The Consequences of Schools Teaching Hate, Division & Victim-hood Mentality

yep...you are a racist. Wow you really hate black people. Someone will call you on that someday.

Everything said in that book is 100% correct and there is systemic racism in the US. Stop denying reality.

Yeah, affirmative action, which discriminates on the basis of skin color, is certainly racist. Guess who that benefits?

If one chooses to work hard and make good choices in life, America will provide that person the Avenue to success. If one chooses to embrace victim-hood mentality while not putting in the work and making poor choices in life, a positive outcome will not result. If there was systemic racism in America, Barack Obama would never have been POTUS along with a huge number of other successful black people so that kind of blows your theory out of the water, Bob. The vast majority of Americans judge people by their work ethic along with their behavior and character unlike leftists who judge people by their skin color.

Liberals set up black children with feelings of hopelessness and failure when they instill hatred for whites and a 'poor, poor pitiful me' attitude. This leads to an entitlement mentality and blaming a history of slavery instead of embracing the equal rights they have had for decades and becoming successful citizens. Leftists setting fires, looting and killing police officers is a direct result of 'liberal' education and policies including kicking men out of the home and replacing them with Uncle Sam.

Let's take this apart piece by piece.

1. "If one chooses to work hard and make good choices in life, America will provide that person the Avenue to success. If one chooses to embrace victim-hood mentality while not putting in the work and making poor choices in life, a positive outcome will not result."

This is a "JuSt PuLl YoUr SeLf By YoUr BoOtStRaPs" argument. First of all, many poor people work extremely hard, many more than one job, but are still poor. This means the system is failing them, not them. Also, as for most poor people, and especially black people, there are factors completely unrelated to personal choices that result in them being poor. Like how black families accrue a significantly lower amount of income as an inevitable result of centuries of slavery and discrimination, causing their child to have a poor household and a poor education, two very important factors in determining poverty. You can't dumb down poverty to just personal responsibility. Doing so doesn't solve any problems, but deflects from them.

2. "If there was systemic racism in America, Barack Obama would never have been POTUS along with a huge number of other successful black people so that kind of blows your theory out of the water, Bob."

Busting out the "iF aMeRiCa EleCtEd ObAmA, iT cAn'T bE rAcIsT!" argument. Electing Obama doesn't erase racial inequities throughout our systems in America. It doesn't erase racial disparities in the criminal justice system, policing, housing, education, income, etc. It just means, at an individual level, people are okay with voting for black person. Additionally, just because you voted for Obama, doesn't mean you can't be racist. This is like the "I hAvE a BlAcK fRiEnD" argument.

3. The vast majority of Americans judge people by their work ethic along with their behavior and character unlike leftists who judge people by their skin color.
Except employers judge blacks by their names. People with black sounding names on their resumes are less likely to get a call back than people with white sounding names.
https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/minorities-who-whiten-job-resumes-get-more-interviews#commentsAnchor

1. Sources please? I've looked and I can't find a single source to back this up.

2. Sources please? The only inequality I see is based on rap culture and not skin color.

3. From your article:
"But these applicants who let their guard down about their race ended up inadvertently hurting their chances of being considered: Employers claiming to be pro-diversity discriminated against resumes with racial references just as much as employers who didn’t mention diversity at all in their job ads."

So employers treated them the same whether they expressed their race or not. Is it possible they weren't qualified for the jobs?

1. Sources for what? Be specific.

2. Yeah so the MASSIVE income inequality faced by black Americans can be explained by rap culture. Oh f**k off. I can't believe you're serious. The only inequality you could conceivably justify with "rap culture" is black criminality, except rap culture has no impact on crime rates. You can't explain away the other inequalities faced by blacks using "rap culture." Don't be ridiculous.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/01/how-hip-hop-music-ended-violent-crime-united-states-sort/356783/

3. Read: "Employer callbacks for resumes that were whitened fared much better in the application pile than those that included ethnic information, even though the qualifications listed were identical." Notice how they controlled for qualifications.

4. I disavow any liberal who blames white people for the root of all problems.

5. Did you even read the quote? Just because discrimination has been outlawed, doesn't mean its legacy doesn't have an impact today. And discrimination hasn't even been completely ended. The drug war was explicitly racist, a policy which still exists today.

https://www.businessinsider.com/nixon-adviser-ehrlichman-anti-left-anti-black-war-on-drugs-2019-7

There is hiring discrimination as I said before,

There is discrimination in the jury process,

https://eji.org/reports/illegal-racial-discrimination-in-jury-selection/

etc. etc.

And I haven't even started on the criminal justice system or policing yet but you get the idea.

1. Sources for your entire point (or any part of it).

2. No the massive income eniquality can be explained by the dem party and victim culture and being on the dole of the government handouts all their lives and single moms and of course rap culture. Its a culture thing, not a race thing.

3. Read it again. There was no difference when they removed their racial info and included racial info. in the 2nd part.

4. That's fine, but that's basically the dem platform.

5. The drug war was backed by dems and the harsher sentences for black preffered drugs were added by dems. I (and most real conservatives) condemn the drug war.

6. Prove it, show some statistics that compare equally qualified candidates of different races.

The Jury link is "over 100 people" that's not a significant sample size. Try 4k or higher.

I'm still waiting for a single source with proof.

1. Black income disparity: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/reports/2018/02/21/447051/systematic-inequality/

Systemic racism in education funding:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffraikes/2019/09/19/we-can-challenge-systemic-racism-one-school-district-at-a-time/#45c9c927e429

2. "Its a culture thing, not a race thing."

Based on what?

Most systemic inequality is explained by centuries of slavery and discrimination. It's quite simple actually. Because have been enslaved for 250 years and refused the same opportunities as whites for another 100, the intergenerational passing of wealth by blacks is much lower than that of whites. And since poor people are more likely to commit crime, it explains the crime disparity.

3. No, the paragraph you cited said that when applicants find a pro diversity business, they are less likely to "whiten" their resume, and thus, more likely to be discriminated against because the study found that ostensibly "pro-diversity" companies still discriminate. And the quality of the resume, as shown before is controlled.

4. Tell me exactly where in the democratic platform to they blame whiteness as the root of all evil. I'll wait.

5. I'm not denying that some democrats are reluctant to address the drug war, but you can't deny the original architects of the drug war were republicans. To many knowledge, the people who are most likely to oppose the drug war are lefties like me and libertarians, not necessarily republicans.

6. This should suffice.
https://digitalcommons.law.msu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1330&context=facpubs

1. "African Americans own approximately one-tenth of the wealth of white Americans. In 2016, the median wealth for nonretired black households 25 years old and older was less than one-tenth that of similarly situated white households."

Yes, there are a lot rich white people, unless you compare job levels with same pay averages, this means nothing. They are averaging in the few people that are filthy rich (who also happen to be white) to skew the numbers.

2. "Inequitable school funding is one of the first systemic barriers that young people of color and low-income youth come up against. Data show that school districts attended predominantly by students of color receive $23 billion less in funding than primarily white districts— adding up to $2,200 less per student per year. Poor, predominantly white districts receive about $150 less per student than the national average."

Yeah, other studies show money doesn't matter to the level of education received. So you'll have to explain how throwing millions and billions of dollars at any education system will affect it (as has been proven that it doesn't).

3. No where does it say the quality of the resume is controlled. Your other link shows that 6 got rejected for 'black sounding names' and 10 got accepted for 'white sounding names'. This is known as anecdotal evidence. 20-30 resumes is not enough to get a significant statistical sampling.

4. https://patriotforamerica.com/2020/06/01/democrats-blame-white-nationalists-for-riots-while-rioters-scream-allegiance-to-antifa/
Note they are calling all repubs and Trump supporters "White Nationalists"

5. I don't care who the original architects are. I care what's going on now. I'm a libertarian and I oppose the drug war. This is like blaming dems for the KKK.

6. The issue here is you can't know the actual motivation for selecting the jurors. You can only say "statistically black people were chosen less often". This could be because of cultural reasons instead of racial reasons. For instance a lot of black people are Christians. Christians don't generally support the death penalty. Therefore they could ask their religion and then select against them for that.

1. I don't really understand what you're talking about. The stat is comparing the wealth of black households and white households and found a significant disparity. Pointing out that there are a lot of rich white people bolsters my argument, because blacks were denied the same opportunities to become rich for centuries.

2. "Yeah, other studies show money doesn't matter to the level of education received. So you'll have to explain how throwing millions and billions of dollars at any education system will affect it (as has been proven that it doesn't)."

I call MASSIVE BS.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/2019/8/13/21055545/4-new-studies-bolster-the-case-more-money-for-schools-helps-low-income-students

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2018/11/13/460397/quality-approach-school-funding/#:~:text=A%20growing%20body%20of%20evidence,greater%20among%20low%2Dincome%20students.

3. I already quoted a section of the article where they said the qualifications were the same. I don't think I posted a second article, but here's another one where it is also controlled for identical resumes and the sample size was 42,000 applicants.

https://hbr.org/2017/10/hiring-discrimination-against-black-americans-hasnt-declined-in-25-years

4. Huh? That's one MSM dude (I don't like the MSM btw) who said that he believed that outside agitators, including white supremacists could be infiltrating the protests and causing riots and that it should be investigated. Notice how he doesn't say that for a fact, nor does he blame all Trump supporters or all Republicans as white nationalists like you claimed. And it's not entirely far fetched. The guy who broke windows in the Auto zone which incited many of the first riots in Minneapolis was in fact a white supremacist. Go figure.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/man-helped-ignite-george-floyd-riots-identified-white/story?id=72051536

5. Ok then. If you support ending the drug war, then I'm on your side. But, if we're talking about today, I'm pretty sure the democrats are more amicable to drug reform than republicans, though both parties don't go far enough imo.

6. The authors of the study found that the probability of the jury selection disparity happening in a race neutral setting was 1 in 10 trillion.

https://www.nacdl.org/Article/June2018-ThePersistenceofDiscrimination

4. (continued) https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2019/04/29/the-war-against-white-people/

5. Most libertarian conservatives like me are for abolishing the drug schedule and raking in the tax money on pot and other low end drugs, which would go a long way toward paying of the government debt.

6. "While the record will rarely contain direct evidence of purposeful discrimination..." they have yet to prove it was discrimination at all. It might be a statistical anomalie dealing more with culture than race. The judge and lawyers disqualify jurors all the time for all kinds of things. The process goes back and forth between lawyers as they ask questions to try to prove to the judge why a juror should be disqualified. Most states give the lawyers a few freebies where they can throw them out without a reason. Then you get things like whether or not they believe in the death penalty or are they opposed to gun laws. Most of them don't take race into account, instead they focus on each juror's public information.

but just indulging you what would be the solution? Affirmitive action?

1. 67% of rich people are self made in 2018 https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2019/06/24/amazing-facts-that-prove-inheritance-is-mostly-overrated-as-a-reason-for-wealth/#5e6be48e1eca nobody was denied anything and many black people have become rich

2. Nope. The studies have been done and throwing money at the problem does nothing: https://www.conservativereview.com/news/5-smart-reasons-to-abolish-the-department-of-education/

Your first link uses this as its study: "Social scientists have long sought to examine the causal impact of school spending on child outcomes. For a long time, the literature on this topic was largely descriptive so that it had been difficult to draw strong causal claims. However, there have been several recent studies in this space that employ larger data-sets and use quasi-experimental methods that allow for much more credible causal claims. Focusing on studies of students in the United States, this paper briefly discusses the older literature and highlights some of its limitations. It then describes a recent quasi-experimental literature on the impact of school spending on child outcomes, highlights some key papers, and presents a summary of the recent findings. Policy implications and areas for future research are discussed."

"Quasi experimental" should not be used in a study. This one is a manipulated study.

There are no citations in your 2nd article. They need to reference some kind of study to be anything more than an opinion piece.

3. "Together, these studies represent 55,842 applications submitted for 26,326 positions. We focus on trends since 1989 (n = 24 studies), when field experiments became more common and improved methodologically. Since 1989, whites receive on average 36% more callbacks than African Americans, and 24% more callbacks than Latinos."

What methodoligies were employed? Black sounding names? white sounding names? If that's all it is, then the answer is simple, black people can name their kids white sounding names. That might sound racist, but in reality parents have been naming their kids random things since time began and most black sounding names were adopted in the early 80's during the "back to Africa" movement.

4. https://www.salon.com/2020/08/15/as-black-progressives-unseat-black-leaders-incumbents-blame-it-on-white-gentrification/
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/26/black-america-blames-white-america/

1. First of all, I'm not necessarily talking about inheritance. There are a myriad of benefits that arise from being born rich. You have a large house, a good education, access to tutors, income security, etc. That's why you're likely to stay rich if you're born into a rich family. Second of all, I reject the notion that rich people are "self-made." Virtually all them were made rich on the backs of other people's labor. Third of all, yes blacks historically were absolutely denied the same opportunities as whites. They were enslaved for hundreds of years. Then during Jim Crow, they were denied good housing, a good education, business loans, new deal benefits, gi bill benefits, etc. This is literally an inarguable fact.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-why-black-families-have-struggled-for-decades-to-gain-wealth-2019-02-28

2. 17+ studies agree that more education funding improves education. That's not up for debate. How it's spent and where is. As for "quasi experimental," I'm pretty sure it's just a study used to prove a casual link between an intervention and an outcome. It's a specific type of study, and it's no less valid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-experiment

3. You literally just proved my names. If black families have to resort to naming their children using white names in order to get callbacks for a job, that proves that employers are have racial prejudices.

4. The first article is how black liberal politicians are being butthurt over the victories of black progressives. You're citing this as if I don't like black progressives? I'm literally a progressive, so I'm extremely happy that black progressives are taking over liberal incumbent seats. Your second article is a vague op-ed (very ironic) with no substance at all. Your third article was about some anecdotal remarks made by some people, none of which I agree with. The Obama quote admittedly was in bad taste, but he obviously doesn't mean all white people. He has a lot of white people in his administration is generally very friendly with white people so yeah. The famous Clinton quote is also pretty cringe, but she also didn't say all white people.

5. Good for you.

6. It's already been established that it's virtually impossible for the disparity to happen in a race neutral context. Also, the jury disparity doesn't have to be as a result of overt and purposeful racism, but rather preconceived implicit bias. As for solutions, that's a really tough question that I don't have a good answer to you, but this article is a start.

https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2019/03/jury-selection-is-racially-biased-heres-are-three-ways-to-change-curtis-flowers/

4. Liberals set up black children with feelings of hopelessness and failure when they instill hatred for whites and a 'poor, poor pitiful me' attitude.

I don't agree with assigning blame to all white people or hating them, but I guarantee you only a tiny fraction of all liberals actually believe that.

5. This leads to an entitlement mentality and blaming a history of slavery instead of embracing the equal rights they have had for decades and becoming successful citizens.

Slavery and discrimination didn't just end in 1964. Their legacy and impact still resonate today. As Malcom X said: "If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, it's not progress. Progress is healing the wound that the blow made."

"1. First of all, I'm not necessarily talking about inheritance. There are a myriad of benefits that arise from being born rich. You have a large house, a good education, access to tutors, income security, etc. That's why you're likely to stay rich if you're born into a rich family. Second of all, I reject the notion that rich people are "self-made." Virtually all them were made rich on the backs of other people's labor. Third of all, yes blacks historically were absolutely denied the same opportunities as whites. They were enslaved for hundreds of years. Then during Jim Crow, they were denied good housing, a good education, business loans, new deal benefits, gi bill benefits, etc. This is literally an inarguable fact.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-why-black-families-have-struggled-for-decades-to-gain-wealth-2019-02-28

2. 17+ studies agree that more education funding improves education. That's not up for debate. How it's spent and where is. As for "quasi experimental," I'm pretty sure it's just a study used to prove a casual link between an intervention and an outcome. It's a specific type of study, and it's no less valid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-experiment

3. You literally just proved my names. If black families have to resort to naming their children using white names in order to get callbacks for a job, that proves that employers are have racial prejudices.

4. The first article is how black liberal politicians are being butthurt over the victories of black progressives. You're citing this as if I don't like black progressives? I'm literally a progressive, so I'm extremely happy that black progressives are taking over liberal incumbent seats. Your second article is a vague op-ed (very ironic) with no substance at all. Your third article was about some anecdotal remarks made by some people, none of which I agree with. The Obama quote admittedly was in bad taste, but he obviously doesn't mean all white people. He has a lot of white people in his administration is generally very friendly with white people so yeah. The famous Clinton quote is also pretty cringe, but she also didn't say all white people."

4. Yet most prominent liberals express this every chance they get. Sounds like liberals need to clean house then.

5. Discrimination was almost completely gone in the 90s. It was only brought back in by Obama.

Spot on, lokiare! I was starting to respond but noticed you had already taken out the trash. Thank you.