So much for Institutional Racism

August 28, 2010

We love to hear over and over again especially in academia about how America is a nation of searing racism where the entire system is set by whites to keep blacks.  Institutional racism is just the norm in America we are told where blacks are never given a chance and have to do twice as well for half the credit.  The following account by a teacher highlights the reality that our educational institutions-like most of America-actually go out of their way to help blacks and look the other way when they underperform.  This has created a generation of blacks who grow up with a sense of entitlement and expect to be given special treatment-the kind of treatment what is much less available to whites.  There is racism in America but it is against whites.  So many whites, have internalized fear and quilt, routinely go out of their way to favor blacks, in a way that they would never dream of doing with their racial compatriots.  Read the text below:

Before I taught college, I taught at Berkeley High School in Berkeley, CA. I had one student who had a basketball scholarship to UC Berkeley, dependent upon getting a C average her senior year. She was failing my algebra course. We brought her parents in. Her dad told me to give her a C no matter how well she did in my course, because she was the first person in their family to get into college. I told her parents that grades did not work that way, and that she could get free tutoring before or after school, but that she had to pass my course on her own merits. She missed the midterm exam, and her mother called the next day to tell me that her daughter missed the midterm because the daughter was getting her hair braided that day. I told her that she should take the money budgeted to the hair braider and spend it on a private tutor. The parents filed a complaint against me and I was reprimanded for that suggestion as “culturally insensitive”. She was a bright, likable girl, and very popular. She had played basketball overseas in youth tournaments, and was a great player. As it became clear she might not pass the class, I had students and other teachers pressuring me to pass her regardless of her grade. I graded her final exam five times, each time being more generous, trying to give her enough partial credit to pass. I was able to work her grade on the exam up to 58%.  I gave her an F and she lost her Berkeley scholarship. It still breaks my heart to hear her sobs when I told her. I still think I did the right thing.

The common denominator in all of these cases is an assumption the students had that education consists of indulgences bestowed upon the student by a more socially privileged teacher or administrator who pities them. These students were uniformly astonished when other considerations, such as merit, trumped pity. When we lower the bar of merit to admit the underprivileged, the message we send is that merit does not apply to them. Then we fail them by failing to disabuse them of this assumption.


The New York Mosque Controversy

August 26, 2010

The New York Mosque controversy has turned into a typical political football with the left uniformly lining up to support it and the right opposing it.  It seems as if the actual merits of the case have gotten lost in the desire of both sides to reflexively oppose the other tribe´s position and the mosque is a valid excuse to fight over.   Both sides have exaggerated the issue.  The right goes on about sacred ground as if New York has treated the neighborhood around ground zero as a hallowed shrine instead of just another part of the city going on with its business.  But the left, in its reflexive desire to oppose everything that the right does, is rationalising away the dangers of the project and even openly cheering it on.

It is clear to me that virtually every Muslim organization- no matter how moderate they may seem to be- is to some degree in conflict with modern secular society and has at least indirect connections to terrorist and extremist orgnaizations.  There are many tolerant moderate Muslims who go about their life as normal people, BUT almost all truely devout Muslism (who take their religion seriously) and especiallyMullahs and Islamic organizations, are in some form of conflict with modern western values.  That is just the nature of Islam at this moment.  Cultural Muslims can and are moderate, but devout Muslims rarely are.  To really take Islamic theology seriously means the desire for Islamic rule to conquer the unGodly non Muslim world.   I think that we should never forget that, and not confuse cultural with devout Muslims who are so often very very different.

The left, in its tribalistic desire to relexively oppose the right, is overlooking the implications of the mosque.  One would think that the left, in its desire to promote a modern, secular, progressive, equal rights world, would not cozy up with a religious movement that is stuck in the dark ages, instituationalizes discrimination and wants to impose a retrograde theocracy on everyone.  The irony is that the left is now making several opportunistic arguments in favor of the mosque.  For a group, which has turned offense into an art form and is constantly looking for ways to shut down freedom of expression that they find “offensive”, they now have suddenly blossomed into a strident advocate of free speech on this issue.  Their argument is that the mosque should be built and if that upsets anyone it is irrelevant because America is about freedon of speech, period.  This is a bit rich coming from an ideologythat has instituted speech codes on college campuses to protect delicate sensibilities, and likes to say that freedom of speech ends when someone yells fire in a crowded theater-or in other words freedom of speech should not be permitted if it upsets certain people.  The futher irony is that the left, which enjoys opposing most forms of Christianity, is now spouting the argument that freedom of religion is an unlimited right.

In addition, they are also overlooking the implications of the name of the mosque-Cordoba-which was the most important city in Muslim conquered Spain, Europe and the West.  It does not take a leap of imagination to realize that this is their new imagined imperium over the west.

Even more disturbing is that the left is conveniently overlooking the practice of Taquia, in which it is perfectly acceptable for Muslims to lie and decieve non Muslims.  We see this time and again where Muslim leaders say soothing words of moderation and tolerance to the west in English, and blood curdling invectives of Jihad in Arabic to their own people.  The New York Mosque leadership also shows signs of this two facedness.  The left appears to happily take the moderate words of Iman without looking any deeper.

There is also the belief that showing tolerance towards Muslim organizations will pacify and moderate them.  This may sound nice but devout Muslims will only be pacified by force.  When a movement´s core ideology is that non believers are infidel scum who deserve only to be converted or eliminated, it is hard to buy repect by being nice.

In the end the Muslim radicals must be chuckling to themselves at what a bunch of useful fools the left is in defending and assisting radical Islam.  The Muslims know full well that when they take over, the secular left will be the first to be eliminated because they don´t even believe in God.

Finally the left appears to be happily indifferent as to where the funding for the mosque is coming from.  Any other non religious organization which is recieving large sums from foreign radical organziations would have the FBI all over them.  On this issue the left trumpets the argument that Muslim religious organizations should remain above the law.

In the end it saddens me to see the country divering its energies on left versus right conflict when we really should be focused more on competency and making an effective government and society.  It seems that it is hard for people these days to see issues clearly and objectively, because so many people are caught up in their tribalistic ideological bubbles automatically defending their own and attacking the hated other.   So many in the left, especially the elites, live in a politically correct bubble  world where everything confirms their biases and tribalism.  Their friends and colleagues are PC, they read the New York Times, watch Oblermann and generally immerse themselves an information and communication echo chamber.  If they do happen upon a divergent opinion, they reflexively dismiss and attach it out of hand.  Many on the right, feeling left out by our PC saturated media and government, seek refuge in people like Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and their local evangelical church with its own self contained community.  In the end there is little honest debate and mostly just tribalistic fighting.  If we used our mental abilities to actually confront problems honestly instead of politically, we would acomplish a lot more.

For a video on the true nature of Islam watch below: