Andrew Sullivan reports on the media’s woke trance. (HT Peter Minowitz) A slice:
In the words of The New Yorker’s Jelani Cobb: “The most pernicious effects of American racism were to be seen in what happened in the absence of white people, not in their presence.” So we instantly knew this was not about bad individuals, or bad training, or bad policies, but about white supremacy. Because everything is always about white supremacy. The unfalsifiable nature of this assertion is key to its popularity.
It’s reminiscent of the moment Ta-Nehisi Coates saw the true depths of white evil, when a black cop killed a black friend. Coates explained the real culprit: “The Dream of acting white, of talking white, of being white, murdered Prince Jones as sure as it murders black people in Chicago with frightening regularity.”
This is why, in pieces devoted to the disproportionate number of black men in jail for murder, the MSM never provide data on the disproportionate number of black male murderers. You’d think that would just be logically relevant. Ninety percent of those convicted of murder are men — but we don’t view the system as biased against them, because they commit 90 percent of the murders! Similarly, if black men — around six percent of the population — have been responsible for more than 50 percent of all murders over the years, you can see why they might be over-represented in prison, without any reference to any system of “whiteness” at all.
But with critical race theory, the black officers didn’t actually kill anyone. Whiteness did — by infesting their brains and souls, like the fungally-challenged people in “The Last of Us.” CRT denies human agency to members of minorities, strips them of choice, renders them inert as individuals. They are only ever instruments of the “system.” They may identify as black, but they’re all Clayton Bigsby underneath.
(DBx: One reason my late, great colleague Walter Williams so loathed the progressive left is that he was often dismissed by progressives as an “Oreo” – black exterior, white interior. Never mind that Walter grew up in a Philadelphia housing project. His refusal to be an obedient mascot for progressives who stoke and use racism as a means of extending government control over our lives was simply intolerable to them. Progressives deal with the likes of Walter, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Larry Elder, and Shelby Steele not with the respect that progressives disingenuously claim every person deserves, but with contempt and ignorant disdain. And the arguments offered by Walter, Tom Sowell, and others in support of free markets and against race-based government policies have long been, and continue to be, largely ignored rather than engaged. That’s how too many progressives do social ‘science.’)
Here’s David Henderson on Steven Camarota’s confused argument about immigration and inflation.
The 1619 Project’s most harebrained idea is that the American Revolution was fought to preserve slavery. Slavery was barbaric, especially in the more southern states. But there was little slavery in the northern colonies, and they would not have risked their lives for its preservation.
Janet Daley warns of the dangers lurking in “the elevation of feelings into facts.” A slice:
It is only helplessness and victimhood which are rewarded as legitimate forms of individualism, not strength or initiative. “I am what I feel” is the definition of truth, rather than “I am what I can do.” Indeed, taking pride in what you are capable of, is the last thing this ideology would choose to venerate because rewarding people on their merits is seen as ruthless. It promotes talent and effectiveness which are not evenly distributed and which must, therefore, be inherently unfair. It is one of the chief propositions of this new philosophy that talent and competence are functions of privilege.
Richard Rahn decries “the ‘experts’ who misled us during the COVID-19 pandemic.” Two slices:
When it comes to understanding viruses, it is obvious that, particularly after the pandemic, much is to be learned. Government health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci made major mistakes in giving the impression that they knew far more than they did about COVID-19 and the various vaccines and other treatments. The public was subject to endless revisionist history and denial about earlier statements (as if video recordings did not exist) about how effective the vaccines were, how many shots would be needed and at what intervals, and what side effects might occur. All of the doublespeak and mis-forecasts have caused the public to take a jaundiced view of the alleged consensus statements of the medical experts.
…..
The costs of lockdowns to schoolchildren, businesses, the economy in general and most importantly, civil liberties were never adequately considered and could justifiably be called criminal. The lockdowns caused a drop in real incomes, causing more economic stress, which led to more health problems and higher death rates. Many politicians made demands that the economy be locked down, upon the advice of medical professionals, without the benefit of a credible cost-benefit analysis of the lockdowns versus alternatives. The lockdown mandates were about government power — not knowledge — leading to absurd regulations where churches had to be shut, but not bars.
Vinay Prasad tweets: (HT Jay Bhattacharya)
It is anti-vax to not see a difference between an 85 yo who never had COVID getting dose 1 (a very good idea), and a 20 year old who got 3 doses, & had covid getting dose 4.
The latter has no data to support it; needs RCT
Not understanding the difference is bad medicine
