“The Atlantic then provides numerous links to various things Derbyshire has written, going back at least four years, with links, that don’t sound very good.”
What did he write that bothers you?
Mathematicians are trained to look at numbers, not to avoid them. Based on recent happenings in multiple cities, if the percentage of people at a public gathering suddenly goes from predominately white to black, it IS a good idea for whites to clear out.
There ARE racial differences between East and West Africa. And in Africa, those differences are critical to survival sometimes - remember Rwanda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide)?
People are not statistics.
We should not shirk from understanding, explaining, and working on the problems that are pointed out by various statistics.
But I don’t believe you react to statistics by teaching a general distrust for an entire race of people.
Let’s look at just one statistic — I think it was that 1600 white people were killed by blacks each year.
It is offered as part of the argument that it is much more likely that a black will kill a white, than a random white would kill a black.
But the problem is that neither a random white or a random black are likely to kill anybody. You could live your whole life and never run into one of the “black killers” who would kill a white person.
Some of what Derb wrote is just common-sense, although it would apply equally to other circumstances. There’s no sense in putting yourself into a situation where you would be an obvious target, regardless of the race of the neighborhood. And it is certainly true that people of all races tend to react differently to people who are ‘like them’.
But other things he said take single incidents and pretend they are common occurances. I go to dozens of theme parks every year, and there have been minority events in those parks, and I’ve never felt endangered or otherwise made uncomfortable being there. Yes, there was an incident — but saying it’s common is like using Columbine to justify the wholesale repression of common actions high schoolers take, in the name of “stopping the violence” that is already lower in schools than other places.
Derb knows this — he is a math guy. I still think he was being satirical.
108 posted on Sat Apr 07 2012 21:34:47 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Mad Dawgg: “My little league coach taught me to never swing at a pitch that is un the dirt.”
Yes, but we're playing big league politics, not little league baseball. In politics, responding to something **IN THE SAME NEWS CYCLE** is crucial if you're a candidate, and it's not a lot lower in the priority list for situations like this.
The big difference is a pitch in the dirt doesn't get the batter in trouble, and if there are enough of those pitches, the batter gets to walk to first base. Here, the “pitch,” if not responded to, can cause major damage to Free Republic for being racist. It's not a true accusation — look at all the support here for Herman Cain and Col. West — but an accusation with no response is an accusation which gets believed.
Let's be clear here — this is a high stakes game of hardball. The leftists are looking for ways to discredit conservatives. Free Republic is a major conservative website. Especially if Jim Robinson intends to lead a last-ditch fight to stop Mitt Romney — and he has made very clear that he's not going to support Romney no matter what the Republican Party does — Free Republic needs to avoid getting blasted as a website full of bigots.
We already know that the New York Times and reporters for other major media read Free Republic. Absolutely the last thing we need is for an article to show up in the major media tying Gingrich (or Santorum) to a few wacked-out crazy commenters here on Free Republic, and then have Mitt Romney resurrect the ghost of John McCain by saying he represents the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, not the party of Bob Jones University — but substituting the term “Free Republic” for “Bob Jones University.”
Anybody who knows the internet knows wackos put up wild comments. Some are trolls deliberately trying to get the website in trouble; others are the sort of extremists who attach themselves to any movement. The question is what the management does with those comments when called to their attention.
110 posted on Sat Apr 07 2012 21:35:40 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by Mr Rogers: “What did he write that bothers you?”
My primary problem is not with National Review or with Derbyshire, but rather with the characterization of Free Republic as a place where “really obvious racist stuff” goes up.
Yes, I've seen some racist and secessionist crap here. When I've seen it, I've jumped on it. I think I could probably find wild-eyed crazy stuff on any website that doesn't reflect the views of management — I don't blame Daily Kos or Huffington Post or places like that for their local loony leftists in the comment section until it becomes obvious the commenters are being backed by management — and that's why Free Republic needs to officially respond to make clear that we are not racists.
@ Flotsam_Jetsome: We're on the same page about public displays of affection, and not just in Asia. My Korean niece attends the largest of several Christian schools outside Fort Leonard Wood, which is run by an independent fundamental Baptist church. The school has a large minority contingent of blacks, Hispanics, and several different Asian groups. They require school uniforms and their rules on public displays of affection are stricter than Korean schools.
112 posted on Sat Apr 07 2012 21:38:09 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by reaganaut1: “Define ‘racism’. Is doubting that all races are equally intelligent on average ‘racist’?”
As Flotsam_Jetsome reminded us, every time we post there is a statement saying this: “Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.”
I think it's important that Jim Robinson, not me, make the call on how to define “racism.” I have ideas but it's important that I defer to the site owners.
For now, the problem is what the Atlantic said about Free Republic with pictures of Obama with bones in his nose, not comparing racial performance on standardized tests.
124 posted on Sat Apr 07 2012 21:54:32 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) by CharlesWayneCT: “BTW, in what has to be a hilarious joke, when the Atlantic article pretended to find such pictures at FR, they provided a link to the offensive picture. It was actually a link to Talking Points Memo, which is a left-wing site.”
Proving Atlantic doesn't have its own facts right is wonderful. Now let's go stick that into the Atlantic and see how they like it...