant culture. Look at what we did to the Chinese and the Japanese in the 19th century (up to and including barring them from coming to this country)... oh, and internment camps. How many German-Americans (or Italian-Americans) ended up in internment camps?
Success doesn't make the racism disappear and doesn't mean it wasn't there.
IOW, the Asians have succeeded in spite of racism. It is possible. They also do not labor under the large institutional and structural issues that the descendants of slaves have had to deal with. Are you going to argue that blacks did not suffer systemic oppression in this country because of their skin color and origin? Are you going to argue that other races have not faced similar, if less severe, obstacles?
I look at the examples of successful GoP Presidential candidates (the ones who won the nomination).... how are they more diverse than the Democrats? Especially the ones that got the nomination? How many female GoP politicians have been the party's Presidential nominee (zero)? How many visibly mixed-race have been part of the party ticket (Pres/VP) in the Presidential election? (zero). Again, you see what you WANT to see.
We didn't demand that EVERYONE be one tribe and one culture... especially those that did not "look like us." We certainly did not really do that with the slaves (or the natives)--we tried to keep them separate (or dead) or separate but "equal" remember? They were not welcome, regardless of how well they assimilated (even by the people who fought to end slavery--but wanted the blacks gone afterwards).
It isn't just cultural. as much as you would like to pretend.
If you demand one tribe and one culture the reality is that you are NOT being diverse. What made America successful was a combination of the unchaining of human greed via a capitalist economy with limited control (including human slavery and genocide), a large expanse of real estate (and resources) that could be easily taken from the native population, and several accidents of history.
Again, you see what you WANT to see. You want VERY badly to pretend that racism is not a thing.. or that it isn't racism, but something else that isn't so bad.. or that MIGHT even be good.
You just wrote a whole bunch of words that could have been replaced with "Frankly, you are correct".
But read this as tell me if you can spot the cognitive dissonance.... or demonstrated lack of logic.
"CULTURAL bias is tribalism, which is an outgrowth of the natural tendency to preference the similar"
"The fact that Asians succeed where others do not speaks to the nature of their culture and how it fits into American culture (specifically the work ethic and emphasis on education)"
You write these things to refute my points, and then make my points.
If the US is a country where whites are systemically racist against other non-whites and this explains the low socioeconomic circumstances of minorities, then Asians as a racial group would demonstrate the same low socioeconomic circumstances. They don't. That is evidence that there is not material systemic racism enough to explain other minorities low socioeconomic circumstances.
The reason is that Asian, in general, have more often assimilated into core American culture and have adopted American cultural values that support more successful outcomes.
What is messed up about the left memes of "racist America", and I know why they do it, is that the only divide we see growing and big today is class. The primary bias we see today is from the upper educated professional class and those working class and low income people. THAT is the implicit bias we are dealing with today... not racism.
1) Their CULTURE (which is different from American culture) emphasizes things that tend to increase the chances of success;
2) A lot of them come here as educated adults (H1-B visas) and (proportionally) have twice the population with a bachelor's degree or higher.
In other words, we aren't seeing the full population range of Asians as vice other races and they tend to be starting out in a better position (these days) than the average American, let alone the average American black.
Contrast this with growing up as black in America or Hispanic (especially if you show up in the US as an educated adult with a good job (H1-B visa) and then have the resources to raise children in the traditional Asian home environment.
What shaped the culture of American blacks? And where are they starting out, in comparison? What are the differences in perception (by the majority culture) of each group? It isn't as simple as you want to paint it.
As you point out, class (socio-economic status) is also a major factor--but there is just as much implicit bias by working class/low income against the upper class as there is in the opposite direction--the current faux populism of the GoP (and the accompanying performance art) is evidence of that.
I still find it hilarious that so many people think that Trump or his movement are actually populist rather than just grifters.
If you claim that the US is fundamentally racist... white bias against other races... then it would apply to all non-white races.
You cannot make this claim when it is clear that:
1. There are many people of all races that are successful and integrated into upper-class levels of American society.
2. The wealthiest and highest paid entertainers are black.
3. We had a two-term black POTUS.
4. The GOP ticket includes black candidates.
5. Mixed race marriages are plentiful and common.
6. Rosa Parks can sit anywhere she wants.
The list goes on.
The bias today is class. There is a bias against the underclass from the upper class. There is a bias against the upper class from the underclass. Blacks and other minority groups are over-represented in the underclass and under-represented in the upper class for reasons that are no longer racial bias.
The problem with you on the left continuing to push this fake scholarship of victimology is that it is not factually accurate and hence deflects from us having a real dialog about the real problems so we can some up with real solutions.
Effing more awareness about a fake boogieman of racism is not going to help anyone. Well it might help professional race-baiters make more clicks and money, and Democrats retain political power lacking anything else compelling to the American voter.
I work in trying to get more economic opportunity in the black community. Your lies about the black man being held back by white oppression is destructive to the black community. Stop it please.
1) You might want to think a little about how you’re defining racism. The idea that Asians aren’t experiencing racism because they tend to be successful would come as a real surprise to Asians, especially in recent years. I know very few Asians who haven’t experienced pretty stark racism. It was just in the past month a Wharton professor proposed halting Asian immigration because Asians are taking all the good jobs. See how Asian Americans feel about that. (The Great Replacement Theory espoused by the Tucker Carsons of the world is another example of growing racism.)
2) African Americans have and still experience economic racism that kept them steps behind whites and made building generational wealth. Land was stolen, and is still being stolen, from farmers. Whole successful tubes were destroyed and property seized and owners never compensated. Black WW2 vets were in many cases denied educational and other benefits given to virtually all white gets. Black neighborhoods were destroyed by highway projects and set off in neighborhoods underserved by local governments and businesses. Red lining made getting home loans nearly impossible for many blacks … and there has been story after about how black families are having difficulty getting loans despite having the same financial qualifications as whites. And it is EXTREMELY difficult to build generational wealth without home ownership. Those are just a few examples of how the economic deck has been stacked. There are many more examples … if you take the time to learn about them
Asian "racism" is coming from Democrats who lump Asians into whites and push colleges to limit their acceptance. That is why Asians are jumping from the Democrat party, in addition to the woke nonsense causing them to recoil.
100% of the problems in the black community are caused by the fall of economic opportunity that has been caused by the political establishment exporting jobs while importing more poor and uneducated people from other countries to compete for the remaining few, and the decades of failed liberal policies including attempting to pay off families with welfare while resisting education reforms that threaten the adult jobs program and Democrat campaign contributor we call the public education system.
So if you want to call this racism, then it is the Democrat party perpetuating that racism.
I’m very curious where the quote you cite, “all whites are implicitly biased against blacks,” comes from. I can’t find anything like that, attributed to Sharpton or anyone else. Implicit bias is universal because we simply make judgments, good and bad, based on superficial things like race, appearance, perceived class even where we see people in unexpected places—generally without being aware that we are doing so. People who ardently reject racism or are even of the same race are entirely capable of implicit bias. Even if you are inclined—or maybe especially if you are inclined—to reject the concept, it’s worth at least trying to understand it. You might learn something about the way the brain works and how it plays tricks on us. Here’s a helpful rundown. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2014/12/26/7443979/racism-implicit-racial-bias
The fake academic scholarship writing on the theory of implicit bias which has been fully adopted as reality by the social justice activist set that permeates the Democrat party apparatus will use the slight of hand to say "most", but then go on to explain that there isn't really any acceptable way to identify those that are and those that are not... so we just need to assume that all are.
There are always normal people commenting on these sites. But there are many more Howleys on the left than there are on the right. At least that I can see.
Sharpton is evil, but is more of a self-aggrandizing opportunist with a long history of using hate to enrich himself. Howley actually seems to believe his hatemongering.
Interesting to compare and contrast the species of conservatism Joshua Tait describes with David Brooks recent description of his conservatism in The Atlantic. Brooks takes "epistemological modesty" as the defining characteristic of philosophical conservatism. The Right Tait describes is anything but epistemological modest, and he rightly describes it as a form of Utopianism. What historically gave a degree of unity to Brooks style conservatism and this utopian right-wingism was anti-Marxism. Recall that orthodox Marxism asserts that there are laws of history as clear and simple as those of Newtonian physics and the adherents to this philosophy are here to lead us into this inevitable future. The two sides of conservatism hated Marxism for different reasons, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Now that orthodox Marxism has faded as a living force in our lives, those of us on the more Brooksian side of conservatism are discovering we really have little in common with the conservatism Tait describes.
There is a regular commenter at this site that reminds us that Adlai Stevenson described the Democratic Party of his time as conservative. Among Brooks style conservatives, this is not an idiosyncratic view. In this school, FDR's reforms are regarded as conservative reforms. Recall that so many at the time thought that the future was either communism or fascism, that the institutions of free governance had been thoroughly discredited. FDR conserved these institutions with his significant reforms.
The First New Deal had a lot of fascist economic ideas, especially the National Recovery Administration.
We forget that the biggest break that FDR had with Fascism and with conservative Republican dogma was with his total embrace of free trade and his western hemisphere Good Neighbor Policy. Dozens of reciprocal trade agreements happened on his watch and eventually the Republicans would admit that he was right (until Trump). And he stopped sending the Marines into every Latin American country where the government did something we didn't like. He let Mexico nationalize its oil industry, a decision that would have a huge positive impact on the US's ability to fight WW2, as it created a very friendly country to our south that sent us humongous amounts of raw materials, a huge surplus labor force to replace the agricultural workers who had been drafted into our military, and even an air squadron to fight in the Philippines -- the only time Mexico has ever sent its military to fight outside Mexico. Trump of course is aware of none of this.
You can combat evil. Evil has plans and goals. Evil is rational (at least within the human sense).
What you cannot fight is stupid, because it is simply there and it is persistent. It permeates humanity and human behavior. It's why we have warning labels on stuff telling people not to do things (like make toast while taking a bath). Why we always warn people about driving and texting.... about wearing your seat belt... a lot of things.
It is a continual effort to simply mitigate the worst effects of stupid. It kills thousands every year. Sickens or cripples more.
People like Howley feed on stupid. They need it to survive. Go though the checkout line at a lot of places and look at the racks by the register--at the tabloids, with their front page stupid for all to see and buy. Youtube is full of examples of stupid that people laugh at (and then go and do something as equally stupid).
No amount of education or training can fix it. It is in the bone.
When you combine the stupid with the willingness of people to believe things that make them happy (even if they are lies), you get a "winning" combination.
Nice to note that when the "Girth-Lookalike of the Snowflake/Secessionist-in-Chief, was living off the largess of his wife's Ambassadorial pocketbook, that Gingrich was studying Constitutional Law for four years.
No surprise that reality was absent from his first consultative "policy" for the party in 2024.
Surprised that he didn't offer the usual cult chant "Lock Them Up," but he probably didn't want to confuse the ReTrumplican't boobwazie as who who he was sending out the call for lock-up.
It will be a difficult call for the rank and file to choose who most emulates the girth of William Howard Taft: The Former Guy (Trump), the Former Disgraced House Speaker (Gingrich), the Wannabe President (DeSantis), and the Former Self-Declared Legal Scholar and Human Being (Cruz).
You think the former guy doesn't needle Cruz about being portrayed by a woman on SNL.
Gingrich is a joke. What isn’t a joke is his ridiculous statement that the Jan06 committee be jailed especially Liz Cheney. This for doing a job investigating sedition and treason against our Democracy? Gingrich is a bloody clown, but a dangerous clown.
Luke O’Brien
A lot of discussion of Franco and no one has thought to post this? I am disappointed in all of us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjRqj_STFFM
Let's not forget that intellectual conservatism also kind of loved Pinochet's Argentina.
Pinochet was Chilean, not Argentinian. But yes, intellectual conservativism loved him.
You mean the 8th largest economy at one time until the socialist Peron "reformed" it?
Peron was more like Donald Trump than like Clement Attlee.
Why yes, JBoone, that's the one I mean.
As I have said elsewhere, conservatism as an ideological enterprise seems to go bad. Just as progressivism as an ideological enterprise seems to go bad (which I have not talked about much to date, but probably should).
If you look at the history of both in America, there is a lot of ugly. Even more if you expand the scope to outside of America.
Both are too focused on change--the conservatives as something to be resisted at almost all cost and progressives as something to be expedited at all cost. Neither lives in the actual moment. These (increasingly) seems top be a problem in American Culture at large. No one seems to be present in the here and now.
Both are, in the end authoritarian... because they cannot get what they want without being so. They both, in the end wish to create a uniform culture (at least uniform in the ways that count). And, again, you need to be authoritarian to get that.
We can look at conservatism and we can see evils that we know (because they are rooted clearly in our past). It is somewhat more difficult to see the evils of progressivism, as that is a more recent phenomenon and there are not so many examples--but there are some pretty bad ones--pick pretty much any revolutionary movement starting with the French revolution.
As Eric Hoffer once said "What starts out here as a mass movement ends up as a racket, a cult, or a corporation.“
What's wrong with me? I'm a smart white woman and I could have been making millions over the past 20 spouting nonsense.
I could have started my own racist, gun loving online rag and raked in the cash from idiots. It's apparently easy money. As someone once said "there is a sucker born every minute".
It's not too late!
Ha ha!
I feel you.
Newt Gingrich is one of the worst of the worst. The left should not let his comment pass without a huge outcry. A hew and a cry.
Outstanding article by Joshua Tait--an absolute must read. I have been puzzled for a while by the scarcity of attention to Franco and the Spanish Civil War amidst the comparative energy focused on the affinities between Hitler/Nazism and trumpism/far-right authoritarianism in today's United States. Thank you for this vital historical lens.
Gotta love good old Newt, the self-declared superior intellect of the GOP, the self-serving genius [sic] who molded the Grand Old Party in his image, yadayadayada, all when Newt couldn't even get tenure as assistant professor at then backwater West Georgia College. Gingrich saw the writing on the wall. His academic balloon was popped. He was going nowhere fast. So he found his salvation: the cesspool of the Republican Party. Gotta hand it to Newt. He's a genius at being a total F N loser. And an unabashed fascist.
All proof that it does not take brains to wallow in the gutter.
Newt is also a recent convert to traditionalist Catholicism. His wife was trump's ambassador to the Vatican. See: Joshua Tait's indispensable article, referenced in Charlie's newsletter.
This is how the right has laundered their misinformation for years. Slowly from one fringe source to another. It bubbles up. Until it ends up in the freaking WSJ.
Reagan championed white supremacy and conservatives made him a hero
I missed that white supremacy speech.
Philadelphia, MS where he extolled states' rights near where civil rights activists were murdered
Where are the "good" GOPers like Hogan, Romney, Murkowski, and Collins on these issues? If they'd just quit the GOP and be independent like King is, they'd ate least have show they have some dignity
The problem is that if they speak up they will be voted out of office. I believe Cheney's one of the best and smartest Republicans, but she will probably not be voted for when she's up for election. And Kinsinger, her fellow Republican on the Jan 6th committee, says his family refuses to speak to him, even his parents! I can't imagine choosing a scumbag grifter like Trump over my own son.
There is really something horrible afoot.
Hogan has been saying things like this for a while. But he is term-limited and will likely return to the private sector.
That sounds like good German talk in 1933
That is exactly what Trumpers want good Republicans to do. They want good Republicans out of their party and out of their way so their corruption can't be stopped. The minute those elected Republicans leave the GOP, any influence they have to stop the Trump craziness is gone. I don't know why a lifelong Democrat who only turned Republican a year before running President gets to define in perpetuity what the Republican Party stands for. There is going to be a conservative political party, so isn't it better for conservatives to stay in the GOP and work to fix the problems instead of struggling for relevance as an independent or a Democrat? Absolutely. I'm with former GOP Chair Michael Steele on this topic. I think remaining a Republican doesn't mean you don't have dignity. I think Liz Cheney could not be showing more dignity right now.
The problem is that these people already have no influence, even if they remain in the party... if they CAN remain in the party. I doubt that they can. Most of them seem to be retiring or not running for re-election.
That would be great except the Republicans are pushing out of the party.
Perhaps. But when the building is burning to the ground, you need all hands on deck to do what can be done to either save the building or the surroundings or both.
Quisling called he wants his excuse back
Conservatives kowtowing to white supremacist authoritarians is dignified how? Quit the party and form a new one dedicated to ideals, not racism and a culture of personality
Peter Crumpet lolololol. Sounds about as fake of a name as Newt Gingrich.
Create an author who is a mashup of Charles Dickens and J.K.Rowling and that author would surely create a character named Newt Gingrich.
This guy sounds a lot like a reflection of Al Sharpton and every poster on the Daily Kos. He is not mainstream Republican at all. In terms of radicalism and his penchant for saying absurd things (like "all whites are implicitly biased against blacks" and the "US is a systemically racist country") which seem to be now mainstream beliefs in the Democrats party, he is way outside the lines of normal and standard for the Republican party.
Hi JBoone, how's it going? Why the name change?
I was adopted recently.
Good luck with your new family.
Racism is inherent in human beings. It is built into us. It is an evolutionary mechanism. You can call it something besides racism (because it encompasses more than race). racism is merely the most highly visible contemporary manifestation.
We have an inherent preference for those who are like us--whether it be "race" or social status, or culture. Physical similarity is a signal of genetic similarity and cultural or social status similarity also works because the brain wiring for the whole thing is simplistic (it elides general similarity into genetic similarity).
The US HAS been a systemically racist country. We are still dealing with aspects of that. To deny that is to deny much of US history and culture.
Some people run their mouths about stuff in order to gain a following or get money or power. The misuse in that fashion does not invalidate the general observation that EVERYONE is racist to a greater or lesser degree--meaning that they will give preference to those who are most like themselves. The ultimate expression of this is nepotism.
I think it would be safe to say that most intelligent people with some decent education (and honesty) would recognize this--and so the thought that" 1) the US has been systemically racist and we are still trying to fix that and 2) people are racist are general beliefs that have validity--thus tarring the Democrats who have these beliefs is not actually tarring them.
Whites get more attention in this regard because, gee, they have held political, economic, and social power for most of the history of this country and have openly displayed their racism.
There is a common indicator of psychological dysfunction and/or cognitive dissonance (requiring cognitive behavior therapy). It is the propensity for a person to project historical events to being a current source of problem.
"The US HAS been a systemically racist country."
I think the problem with the progressive badge is that criticism is a required stock and trade and hence a progressive can never really admit to progress or else there would be no more need for a progressive project.
There is copious historical evidence of darkness and human malevolence. But then in 2008 53% of the nation voted for a black president.
The US was once a systemically and institutionally racist nation. Thankfully the Republicans went to war to abolish slavery, and then the Republicans ended Jim Crow and passed civil rights legislation. The next step is for the Republicans to defeat the Wall Street embedded Democrats that are destroying black economic opportunity. That will be civil rights 2.0 progress that progressives will find a way to criticize.
Except the GoP has somehow become the banner bearers of racism in America today... they sure seem popular with the white supremacists for some reason.
There are about 140 true white supremacists after Robert Byrd passed away... and 33% of them are Democrats, 33% of them are Republicans and the other 34% are anarchists. Find another meme.
Saying something is so doesn't make it so... in case you didn't know that.
Pot calling kettle. Someone needs to take his own meds and stop prescribing to others.
"Racism is inherent in human beings. It is built into us. It is an evolutionary mechanism."
No it is not. Tribalism is. Cultural bias is because of tribalism. There is no inherent evolutionary benefit to racism (bias against others based on physical appearance). And the fact that Asians in America are the leading socioeconomic group dashes this fake theory of implicit racism all to hell.
Humans are predatory pack animals. They form tribes as a way to better attain and control the available resources. They fight other tribes when the other tribes compete for the same resources. Weak leaders attempt to carve out power by fomenting tribal conflict. People will align themselves with the tribe in power as part of a natural survival instinct... even when the tribe is warlike and nasty.
But this isn't racism. The Republican party has had a more diverse set of presidential candidates than has the Democrats that seem to be stuck on old white liberals. But I would not characterize the Democrats as racist because of this. They are tribal and their tribe is comprised of the people that adopt the worldview of the liberal progressive.
The secret sauce of the US being the most successful and most diverse country on the planet was because we demanded everyone be one tribe, one culture. We are not fighting any race wars today, we are fighting a cultural-tribal war.
CULTURAL bias is tribalism, which is an outgrowth of the natural tendency to preference the similar, which is rooted in evolutionary biology. maybe you should do some reading in evolutionary theory and evolutionary psychology/behavioral economics?
The fact that Asians succeed where others do not speaks to the nature of their culture and how it fits into American culture (specifically the work ethic and emphasis on education)... and of how that culture is perceived by the dominant culture. Look at what we did to the Chinese and the Japanese in the 19th century (up to and including barring them from coming to this country)... oh, and internment camps. How many German-Americans (or Italian-Americans) ended up in internment camps?
Success doesn't make the racism disappear and doesn't mean it wasn't there.
IOW, the Asians have succeeded in spite of racism. It is possible. They also do not labor under the large institutional and structural issues that the descendants of slaves have had to deal with. Are you going to argue that blacks did not suffer systemic oppression in this country because of their skin color and origin? Are you going to argue that other races have not faced similar, if less severe, obstacles?
I look at the examples of successful GoP Presidential candidates (the ones who won the nomination).... how are they more diverse than the Democrats? Especially the ones that got the nomination? How many female GoP politicians have been the party's Presidential nominee (zero)? How many visibly mixed-race have been part of the party ticket (Pres/VP) in the Presidential election? (zero). Again, you see what you WANT to see.
We didn't demand that EVERYONE be one tribe and one culture... especially those that did not "look like us." We certainly did not really do that with the slaves (or the natives)--we tried to keep them separate (or dead) or separate but "equal" remember? They were not welcome, regardless of how well they assimilated (even by the people who fought to end slavery--but wanted the blacks gone afterwards).
It isn't just cultural. as much as you would like to pretend.
If you demand one tribe and one culture the reality is that you are NOT being diverse. What made America successful was a combination of the unchaining of human greed via a capitalist economy with limited control (including human slavery and genocide), a large expanse of real estate (and resources) that could be easily taken from the native population, and several accidents of history.
Again, you see what you WANT to see. You want VERY badly to pretend that racism is not a thing.. or that it isn't racism, but something else that isn't so bad.. or that MIGHT even be good.
You just wrote a whole bunch of words that could have been replaced with "Frankly, you are correct".
But read this as tell me if you can spot the cognitive dissonance.... or demonstrated lack of logic.
"CULTURAL bias is tribalism, which is an outgrowth of the natural tendency to preference the similar"
"The fact that Asians succeed where others do not speaks to the nature of their culture and how it fits into American culture (specifically the work ethic and emphasis on education)"
You write these things to refute my points, and then make my points.
If the US is a country where whites are systemically racist against other non-whites and this explains the low socioeconomic circumstances of minorities, then Asians as a racial group would demonstrate the same low socioeconomic circumstances. They don't. That is evidence that there is not material systemic racism enough to explain other minorities low socioeconomic circumstances.
The reason is that Asian, in general, have more often assimilated into core American culture and have adopted American cultural values that support more successful outcomes.
What is messed up about the left memes of "racist America", and I know why they do it, is that the only divide we see growing and big today is class. The primary bias we see today is from the upper educated professional class and those working class and low income people. THAT is the implicit bias we are dealing with today... not racism.
Here is why Asians tend to succeed:
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/rise-of-asian-americans-2012-analysis/overview/
1) Their CULTURE (which is different from American culture) emphasizes things that tend to increase the chances of success;
2) A lot of them come here as educated adults (H1-B visas) and (proportionally) have twice the population with a bachelor's degree or higher.
In other words, we aren't seeing the full population range of Asians as vice other races and they tend to be starting out in a better position (these days) than the average American, let alone the average American black.
Contrast this with growing up as black in America or Hispanic (especially if you show up in the US as an educated adult with a good job (H1-B visa) and then have the resources to raise children in the traditional Asian home environment.
What shaped the culture of American blacks? And where are they starting out, in comparison? What are the differences in perception (by the majority culture) of each group? It isn't as simple as you want to paint it.
As you point out, class (socio-economic status) is also a major factor--but there is just as much implicit bias by working class/low income against the upper class as there is in the opposite direction--the current faux populism of the GoP (and the accompanying performance art) is evidence of that.
I still find it hilarious that so many people think that Trump or his movement are actually populist rather than just grifters.
You seem pretty brain dead on this.
If you claim that the US is fundamentally racist... white bias against other races... then it would apply to all non-white races.
You cannot make this claim when it is clear that:
1. There are many people of all races that are successful and integrated into upper-class levels of American society.
2. The wealthiest and highest paid entertainers are black.
3. We had a two-term black POTUS.
4. The GOP ticket includes black candidates.
5. Mixed race marriages are plentiful and common.
6. Rosa Parks can sit anywhere she wants.
The list goes on.
The bias today is class. There is a bias against the underclass from the upper class. There is a bias against the upper class from the underclass. Blacks and other minority groups are over-represented in the underclass and under-represented in the upper class for reasons that are no longer racial bias.
The problem with you on the left continuing to push this fake scholarship of victimology is that it is not factually accurate and hence deflects from us having a real dialog about the real problems so we can some up with real solutions.
Effing more awareness about a fake boogieman of racism is not going to help anyone. Well it might help professional race-baiters make more clicks and money, and Democrats retain political power lacking anything else compelling to the American voter.
I work in trying to get more economic opportunity in the black community. Your lies about the black man being held back by white oppression is destructive to the black community. Stop it please.
1) You might want to think a little about how you’re defining racism. The idea that Asians aren’t experiencing racism because they tend to be successful would come as a real surprise to Asians, especially in recent years. I know very few Asians who haven’t experienced pretty stark racism. It was just in the past month a Wharton professor proposed halting Asian immigration because Asians are taking all the good jobs. See how Asian Americans feel about that. (The Great Replacement Theory espoused by the Tucker Carsons of the world is another example of growing racism.)
2) African Americans have and still experience economic racism that kept them steps behind whites and made building generational wealth. Land was stolen, and is still being stolen, from farmers. Whole successful tubes were destroyed and property seized and owners never compensated. Black WW2 vets were in many cases denied educational and other benefits given to virtually all white gets. Black neighborhoods were destroyed by highway projects and set off in neighborhoods underserved by local governments and businesses. Red lining made getting home loans nearly impossible for many blacks … and there has been story after about how black families are having difficulty getting loans despite having the same financial qualifications as whites. And it is EXTREMELY difficult to build generational wealth without home ownership. Those are just a few examples of how the economic deck has been stacked. There are many more examples … if you take the time to learn about them
Asian "racism" is coming from Democrats who lump Asians into whites and push colleges to limit their acceptance. That is why Asians are jumping from the Democrat party, in addition to the woke nonsense causing them to recoil.
100% of the problems in the black community are caused by the fall of economic opportunity that has been caused by the political establishment exporting jobs while importing more poor and uneducated people from other countries to compete for the remaining few, and the decades of failed liberal policies including attempting to pay off families with welfare while resisting education reforms that threaten the adult jobs program and Democrat campaign contributor we call the public education system.
So if you want to call this racism, then it is the Democrat party perpetuating that racism.
If you thought I made your points, then you have some serious cognitive dissonance going on.
Sure. I have a relative who is insane and he thinks everyone else is crazy. Get some help.
Frank Lee is JBoone.
I’m very curious where the quote you cite, “all whites are implicitly biased against blacks,” comes from. I can’t find anything like that, attributed to Sharpton or anyone else. Implicit bias is universal because we simply make judgments, good and bad, based on superficial things like race, appearance, perceived class even where we see people in unexpected places—generally without being aware that we are doing so. People who ardently reject racism or are even of the same race are entirely capable of implicit bias. Even if you are inclined—or maybe especially if you are inclined—to reject the concept, it’s worth at least trying to understand it. You might learn something about the way the brain works and how it plays tricks on us. Here’s a helpful rundown. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2014/12/26/7443979/racism-implicit-racial-bias
The fake academic scholarship writing on the theory of implicit bias which has been fully adopted as reality by the social justice activist set that permeates the Democrat party apparatus will use the slight of hand to say "most", but then go on to explain that there isn't really any acceptable way to identify those that are and those that are not... so we just need to assume that all are.
http://www.kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/docs/implicit-bias_5-24-12.pdf
Dailykos has a lot of normal people commenting. I however am under a permanent ban because I said I would never vote for Tulsi Gabbard for President.
There are always normal people commenting on these sites. But there are many more Howleys on the left than there are on the right. At least that I can see.
You aren't looking very hard.
Sharpton is evil, but is more of a self-aggrandizing opportunist with a long history of using hate to enrich himself. Howley actually seems to believe his hatemongering.
I think all of them are looking for followers, likes and clicks to monetize. Say the most absurd things and get your base all riled up.
Interesting to compare and contrast the species of conservatism Joshua Tait describes with David Brooks recent description of his conservatism in The Atlantic. Brooks takes "epistemological modesty" as the defining characteristic of philosophical conservatism. The Right Tait describes is anything but epistemological modest, and he rightly describes it as a form of Utopianism. What historically gave a degree of unity to Brooks style conservatism and this utopian right-wingism was anti-Marxism. Recall that orthodox Marxism asserts that there are laws of history as clear and simple as those of Newtonian physics and the adherents to this philosophy are here to lead us into this inevitable future. The two sides of conservatism hated Marxism for different reasons, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Now that orthodox Marxism has faded as a living force in our lives, those of us on the more Brooksian side of conservatism are discovering we really have little in common with the conservatism Tait describes.
There is a regular commenter at this site that reminds us that Adlai Stevenson described the Democratic Party of his time as conservative. Among Brooks style conservatives, this is not an idiosyncratic view. In this school, FDR's reforms are regarded as conservative reforms. Recall that so many at the time thought that the future was either communism or fascism, that the institutions of free governance had been thoroughly discredited. FDR conserved these institutions with his significant reforms.
The First New Deal had a lot of fascist economic ideas, especially the National Recovery Administration.
We forget that the biggest break that FDR had with Fascism and with conservative Republican dogma was with his total embrace of free trade and his western hemisphere Good Neighbor Policy. Dozens of reciprocal trade agreements happened on his watch and eventually the Republicans would admit that he was right (until Trump). And he stopped sending the Marines into every Latin American country where the government did something we didn't like. He let Mexico nationalize its oil industry, a decision that would have a huge positive impact on the US's ability to fight WW2, as it created a very friendly country to our south that sent us humongous amounts of raw materials, a huge surplus labor force to replace the agricultural workers who had been drafted into our military, and even an air squadron to fight in the Philippines -- the only time Mexico has ever sent its military to fight outside Mexico. Trump of course is aware of none of this.
On my long list of will-eventually-get-to books.
You can combat evil. Evil has plans and goals. Evil is rational (at least within the human sense).
What you cannot fight is stupid, because it is simply there and it is persistent. It permeates humanity and human behavior. It's why we have warning labels on stuff telling people not to do things (like make toast while taking a bath). Why we always warn people about driving and texting.... about wearing your seat belt... a lot of things.
It is a continual effort to simply mitigate the worst effects of stupid. It kills thousands every year. Sickens or cripples more.
People like Howley feed on stupid. They need it to survive. Go though the checkout line at a lot of places and look at the racks by the register--at the tabloids, with their front page stupid for all to see and buy. Youtube is full of examples of stupid that people laugh at (and then go and do something as equally stupid).
No amount of education or training can fix it. It is in the bone.
When you combine the stupid with the willingness of people to believe things that make them happy (even if they are lies), you get a "winning" combination.
No, they feed on evil
No. They are evil, but evil needs stupid like fires need oxygen.
Nice to note that when the "Girth-Lookalike of the Snowflake/Secessionist-in-Chief, was living off the largess of his wife's Ambassadorial pocketbook, that Gingrich was studying Constitutional Law for four years.
No surprise that reality was absent from his first consultative "policy" for the party in 2024.
Surprised that he didn't offer the usual cult chant "Lock Them Up," but he probably didn't want to confuse the ReTrumplican't boobwazie as who who he was sending out the call for lock-up.
It will be a difficult call for the rank and file to choose who most emulates the girth of William Howard Taft: The Former Guy (Trump), the Former Disgraced House Speaker (Gingrich), the Wannabe President (DeSantis), and the Former Self-Declared Legal Scholar and Human Being (Cruz).
You think the former guy doesn't needle Cruz about being portrayed by a woman on SNL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVt59iF4oYE
SNL picked up on Tim Miller's observation about Cruz having an humiliation kink.