Search Results

RACIST COMMUNITY BLAMES “OUTSIDE AGITATORS:” Harvard derides affirmative action lawsuit as ‘ideological.’

IS ALBERT EINSTEIN NEXT TO MEET THE BIG PC AIRBRUSH? Calling Einstein A Racist Is Perfect For Those Who Can’t Compete With His Accomplishments:

So what does Einstein say in his diaries? “This theory of relativity thing could come in really handy at eliminating inferior races with an atom bomb?” “Let’s enslave uppity Chinese women who want to study quantum mechanics?”

No. Of the Japanese, he says, “Intellectual needs of this nation seem to be weaker than their artistic ones — natural disposition?” Of the Chinese, he considered some that he saw to be “industrious, filthy, obtuse people” and said “it would be a pity if these Chinese supplant all other races. For the likes of us, the mere thought is unspeakably dreary.”

To recap, unlike Columbus, Washington, or Jefferson, who inflicted real pain upon many people through real actions, in 1922, Einstein had some private thoughts that are roughly as offensive as the 15 articles your aunt shared on Facebook last week. Einstein then wrote those unsavory thoughts in a private journal, never spoke them aloud publicly, and never lived a life in accordance with them. The horror…Why is this news for the Knights of Akshully? The answer is fairly simple. Their goal is not to eliminate injustice. If it were, they’d spend their time fighting against the slavery, oppression, and racism that still run rampant in the world instead of attacking historical figures who were increasingly less guilty of perpetuating slavery, oppression, and racism.

Likewise, it’s hard to believe they’re seeking a genuine debate about how much a man’s moral failings ought to affect his legacy, since the answer is always the same: “Terminate with extreme prejudice the one with extreme (or modest) prejudice.” Rather, it seems the Knights of Akshully’s goal is to devise an ethical system that gives them bragging rights over the far more accomplished figures of history.

Read the whole thing. As Paul Johnson wrote in Modern Times:

At the beginning of the 1920s the belief began to circulate, for the first time at a popular level, that there were no longer any absolutes: of time and space, of good and evil, of knowledge, above all of value. Mistakenly but perhaps inevitably, relativity became confused with relativism.

No one was more distressed than Einstein by this public misapprehension. He was bewildered by the relentless publicity and error which his work seemed to promote. He wrote to his colleague Max Born on 9 September 1920: ‘Like the man in the fairy-tale who turned everything he touched into gold, so with me everything turns into a fuss in the newspapers.’ Einstein was not a practicing Jew, but he acknowledged a God. He believed passionately in absolute standards of right and wrong.

He lived to see moral relativism, to him a disease, become a social pandemic, just as he lived to see his fatal equation bring into existence nuclear warfare. There were times, he said at the end of his life, when he wished he had been a simple watchmaker.

The public response to relativity was one of the principal formative influences on the course of twentieth-century history. It formed a knife, inadvertently wielded by its author, to help cut society adrift from its traditional moorings in the faith and morals of Judeo-Christian culture.

A century later, is the age of moral relativity about to devour the legacy of the man who invented the real theory of relativity? The PC police will likely give it their best shot, if only because, as Kevin Williamson wrote last week, in an article ominously titled, “Watch What You Say. Someone Else Is.

The generation that reached what passes for maturity in the age of social media is the most status-obsessed—and hence etiquette-obsessed—since the ancien régime. They are all miniaturists: There hasn’t been an important and original book of political ideas written by an American Millennial, and very few of them have read one, either. But they are very interested in individual pronouns and 280-character tweets. It is extraordinarily difficult for any one of them to raise his own status through doing interesting and imaginative intellectual work, because there is practically no audience for such work among his peers. Worse, the generation ahead of him stopped paying attention to Millennials years ago, and the generation behind him never started.

What that leaves is the takfiri tendency, scalp-hunting or engineering a court scandal at Versailles. Concurrent with that belief is the superstition that people such as Harvey Weinstein or Bret Stephens take up cultural space that might otherwise be filled by some more worthy person if only the infidel were removed, as though society were an inverted game of Tetris, with each little disintegration helping to enable everybody else to move up one slot at a time. Status obsession does funny things to one’s map of social reality. It leads to all manner of bizarre thinking.

Not least of which is the continuous search for the next great man to airbrush from history for the tiniest flaws in his thinking, if only out of jealousy.

WHY ISN’T THIS TRAILER RACIST, REACTIONARY, ETC?  Film scribes are swooning over this gun-toting vigilante months after dubbing her kissing cousin a racist (and worse).


BRIE LARSON MAKES A SMALL CONTRIBUTION TO THE TRUMP 2020 CAMPAIGN: In a piece titled, “Brie Larson Promises ‘I Do Not Hate White Dudes,’ But Laments Lack of Inclusion Among Film Critics,” the future Captain Marvel, age 28, is quoted as saying:

“I do not need a 70-year-old white dude to tell me what didn’t work for him about ‘[A] Wrinkle in Time.’ It wasn’t made for him. I want to know what it meant to women of color, to biracial women, to teen women of color, to teens that are biracial.”

“And while this is very woke of Ms. Larson,” Sonny Bunch writes in response at the Washington Free Beacon, “I sense two issues with her theory of criticism. The first is that she doesn’t actually have to read old white men to find out A Wrinkle in Time is not particularly good; there are plenty of women and minorities who are happy to fill her in on that fact.” Bunch links to a screenshot full of female, black and Hispanic reviewers who didn’t give thumbs up to A Wrinkle in Time, adding: 

But there’s a bigger, more troubling issue with Larson’s line of thinking: the presumption that certain people are more prone to appreciating specific works of art because they fit into some broader category of gender or race or whatever. As Jessica Ritchey noted in Mel Magazine after an Internet gadfly suggested Vertigo is only considered a good movie because “lol white men amirite,” this is kind of gross:

One of the most exhausting aspects of our current cultural moment are the “ugh, only straight white men like this” takes that completely erase the voices of female critics, critics of color and fans who don’t fit neatly into binaries of who “should” like/dislike something. It’s part of a larger and much more pernicious problem — mistaking pop-culture consumption for moral worth as opposed to, you know, how we carry ourselves every day; how we treat other people; and how we support (or don’t) the causes that matter to us. Instead, we equate what someone watches on Netflix as the mark of a good/bad person.

Art is complicated; art is messy; art doesn’t fit into neat little boxes. Sure, A Wrinkle in Time got hammered. But Moonlight is a film about a gay black man that was nigh-on unanimously praised by the straight-white-male critical corps. Girls Trip is a film about black women that clocked in at 90 percent fresh. Black Panther? 97 percent approval rating. I’m not sure a more diverse array of voices would actually change that much when it comes to a bad film’s reception, at least in the extremely reductive sense of a film’s RT score.

In her response to Larson, Amy Alkon tweets, “Age-ist, sexist, racist thinking is now so chic. Guess what: I have read @TerryTeachout‘s insights for decades and appreciated the hell out of his insights. He’s a white dude. Whatever. It’s the insights I come for, not the skin color or age.”

Brendan O’Neill of Spiked wrote in his FaceBook page last year that, “It’s becoming so clear now why the war of words between SJWs and the new white nationalists is so intense. It isn’t because they have huge ideological differences — it’s because they have so much in common.”

And as Glenn noted last year:

If you divide America along racial/ethnic lines, eventually the largest racial/ethnic group will start to think of itself as a racial/ethnic group and act accordingly. But in the meantime, it’s a good living for [Ta-Nehisi] Coates, and I guess an okay one for [alt-right founder Richard] Spencer.

And if you want more Trump, well, Coates will help you get more Trump, and a lot more effectively than Spencer ever has. Right after the election, John Podhoretz tweeted, “Liberals spent 40 years disaggregating [the] U.S., until finally the largest cohort in the country chose to vote as though it were an ethnic group.” That’s where “whiteness”-as-original-sin gets you. But hey, like I said, it’s a good living for some people.

Larson’s Captain Marvel movie, distributed by the ever-woke Walt Disney Studios, opens in March of 2019. I wonder how many identity politics-themed bon mots Larson will be tossing to interviewers during its run up.

AT SYRACUSE, TRUTH IS FAR LESS IMPORTANT THAN POLITICS: In the Washington Post, Syracuse law professor Greg Germain points out that the supposedly bigoted and racist language used by members of a fraternity suspended after video of a satirical roast got out was, uh, satirical:

A diverse group of 15 students (white, African American, Hispanic, Jewish, Muslim, Christian) who were pledging an engineering fraternity were asked to do a roast of the fraternity members for their joint amusement. The skits were crude: masturbation jokes; a politically conservative member was made to be an alt-right bigot who formed a competing fraternity to spread racism; a skit about sexually assaulting a fraternity member who was so controlled by his girlfriend that he could not move (patterned after a viral Brandon Rogers YouTube video). They were making fun of themselves and each other in outlandish ways using very crude language.

And Syracuse knew this perfectly well before it ruined these would-be engineers’ educational plans (and perhaps careers) for nothing. Take this example, from the affidavit of a black student that was filed in the suspended students’ lawsuit against Syracuse:

7. The second skit, entitled “The Trilogies of Tri Kappa,” was based on a satirical fraternity headed by a racist who was trying to integrate members of his “once great” fraternity to “his newly formed white empire.” This imaginary fraternity known as Tri Kappa was the “main enemy” of Theta Tau. This story was intended to lampoon one Chapter member who was a known supporter of President Trump and a political conservative.

8. The main character in the story was presented by the new member portraying him as a red neck, “back woods” figure, who forced his pledges to undergo an “anointing” by taking an oath to “always have hate in [his] heart” for “niggers,” “spics” and the “fuckin’ kikes.” The new member portraying the “pledge” taking the oath in the skit was Jewish. It was evident to everyone in attendance who knew the individuals involved and referenced in the story how ridiculous and satirical it was for one member to be portrayed as a rabid racist in our Chapter which had twenty eight members with racial, ethnic and religious minority backgrounds, including me and other African American and Hispanic members. Although I did not participate in this skit, I observed it and laughed along with everyone else because it was exaggerated satire showing the ignorance and absurdity of actual racists.

To be clear, not only did Syracuse punish these students for “offensive” speech despite promising them free speech (which is wrong), it stripped them of their educations for allegedly saying the exact opposite of what they were saying (which is both wrong and cruel). If you’d like to exercise your right to free speech and let Syracuse know your opinion about the situation, I know the students would appreciate the support.

BEN SHAPIRO: No, Star Wars Isn’t Failing Because Of Hateful Trolls. It’s Failing Because Kathleen Kennedy Has Done A Garbage Job.

As Ace of Spades writes, “I do not expect Star Wars fans will enjoy being called sexist, racist, backwards and deserving of eternal defeat from the company that hopes to sell them tickets in the future. Hey bigots, racists, sexists and manbabies, buy tickets for our movies or else.”

Get woke, go broke. Insulting the audience worked out just swell for both Lady Ghostbusters – and Lady Clinton.

CAMPUS’ WAR ON FREE SPEECH CLAIMS 16 STUDENT VICTIMS: Have you ever attended, participated in, or, like millions of Americans, watched a “roast” on TV? Maybe even found it funny? Well, you loathsome degenerate, you had better stay far, far away from Syracuse University, which suspended 16 students for 1 to 2 years(!) for roasting their fraternity brothers – in private, and with zero complaints filed by the roast-ees – after someone posted out-of-context video on Facebook several weeks later. What the students said sounds bad. But the more you look into this situation, the worse Syracuse looks, and the angrier you will get. If you’d like to help these students out by expressing your own thoughts to Syracuse (which literally has the First Amendment written in giant letters on the side of a building, for crying out loud), FIRE has made it easy.

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Gov. Candidate Blames ‘Progressive’ Policies For Making Calif. a Poverty-Stricken Racist Dystopia.

HE’S NOT WRONG: Gov. Candidate Blames ‘Progressive’ Policies for Making Calif. a Poverty-Stricken Racist Dystopia.

SALENA ZITO: Hollywood Desperately Needs to Fill the Hole Left by Roseanne: 

If the lesson the left takes away from this is that all Trump voters are racist, it will be making the same mistake the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, the national news media and the NFL have made in misunderstanding this coalition of people. But if wisdom prevails, the left will step back and realize there was a void in the market that even Roseanne Barr could fill — a person who conservatives have reviled for years.

If there was a hole that big in Hollywood, then we should take an honest look at our programming and how our entertainment industry treats Middle America. Plenty of lessons are coming out of this chapter of Barr’s life. Most of them are obvious: Words matter, and there are consequences for hateful behavior.

But people will miss two other very important lessons. The first is we have to stop leaping to the assumption that all people who voted for Donald Trump are racist and everything they like has tinges of racism — from guns to how the NFL has handled the national anthem controversy.

The second is that Hollywood hasn’t been serving a great big chunk of this country for a long time. As a result, a show no one predicted would be popular broke all the records. I sincerely hope ABC is able to revive some version of “Roseanne” under a different name and with some of the same characters, as has been reported. Because right now, people in a large swath of the country are hungry for something that authentically reflects their lives. That’s where the story is.

Much like Jimmy the Greek handing CBS all the reason they needed to fire him after his freshness rating had long expired, Roseanne was axed because her racist tirade gave Disney the perfect excuse to both dump a TV series whose premise they hated, and send a symbolic warning shot to flyover country to know your place, rubes. Disney is such an enormous conglomerate of broadcast and cable TV channels, movies, amusement parks, and a bottomless merchandising well that the revenues lost from cutting Roseanne’s series is little more than tip money. But as with dumping Tim Allen’s conservative-friendly series after Trump was elected president, the frisson of pleasure that Obama and Hillary-supporting Disney executives felt when sacking yet another flyover country favorite makes any minor financial imposition feel all worth while. Roseanne should have had the common sense to know that she was on double-secret probation, and that in television, even the biggest names are ultimately replaceable.

ANNALS OF LEFTWING AUTOPHAGY: Woke Restaurant Serves Discomfort Food.

Sometimes you can have the best of intentions and still miss the mark completely. Such is the case with Busboys and Poets‘ “Race Card” initiative, which aims to foster discussions about race and privilege among its diners by handing out literal “Race Cards”—cards featuring larger questions about the state of race relations in America—to patrons as they enter.

recent Facebook post featuring one of the “Race Cards”—which reads “Did you perceive me as racist because I’m a white male?”—has garnered more than 150 shares and even more comments, with people criticizing Busboys and Poets for taking a somewhat tone-deaf approach in trying to foster a conversation about race. Other “Race Cards” that Busboys and Poets employees are handing out read: “What is your experience with race in America?,” “Have you ever been in a place where you were the racial minority?,” and “How often do you discuss race with your friends or family?”

Akosua Johnson, who posted the picture that went viral, says that a bartender at Busboys and Poets handed them the card when they sat down at the bar. Johnson, who identifies as nonbinary and uses they/them pronouns, wrote on Facebook that the bartender, who was white, “had no idea how to actually engage with this poorly constructed, forced ‘conversation’ and so just walked away immediately after dropping the cards in the middle of my meal.”

Read the whole thing. I don’t know what the calorie count for schadenfreude is, but there’s a huge serving to be had here.

REALCLEARPOLITICS: Trump Lifts The Economic Underdogs.

The movie “Cinderella Man” depicts the incredible true-life tale of boxer James J. Braddock, who rose from abject poverty and the bread lines of the Great Depression to fame and fortune as heavyweight champion of the world — all in a matter of months. In the film, Braddock arrives at a government welfare office to repay the assistance he had received while still poor and declares, “I believe we live in a great country, a country that’s great enough to help a man financially when he’s in trouble … and I just thought I should return it.”

Americans love such tales in which the downtrodden succeed, and underdog stories make for great cinema. In real life right now, a lot of economic underdogs in America are growing into a prosperity they did not think possible just a few years ago. Simply put, it’s time for the little guys, the underdogs, to shine. For example, while government dependency expanded massively during the slow growth of the last decade, since the Inauguration of Donald Trump almost 2 million people have dropped off of food stamps.

On Friday our country cheered yet another stellar jobs report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And unlike the sluggish expansion of the Obama years, the lion’s share of this labor market strength benefits middle-income and previously ignored workers. For example, non-managerial wages accelerated at a 12-month rate of 2.7 percent, the highest in a decade. The jobless rate for non-college graduates fell to the lowest level since 2001. Even for those who did not complete high school, good news abounds, as the jobless rate for that working-class, underdog population has now been below 6 percent for the each of the past five months. . . .

These reforms represent a particularly powerful tailwind for Hispanics, statistically by far the most entrepreneurial demographic in America. Speaking of Hispanics, the labor market news for them has been stellar. In U.S. history, there are only eight months where Hispanics report a jobless rate below 5 percent, and an incredible seven of those eight months have been in the last year alone under Trump’s growth agenda. The news is similarly strong for blacks, where the gap between black and white unemployment shrank to the smallest disparity on record. If President Trump is a racist, as his media critics constantly (and unfairly) allege, then he is remarkably bad at it!


THIS IS CNN. CNN ‘Cultural Critic’ Guest: ‘All of The People’ Who Voted for Trump Are Racist.


The morning after the uneventful pardoning, my news feed began blowing up with stories about a GOP hill staffer named Elizabeth Lauten, who worked for a backbencher congressman. She decided to criticize the Obama daughters on her Facebook page. Lauten attacked their fashion choices, writing in part, “Dear Sasha and Malia, I get you’re both in those awful teen years, but you’re a part of the First Family, try showing a little class. Rise to the occasion. Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at a bar.”

Her post made the media world go apoplectic. It began a 72 hour outrage cycle. Lauten was called racist, bigoted and insensitive. The cultural zeitgeist would not be satisfied unless it received due punishment for the crime. Lauten was of course fired, even though she apologized the same day.

Her political career was ruined forever.

As I wrote at the time, “In a city where image is everything, this is about the worst thing that can happen to a person. To this day, Lauten has found it impossible to get re-hired in the public sector. The media got its scalp and the precedent was set: Do not attack a President’s children.”

Since then, the cultural paradigm has shifted.

Judging by CNN’s Brian Stelter, I’m not sure what the problem is:

Has it come this? I’m sorry, I thought this was America — are we not allowed to say “feckless” anymore? The “scooplet” is also a nice touch, since Stelter is being fed information by an affiliated network so that he can aid  in their PR cleanup effort.


Around the world, progressive economies like those of Sweden, France, and Germany, which redistribute wealth through high taxes and generous social welfare policies, boast far less poverty and inequality than other nations.

What gives? And how does California maintain its reputation as a progressive leader given the reality on the ground?

If racism is more than just saying nasty things — if it is, as scholars like James Baldwin, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Michelle Alexander and countless others have described, embedded into socioeconomic structures — then California isn’t just the least progressive state. It’s also the most racist.

Real World “Elysium”

In the 2013 science fiction film, “Elysium,” the rich have fled to a luxury satellite orbiting Earth while the poor toil in dangerous conditions below. Life in California today differs in degree, not in kind, from that dystopian vision.

Why are Democrat-monopoly states such cesspits of racism and inequality?

ROSA PARKS, THIS AIN’T: Portland bakery fires employees for denying black woman service after closing.

In one statement, “Back To Eden Bakery” says that according to its own surveillance video, a black woman named “Lillian”, who is well known in the area as a “professional equity activist”, entered at 9:06 p.m., after the bakery’s closing time. Employees had also turned off the “Open” sign, but several customers (all white) who had already ordered were still inside. Two other white women who went to the bakery two minutes before “Lillian,” and were also informed that the business was closed for the night.

The bakery says “Lillian” left the store briefly and began recording video.

The bakery’s statement says that even though it does not consider the employees to be racist and that they were following the business’s protocol of closing at 9 p.m., they were fired because “sometimes impact outweighs intent.” The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, “lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work.”

In the statement “Back To Eden” says the employees were fired because the woman and the “clamoring public” demanded they be fired.

In one statement, the bakery admitted that the employees did not necessarily do anything wrong, “this is more about how a black woman was made to feel” at the business.”

I had a hard time believing a story this stupid actually happened, but it seems to check out.

UPDATE: The bakery owners seem to have modified their story a bit in a new Facebook post. They now claim that the fired workers served the two white women who came in slightly earlier, but only if they took their order “to go,” and that one employee was probationary, and the other had been warned about poor customer service in the past. That would make a certain amount of sense, and yet it doesn’t explain why the owners decided to scrub their earlier posts on the subject.

WHEN YOU’VE LOST THE DAILY BEASTMSNBC Staff on Joy Reid: Enough Apologies, We Want Answers:

While Reid is well-liked and respected by colleagues, said one staffer, they are waiting for Reid and MSNBC management to demonstrate a sense of accountability for her inconvenient past writing beyond boilerplate apologies. “It’s very problematic,” said an MSNBC insider.

Particularly, several LGBT staffers at the network expressed feeling insulted by how Reid seemingly suffered no consequences for her old homophobic blog posts or transphobic tweets.

“How many apologies do we need?” another staffer asked.

Others pointed out that this ordeal makes it difficult for Reid to freely comment on the news without viewers calling out some hypocrisy. Multiple staffers pointed to how Reid was roundly mocked online when—amid outrage over Roseanne Barr’s racist tirade—daytime host Andrea Mitchell asked Reid, without irony, “What do you have to do on social media to get fired from a top rated show on an American broadcast network?”

“Now she can’t talk about Samantha Bee, she can’t talk about Roseanne, she can’t talk about anything to do with Israel,” another MSNBC staffer told The Daily Beast. “What can she talk about?”

Fortunately, MSNBC executives, furiously brainstorming, have hit upon the perfect method to both salvage their credibility, and get Reid out of the headlines.

“PRETTY TERRIBLE:” The Actual Side Effects of Ambien.

GRADUALLY, THEN SUDDENLY: How #TheResistance Lost Their Minds.

I think the last civil conversations we had occurred just days before November 8, 2016. You were supremely confident Hillary Clinton would win the presidential election; you voted for her with glee. As a lifelong Republican, I bit down hard and cast my vote for Donald Trump. Then the unimaginable happened. He won.

And you lost your freaking minds.

I knew you would take the loss hard—and personally—since all of you were super jacked-up to elect the first woman president. But I did not imagine you would become totally deranged, attacking anyone who voted for Trump or supported his presidency as a racist, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic Nazi-sympathizer.

Nah, the writing for that had been on the wall since Bush 43 — but do read the whole thing.

“RAPE GANGS” IS A MORE ACCURATE TERM: Tommy Robinson Drew Attention to ‘Grooming Gangs.’ Britain Has Persecuted Him.

Ten years ago, when the EDL was founded, the U.K. was even less willing than it is now to confront the issue of what are euphemistically described as “Asian grooming gangs” (euphemistic because no Chinese or Koreans are involved and what is happening is not grooming but mass rape). At the time, only a couple of such cases had been recognized. Ten years on, every month brings news of another town in which gangs of men (almost always of Pakistani origin) have been found to have raped young, often underage, white girls. The facts of this reality — which, it cannot be denied, sounds like something from the fantasies of the most lurid racist — have now been confirmed multiple times by judges during sentencing and also by the most mainstream investigative journalists in the country.

But the whole subject is so ugly and uncomfortable that very few people care to linger over it. Robinson is an exception. For him — as he said in a 2011 interview with the BBC’s Jeremy Paxman — the “grooming gangs” issue isn’t something that afflicts some far-off towns but people in the working-class communities that he knows. And while there are journalists (notably the Times’ Andrew Norfolk) who have spent considerable time and energy bringing this appalling phenomenon to light, most of British society has turned away in a combination of embarrassment, disgust, and uncertainty about how to even talk about this. Anyone who thinks Britain is much further along with dealing with the taboo of “grooming gangs” should remember that only last year the Labour MP for Rotherham, Sarah Champion, had to leave the shadow cabinet because she accurately identified the phenomenon.

Which brings me to last Friday. That was when Robinson was filming outside Leeds Crown Court, where the latest grooming-gang case was going on. I have to be slightly careful here, because although National Review is based in the U.S., I am not, and there are reporting restrictions on the ongoing case. Anyhow, Robinson was outside the court and appeared (from the full livestream) to be filming the accused and accosting them with questions on their way in. He also appeared to exercise some caution, trying to ensure he was not on court property.

Read the whole thing. The British authorities have behaved contemptibly here. Their behavior is what one might expect from an occupation government under a foreign conqueror.

ALL BETTER NOW? Samantha Bee apologizes to Ivanka Trump: ‘I crossed a line.’

I would like to sincerely apologize to Ivanka Trump and to my viewers for using an expletive on my show to describe her last night. It was inappropriate and inexcusable. I crossed a line, and I deeply regret it.

It was “inappropriate and inexcusable” and entirely scripted and prerecorded, and TBS’s standards & practices division (aka, the network censors) allowed the show to air, presumably after previewing it. As Sean Davis tweets, “If the Turner non-reaction so far is any guide, Roseanne’s big mistake was putting her comments on Twitter instead of in her show’s script. The fact that a whole network reviewed, approved, promoted, and aired Bee’s scripted slur is the best protection Bee could ever buy,” adding that “The Roseanne and Samantha Bee scandals aren’t comparable. Roseanne wrote something on Twitter and her show was immediately cancelled. In the case of Samantha Bee, an entire network’s legal and editorial team knew exactly what Bee would say, approved it, and broadcast it.”

So it’s very likely this check-the-box apology will be enough for her to keep her job amidst the destructive malevolence that is Time-Warner-CNN-HBO. And her own promise to the New York Times at the beginning of 2017 that “We’re facing a new reality after the election. These next four years are going to require a broad coalition of straight-up decency.”

Interesting word that. Back in January, while leftists were freaking out over Trump’s “shithole” comments, Glenn wrote, “I’m amused when people who’ve spent 50 years declaring the very concept of decency repressive and outdated suddenly start with the ‘have you no decency?’ shtick. When Joseph Welch used that phrase, it was pretty much Peak Decency, or as we’re now told, a horrible regressive time of racism, homophobia, transphobia and xenophobia.”

Update: Samantha Bee Apologized for Giving Her Audience What It Demands.

Consider this: The YouTube channel for “Full Frontal” posted just that final 50-second segment containing her Ivanka rant as its own video Wednesday night. It’s now deleted, but the show clearly thought it was a winner until the backlash began.

Of course, Bee will be right back at it next week, just with less salty language.

As for the backlash to her remarks, I suspect media figures were extra-sensitive to getting busted for the dreaded double standard attack, given the swift blowback to Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet about Valerie Jarrett.

Bee should remember comedy is all about timing.

And getting paid: “suspended” their sponsorship of Bee’s show; likely the network feared a repeat of social media panicking Laura Ingraham’s sponsors.

More: State Farm has also suspended its sponsorship of Bee’s show, according to showbiz site The Wrap. 

BEE GETS STINGING BACKLASH FOR VILE IVANKA INSULT: Trump enthusiast Roseanne Barr does an obscenely racist tweet and is fired despite having a hugely popular sitcom. Trump resister Samantha Bee flings an obscenely unfunny insult at Ivanka Trump and … crickets? Well, as LifeZette’s Michele Blood reports, there is a backlash and it is growing. Stay tuned.

DISPATCHES FROM THE NEW CIVILITY. Samantha Bee: Ivanka Trump certainly is a feckless c*nt.

But she’ll get a pass, of course. As Allahpundit writes:

Bee is “in the family,” to borrow a memorable phrase from liberal paterfamilias Jeffrey Goldberg. But Rutz is right that Kimmel or Colbert or any male host who’s also “in the family” would have taken some heat for saying this. It wouldn’t have been a firing offense a la Roseanne’s racist joke and an apology would have been duly offered, probably in the course of blaming Trump for letting their temper momentarily cloud their good judgment. (“It’s just this war and that lying son of a bitch Johnson!”) Family can always be forgiven but there are times when they need “correction.”

Even Bee probably would have had to apologize, though, if she had leveled this at a left-wing woman, as hard to imagine as that is. If she’d called Jill Stein a see-you-next-Tuesday for pulling key votes from Hillary in the Rust Belt, some perfunctory remorse might need to be arranged. The reason Bee dropped the C-bomb, which is rare even on pay TV, is because all the stars had aligned here and she knew it — she’s in the family, she’s a woman, the policy she’s describing is deeply loathed by Democrats, and her target was not just a woman affiliated with the right but Trump’s favorite child/advisor. Given a chance to utter one of the few remaining taboo words on television with impunity, knowing the sweet, sweet clapter it would produce, how could she resist?

As the Washington Examiner noted last year, after Bee described a young Democrat recovering from cancer as having “Nazi hair,” because he happened to have attended CPAC:

In January, just weeks before then-President-elect Trump was sworn into office, Bee made a call for decency.

“We’re facing a new reality after the election. These next four years are going to require a broad coalition of straight-up decency,” Bee said in a freewheeling interview with the New York Times.

“And we’re going to need to be able to talk to people who would normally feel alienated by my show,” she added.

Sounds like a good plan. When does she start?

When the next president has a (D) after his or her name.

Related: “Tonight, Bee is scheduled to receive an award from the Television Academy for ‘advancing social change.’ Were it not for double standards…”

Increasingly, I’m convinced that we’re living in the Matrix — and the robots hired Tom Wolfe to write the source code.

TO THE AIRBRUSHES, COMRADES! ‘Roseanne’ reruns pulled from multiple channels after star’s racist tweet. They sure do move fast to make someone an unperson now.

GREAT MOMENTS IN MEDIA SELF-CONGRATULATION: “ABC network head praised for swift cancellation of ‘Roasanne’ after star’s tweet” reports…ABC News.

They’ve since changed the headline after CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski called them on it (perhaps they feared a doxxing), but the URL on the article remains “abc-network-head-praised-swift-cancellation-roseanne-stars.”

No word yet if newly hired Disney employee Keith Olbermann, reporting back to his old gig at sister network ESPN, has any comments, X-rated or otherwise.


A mere nine hours after Roseanne Barr posted an astonishingly racist tweet about Obama intimate Valerie Jarrett, the American Broadcasting Company did something that has never happened before in the history of broadcasting: It canceled TV’s #1 show.

The show was heralded as the first program to try and make sense of the Trump era, and it generated an enormous audience that dissipated some over the course of three months but was still in powerhouse territory. Networks like ABC build entire weekly schedules around giant hits like Roseanne, so its departure from the airwaves isn’t just a matter of replacing it with another half-hour. This was a decision that had to sting and sting hard.

Barr is likely to be airbrushed out of Hollywood entirely for some time. “Following the cancellation of her hit ABC comedy series, Barr has been dropped by her agency, ICM Partners,” Deadline reports.

Big Hollywood’s John Nolte is likely right when he tweets that unlike Fox rebooting Tim Allen’s conservative-friendly sitcom Last Man Standing, there’s no way that Barr’s series “ends up at another network. She is toxic now and the cast will not follow her. Barr is going to have to do a Mel Gibson. Disappear for a few years.”

FLASHBACK: Occupy Wall Street-era Roseanne Barr in 2011: ‘Guilty’ Wall Street Bankers Should Be Sent to Reeducation Camps or Beheaded.

THAT WAS FAST: ‘Roseanne’ Canceled at ABC Following Racist Tweet.

ABC, in a stunning move, has decided to cancel its Roseanne revival following star Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet Tuesday.

“Roseanne’s Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show,” ABC Entertainment president Channing Dungey said Tuesday.

Early Tuesday, star, head writer and exec producer Barr attacked former President Obama White House adviser Valerie Jarrett in a since-deleted tweet in which she said “Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj.” Barr subsequently apologized: “I apologize to Valerie Jarrett and to all Americans. I am truly sorry for making a bad joke about her politics and her looks. I should have known better. Forgive me — my joke was in bad taste.”

As Allahpundit writes, “She’s always been a crank — our own Ed Morrissey has firsthand experience with it — but some forms of crankery are more radioactive than others.”

Update: Well, yes:

Background on the above image from 2009 here.

Related: Interesting days at Disney — Roseanne is out, but Keith Olbermann, that longtime master of civility and nuanced understatement, is back in.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE, LEGAL EDUCATION EDITION: 2018 Grad Decries Political Correctness At Stanford Law School.

At Stanford Law School, no more than three of approximately 110 full-time faculty publicly identify as conservative or libertarian. (By way of contrast, Stanford Law School touts on its webpage 23 full-time faculty under the inartful rubric of “minority.”) As a consequence, many of my classmates will graduate having never engaged with a law professor whose worldview and convictions track those of nearly half the voting public.

It would require nothing less than willful blindness to presume this state of play does not affect the education that students receive. Probably for obvious reasons, my classmates demonstrate little willingness to identify publicly with anything associated with conservatism or, God forbid, President Trump, no matter how trivial. By way of extraordinary example, the Law School Republicans will soon cease to exist as a student organization because — after a campaign of intimidation and opprobrium — not one underclassman would volunteer to serve on its board next academic year.

An almost unspoken agreement seems to exist among many students that all of us will soon be fabulously successful, so long as everyone remains a “team player” and nobody rocks the boat too earnestly. Political, moral, and religious convictions are, for the most part, accessories best deployed for instrumental purposes, rather than values to be espoused or explored for their own sake. In much the same manner that all respectable people may speak or dress or eat a certain way, students at Stanford Law School have come to believe — and not entirely without reason, given their surroundings — that all respectable people should think the same way. …

For the past two years, I have repeatedly beseeched the dean of Stanford Law School to follow the example set by the leaders of my undergraduate alma mater — the University of Chicago — and publicly affirm the centrality of viewpoint diversity to the aims of education. Each time, she has refused, citing squeamishness at the prospect of overstepping her portfolio. Yet during that same period, she has nonetheless offered schoolwide commentary on public topics as diverse as the violence in Charlottesville, the rescission of DACA, and the Trump administration’s efforts to ban transgender individuals from military service.

Beyond the Office of the Dean, Stanford Law School has staged programs aimed at helping students to #resist more effectively, celebrating International Workers’ Day and offering advice on “progressive lawyering” in the Trump era. Professors have sent schoolwide emails condemning anyone who supported President Trump as either an outright racist or an enabler who is #complicit. One professor even saw fit to join a student/alumni Facebook group for the purposes of criticizing the Law School Republicans.

When the taxpayers get tired of supporting this narrowmindedness, they’ll be accused of “anti-intellectualism.”

JOHN MCWHORTER: Atonement As Activism: Today’s consciousness-raising on race is less about helping black people than it is about white people seeking grace.

Coates is a symptom of a larger mood. Over the past several years, for instance, whites across the country have been taught that it isn’t enough to understand that racism exists. Rather, the good white person views themselves as the bearer of an unearned “privilege” because of their color. Not long ago, I attended an event where a black man spoke of him and his black colleagues dressing in suits at work even on Casual Fridays, out of a sense that whites would look down on black men dressed down. The mostly white audience laughed and applauded warmly—at a story accusing people precisely like them of being racists.

This brand of self-flagellation has become the new form of enlightenment on race issues. It qualifies as a kind of worship; the parallels with Christianity are almost uncannily rich. White privilege is the secular white person’s Original Sin, present at birth and ultimately ineradicable. One does one’s penance by endlessly attesting to this privilege in hope of some kind of forgiveness. After the black man I mentioned above spoke, the next speaker was a middle-aged white man who spoke of having a coach come to his office each week to talk to him about his white privilege. The audience, of course, applauded warmly at this man’s description of having what an anthropologist observer would recognize not as a “coach” but as a pastor.

I have seen whites owning up to their white privilege using the hand-in-the-air-palm-out gesture typically associated with testifying in church. After the event I have been describing, all concerned deemed it “wonderful” even though nothing new had been learned. The purpose of the event was to remind the parishioners of the prevalence of the racist sin and its reflection in themselves, and to offer a kind of forgiveness, this latter being essentially the function of the black people on the panel and in the audience. Amen.

Some might see all of this as a healthy sign of moral advance. And I suppose if I had to choose between this performativity and the utter contempt most whites had for any discussion of discrimination 50 years ago and before, I’d choose our current moment. But goodness, it piles high and deep, this—well, I’ll call it fakeness. . . .

The self-affirming part is the rub. This new cult of atonement is less about black people than white people. Fifty years ago, a white person learning about the race problem came away asking “How can I help?” Today the same person too often comes away asking, “How can I show that I’m a moral person?”

They want religion. But they don’t actually want to be told to do anything they don’t already want to do.


Question asked and answered by Victor Davis Hanson.


● Shot:

In a column for the Politico yesterday, Reason editor Michael Moynihan wrote the left had turned into a “a virtual Bletchley Park of racial cryptographers teasing out the sinister motives and subtexts of McCain’s campaign advertising.”

It was a funny line, but it to dismiss it as just hyperbole would be a big mistake. Responding to McCain’s “The One” ad, a Democratic consulting group put out a frightfully lengthy memo deconstructing it. This excerpt will give you the general thrust of it:

* * * * * * * *

That’s right, after the racist charges didn’t stick and then their ridiculous Nazi accusations were ignored, there was only one other place they could go. Obama’s defenders are now accusing McCain of using his campaign ads to call Obama the anti-Christ. Marvel for a second at the absurdity of that. I have no idea what charge the liberal Bletchley Park could make to further discredit themselves, but where there’s a will, there’s a way.

Mark Hemingway, the NRO Corner, August 07, 2008.

● Chaser:

Hero spy who founded Bletchley Park codebreaking unit with his own money and warned government against dangers of Hitler is ‘too white’ for a blue plaque.

—The London Daily Mail, November 18, 2017.

(Classical reference in headline.)

APPARENTLY LAW-BREAKER IS A RACE:  Calling John Kelly a Racist is Offensive and an Outright Lie.

SURELY, CHER MUST OWN A MIRROR: As I say frequently, “Beware the pious.” Cher, the aging songbird-cum-social justice warrior is being sued for racial discrimination against black people. Here’s a story about of one of her unhinged tweets in which she refers to the President as “a demented racist.”

Pot, meet kettle.

ANDREW SULLIVAN: Kanye West and the Question of Freedom.

When elites speak of tribalism, we tend to think we’re somehow above it. After all, we have educated minds that have developed the intellectual muscles to resist coarser loyalties, have we not? We value unique individuals over the amorphous group. We like to think we can see complexity and nuance rather than wallowing in coarse Manichean ideas, articulated by demagogues, that divide the world into “us” and “the other.” It’s the unthinking masses who do that. Not us. Unlike them, we are aware of the dangers of this temptation, alert to its irrationality. We resist it. . . .

The dynamic here is deeply tribal. It’s an atmosphere in which the individual is always subordinate to the group, in which the “I” is allowed only when licensed by the “we.” Hence the somewhat hysterical reaction, for example, to Kanye West’s recent rhetorical antics. I’m not here to defend West. He may be a musical genius (I’m in no way qualified to judge) but he is certainly a jackass, and saying something like “slavery was a choice” is so foul and absurd it’s self-negating. I don’t blame anyone for taking him down a few notches, as Ta-Nehisi Coates just did in memorable fashion in The Atlantic. He had it coming. You could almost say he asked for it.

But still. And yet. There was something about the reaction that just didn’t sit right with me, something too easy, too dismissive of an individual artist’s right to say whatever he wants, to be accountable to no one but himself. It had a smack of raw tribalism to it, of collective disciplining, of the group owning the individual, and exacting its revenge for difference.

To be fair, Coates’ established role is to call people outside the tribe racist, while policing racial attitudes and behavior within the tribe.


As an individual, I seek my own freedom, period. Being gay is integral to who I am, but it doesn’t define who I am. There is no gay freedom or straight freedom, no black freedom or white freedom; merely freedom, a common dream, a universalizing, individual experience. “Liberation from the dictates of the we” is everyone’s birthright in America, and it is particularly so for anyone in the creative fields of music or writing. A free artist owes nothing to anyone, especially his own tribe. And if you take the space away from him to be exactly what he wants to be, in all his contradictions and complexity, you are eradicating something critical to a free and healthy society. You are devouring the individual in favor of the mob. You are reducing a kaleidoscope to black and white.

And notice that in Ta-Nehisi’s essay, two concepts — freedom and music — that have long been seen as universal, transcending class or race or gender or any form of identity toward an idea of the eternally human or even divine — are emphatically tribalized and brought decisively down to earth. Freedom, in this worldview, does not and cannot unite Americans of all races; neither can music. Because there is no category of simply human freedom possible in America, now or ever. There is only tribe. And the struggle against the other tribe. And this will never end.

Well, that’s the point. If it ends, a lot of people’s livelihoods, social positions, and power bases are gone.

WORST. RACIST. EVER. Hispanics Score Under Trump. “Among Latinos, the jobless rate has only registered below 5 percent for seven months total – in the history of this country. Six of those months have occurred with Donald Trump in the White House, including the April report released last week.”

It’s been a long time since Democrats professed to believe that “a rising tide lifts all boats,” and Trump’s embrace of it could prove to be the ultimate wedge issue.


BLUE ON GREEN: Cannabis Industry Could Be ‘A Form Of Reparations,’ Says Cynthia Nixon.

“Arresting people–particularly people of color–for cannabis is the crown jewel in the racist war on drugs and we must pluck it down,” she said. “We must expunge people’s records; we must get people out of prison.”

As she walked off the stage, a crowd of people moved in to get Nixon’s attention. One man tried to give her a giant, multi-colored bong. (She demurred.) A woman–joint in mouth–attempted to get a selfie with her mid-puff. Her campaign staff tried to manage the crush of cameras surrounding her.

In an interview after her speech, Nixon explained that she has made cannabis a central part of her campaign because it touches on so many other issues.

“It’s a racial justice issue because we’re incarcerating people of color in such staggering numbers,” she said.

Any minute now I’m expecting Governor Cuomo to announce a new Marijuana Importation Fleet — to be staffed entirely by genderqueer persons of color.

BILL WHITTLE: Kanye West — Racist.

Must-see TV.


FINALLY: Good News: Cops Nab DePauw’s Rock-Arranging Racists.

ACROSS THE POND: Racist leftwingers abuse new home secretary Sajid Javid in racist slurs.

The new home secretary was called a “coconut” by the prominent left-wing campaigner Tariq Mahmood online and an “Uncle Tom” by Jack Johnson, a Labour councillor, the Guido Fawkes website said.

Other left-wing campaigners also used racist epithets about the Conservative MP. Mr Javid, whose parents emigrated to the UK from Pakistan in the 1960s, is the most senior black and minority ethnic member of the cabinet.

A Labour spokeswoman said: “Any complaints we receive which relate to party members are fully investigated and appropriate disciplinary action is taken in line with our procedures.”

It’s different when they do it because shut up.

MICHAEL BARONE: Democrats are taking minorities for granted.

According to the 2016 exit poll , Hillary Clinton received the votes of 88 percent of black Americans and 65 percent of Hispanic and Asians. Barack Obama’s 2012 percentages among these groups were marginally higher—93 percent of blacks, 71 percent of Hispanics and 73 percent of Asians. That was a downtick from the 95 percent he won among blacks, but that and his 2012 percentages among Hispanics and Asians were the highest Democratic percentages among the three nonwhite groups measured in exit polls starting in 1972.

Naturally, Democrats want to retain these high levels of support. Hillary Clinton’s 37 percent among white voters was the lowest Democratic percentage among that bloc since Ronald Reagan was on the ballot, and her fall to 28 percent among white non-college graduates may be the worst Democratic showing in that group in the party’s history. It’s easy to imagine — it can be extrapolated from current polling — that other Democrats will run stronger among white groups than Clinton did. It’s harder to imagine that they can win without something like the very high percentages they have been getting among nonwhites.

One way to do that is to hark back to the issues that seem to have worked in the past. In August 2012, campaigning before a biracial audience in South Side Virginia, Vice President Joe Biden said that Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s financial policies would “put y’all back in chains.” Obama-Biden campaign spokesman said this was a metaphor for “unshackling” the middle class, but Republicans — and probably many voters — heard it as an insinuation that their side wanted to return to slavery. Similarly, Democrats attacked the Supreme Court’s 2013 Shelby County decision overturning section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act, but leaving in place the rest of the law, as a return to exclusion of blacks from the polls. But that section only singled out for special administrative scrutiny changes in voting laws in states defined by low voter participation levels in the 1964, 1968 and 1972 elections. That provision made sense when discrimination barred blacks from voting in several Southern states, but as the Court pointed out, there has been no such mass suppression in recent decades; a Census survey showed higher turnout rates among blacks than whites in 2012. It’s hard to see the Democrats’ attacks here as anything but attempts to tar their opponent as racists determined to restore slavery or segregation, even while knowing that such characterizations are false.

Hard indeed.

Plus: “Scarcely mentioned in the immigration debate are Asians, who in recent years have made up an increasing share of immigrants. They constitute, however, only 13 percent of the illegal immigrant population, and the income levels of Asian households are more than 30 percent higher than those of all U.S. households. Historically, there was much prejudice among Asians, peaking perhaps after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Today there is little evidence of invidious discrimination or of the underrepresentation in desirable categories that is considered the justification for racial quotas and preferences. To the contrary, there is stark evidence that racial quotas work against Asian applicants to colleges and universities, who need much higher test scores and academic records than whites, much less Hispanics and blacks, to be admitted to selective schools. Harvard University has been sued for discriminating against Asian applicants and, when Democratic legislators in California sought to seek a ballot proposition to repeal an earlier measure barring racial discrimination in state higher education, they were met by a torrent of protest from Asian parents and dropped the issue.”


On the one side is a collection of Americans who rightly look at Daum’s dress and say, “That’s not racist. It’s just a pretty dress.” On the other side is a collection of Americans who view this indifference and confusion as a provocation.

Now, let me ask. As you survey pop culture, the academy, and American corporations, which side has the upper hand? Which side is defining American discourse? America’s most prominent culture-makers obsess over identity. They elevate prom dress choices to matters of national debate. And that’s why people who still possess a sense of reason, proportion, and manners (on both sides of the political aisle) need to push back. Reason can’t cede the public square to rage. Sometimes a prom dress is just a prom dress. But Lam’s tweet wasn’t “just” a tweet. It was a symbol of the incoherent anger that is tearing this nation apart.

Definitely read the whole thing. And kudos to Daum for not backing down. What David French accurately calls “perhaps the dumbest story you’ve ever heard — a story that is stupid with a heaping helping of malice on the side” made the Washington Post:

While the family lives in a predominantly white suburb of Salt Lake City, Dawes said she has made an effort to give her daughter a multicultural upbringing. When Daum was in the third grade, her mother pulled her out of her school and enrolled her in a more diverse school in Salt Lake City. “I wanted her to have that exposure,” Dawes said.

She also said that Daum has grown up with a multicultural extended family. Several of her nieces and nephews are of Pacific Island descent.

The mother found it particularly unsettling that “an adult male has attacked her for what she’s wearing,” something that has nothing to do with “her talent or her mind.”

“I’m proud of her for standing her ground because she didn’t do anything wrong,” Dawes said.

In the days since the photos went viral, Daum said she has made a point of researching the significance of the dress in Chinese history and culture. She also says she has learned about the velocity and reach of messages on social media, and the importance of being able to see her own posts from a different lens.

“This does give me a better sense of choice and being careful in what I say in posts and how it can be perceived differently,” she said.  “It’s taught me to be extra cautious because you don’t want people to see it the wrong way.”

But at the same time, she said, “there are people who are going to find something to offend them no matter what it is.”

“I’d wear it again,” she said of the dress.

Good for her. Twitter’s management attempted to keep the mob enraged by spotlighting this weekend’s idiocy as a “Twitter Moment,” but since the cycle that Internet shaming is now completely predictable, that may finally be diluting its impact:

  • Random crank is outraged over minutia, tweets random crankery.
  • The outrage mob amplifies said crankery 140 characters at a time – or simply by hitting the retweet button.
  • A few days later, faced with thousands of thousands of hateful responses, the victim apologizes, and the mob’s thirst for blood* is temporarily slaked…
  • …until the outrage mob finds a new skull to collect.

Also diluting the outrage mob? As Jordan Peterson advises Daum, “Don’t apologize. That will merely be read as an indication of your guilt. You’re innocent. Maintain your stance,” adding “Ignore them. They’re contemptible bullies masking their cruelty with virtue. You’re a kid trying to have a nice time. You’ve done nothing wrong.”

* And the frisson of pleasure from the belief that they’re the doing vital missionary work as members of the anointed.

I’M EMBARRASSED FOR THE AUTHOR: USC lawprof Michael Simkovic: A well-organized campaign to bait, discredit, and take over universities is exploiting students and manipulating the public.

Here’s a taste:

Recently, the Federalist Society invited South Texas College of Law Houston’s Josh Blackman to lecture at CUNY law school.  Professor Blackman’s sparsely attended lecture drew protestors because of Blackman’s previous criticism of an amnesty program for undocumented immigrants and his use of language the protestors interpreted as racial dog whistling.

A university official asked the students to be respectful, defended Blackman’s right to speak, and admonished the students “please don’t take the bait.”  One student noticed Blackman recording himself and asked Blackman, “You chose CUNY didn’t you? Because you knew what would happen if you came here.”  (CUNY, like Vassar, has a reputation for left-wing student activism).  Blackman deflected the question.  One protestor used an expletive, which Blackman repeated.

According to both Blackman and CUNY, the protestors were non-violent.  Security was present to maintain order.  Blackman—tall and muscular—towered over the students and appeared calm throughout the exchange.

(1) Josh Blackman is an incredibly mild-mannered, polite, nice guy. The protesters didn’t identify any “dog whistle” language; they just called him a racist because that’s their default criticism of anyone they don’t like. Simkovic should be ashamed of himself for suggesting that the students may be correct in asserting Blackman has actually indulged in racism, which is a kiss of death in academia. A public apology should be forthcoming.

(2) Josh hasn’t criticized the amnesty program per se, which he supports, he’s criticized its implementation by executive order, which he believes is unconstitutional. The fact that neither the students nor Simkovic can appreciate the distinction doesn’t speak well of either.

(3) Josh is, I believe, the most prolific speaker for the Federalist Society in the country. He has spoken at dozens of schools. By Federalist Society rules, the students at each chapter have to invite him, he can’t invite himself. In short, the idea that he somehow chose CUNY to provoke a reaction is ridiculous, and the notion that presenting an anodyne talk on free speech, which Josh had presented at several other law schools without incident, should provoke any sensible, mature person is ridiculous.

(4) Josh is certainly reasonably tall, but when a security guard comes to you before a talk and asks if you have an “exit strategy” and gives you suggestions about various emergency routes out of the law school, even a six-footer might feel a bit threatened. I wonder how Prof. Simkovic would feel if a security guard came to him before one of his classes, and suggested he needed an “exit strategy” in case the protesters intent on disrupting his class and chanting expletives outside his classroom turn violent?

The whole piece is like this, full of illogic and innuendo, suggesting that the fault with the threats to free speech on campus lies with those who engage in and defend free speech, rather than those bent on suppressing it. Read it and weep.



“MY CULTURE IS NOT YOUR GODDAMN PROM DRESS:” White girl in Chinese prom dress triggers SJW Twitter.

And from right around this time in 2016, Video Game Director David Jaffe Plays The KKK Card As He Ruins Superhero Prom Picture:

Most of what I wrote back then applies to this year’s lefty freakout over prom-going teenagers, with just minor touchups.

As John Nolte wrote at Big Hollywood in 2015 when the Onion’s otherwise often enjoyable AV Club Website attacked a Michigan restaurateur for symbolically “banning” Hollywood’s Michael Moore and Seth Rogan when the two smeared the late Chris Kyle after Clint Eastwood’s American Sniper proved to be a surprise box office smash:

And how does the AV Club respond to this symbolic but righteous protest? By using no fewer than 7 paragraphs to relentlessly mock the Little Guy and his business.

[Restaurant owner Tommy] Brann has come up with the equally deadly revenge of denying him “decent, better than average, but nothing to rave about” fare delivered through “terrible service” amid “dated and kinda dirty” decor, of the sort that Americans must consume daily to live. Rogen and Moore are hereby condemned to slowly starve to death in the Brann’s parking lot, yearning fruitlessly for Brann’s Classic Onion Straw Loaf, the lights of the sign that illuminates their fatal mistake growing dim in their eyes.

Is anyone else old enough to remember when speaking truth to and defying power was the in-thing?

When the American Left reveals who they are really for and against, it is chilling.

Know your place and shut your mouth, little man.

And now you too, girls in Asian-style dresses, as well as teenage boys with geeky but harmless superhero T-shirts and the prom dates who love them. As Fred Siegel wrote in 2014 history of the American left, The Revolt Against the Masses, “The best short credo of liberalism came from the pen of the once canonical left-wing literary historian Vernon Parrington in the late 1920s.‘Rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class.’”

And if that means smearing high school kids as crypto-racists as part of the PC cleanup, hey, at least you can feel proud knowing you fought the good fight by Speaking Truth to Prom.

UPDATE: “The entire corpus of Identity-politics ideology is just a new way to bully,” Jordan Peterson tweets, with “the additional twist of simultaneously claiming higher moral ground.”

Found via John Sexton at Hot Air, who notes the whiplash factor of this train wreck: “Haven’t we seen the entire media recently defend the honor of the Parkland teens on the grounds that, Hey, they’re just kids? It’s amazing how fast the left goes from ‘don’t attack these poor kids’ to a mean girl army ready to destroy someone the same age over their choice of prom dress. Even more incredible, you can bet they all feel proud of themselves for this shameful behavior.”

Of course — it reminds them that they’re the anointed, as Thomas Sowell would say.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: College Republicans’ pro-NRA flyers trashed, members smeared as ‘racists.’


Big Brother is dead and in a freezer, but his frozen brain sends out spasmodic thought-orders through the network of Marxists in the nation.  Today they go after racistsexisthomophobes, tomorrow they extend that to “Islamophobes” and prevent, say, the outlawing of female genital mutilation.

Read the whole thing. As Ross Douthat of the New York Times and National Review tweeted last year when Time-Warner-CNN-HBO employee Lena Dunham admitted she was prepared to dox airline stewardesses if they displayed insufficient wokeness, “Every great idealist begins as a rebel, becomes a square, and eventually degenerates into a narc.”

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: A recent graduate and former student employee of the University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point recently posted a list of all the students on a College Republicans email list on social media to help “identify the racists.” “When challenged, Erwin Palma retorted that others have no business telling him how to treat Republican supporters because he is ‘a target for multiple forms of violence and oppression fueled by the Republican Party.'”

STEPHEN L. CARTER: Georgia’s law against wearing masks in public must be applied to everyone, including those protesting the presence of hate groups.

I’m a little confused by some of the responses to the arrest of self-styled anti-racism protesters in Newnan, Ga., earlier this week for violating the state’s law against going masked in public. Observers seem somewhere between troubled and outraged that a statute originally enacted to deal with the Ku Klux Klan should be used against people who were marching non-violently against (in this case) self-proclaimed Nazis. But were the law applied selectively, hitting only racist targets, it would be blatantly unconstitutional.

Statutes that prohibit wearing masks in public go back to the decade after the Civil War, when Reconstruction authorities were searching for a way to deal with the terrorism of what historians call the first Ku Klux Klan. By the end of the 19th century, the group had died out, but a second Klan arose in the 1920s, leading to pressure on state governments to enact anti-masking laws. The Georgia version was adopted in 1951. . . .

That’s it. Nothing about the Klan. Nothing about whether you’re being violent or not. Nothing about which side of a dispute you happen to be on. As a matter of fact, it’s quite important that the statute applies equally to racist and anti-racist groups. Otherwise, the law would be flatly unconstitutional.

I’m certainly not comparing the Georgia protesters to the Klan, but it’s hornbook First Amendment jurisprudence that regulations on speech must be neutral as to content – that is, the state can’t treat two speakers differently depending on which side each happens to take. To propose that the good guys and the bad guys be subject to different rules is to fall into the trap that the journalist Nat Hentoff memorably labeled “free speech for me but not for thee.” In short, if the racists can’t cover their faces, neither can the anti-racists.

Some of the protesters arrested in Georgia told reporters that they kept their faces covered for fear of retaliation by white supremacists. The idea, wrote one critic of the arrests, is to make it harder for opponents “to weaponize their politics with employers or fellow right-wingers.” The fear is understandable, but to cite it as a justification for masking also carries a certain irony. If you peruse the pro-Klan writing of the past, the desire to avoid retaliation was a consistent theme. The night riders had to keep their faces covered, they claimed, so that those perfidious Yankees would not arrest them for protecting their communities against crimes and depredations that Union occupiers ignored.

It’s also ironic given how “anti-fascist” protesters are always going after people’s jobs.

UPDATE–ADL APOLOGIZES: ADL regrets calling group that targets anti-Israel students Islamophobic and racist. Background here.

MAYBE THEY SHOULD JUST LEAVE “ANTI” OFF OF THEIR NAME: Defamation by the Anti-Defamation League:

The ADL’s national office tweeted, “thank you to @umich student leaders for exposing Canary Mission’s Islamophobic & racist rhetoric as ‘antithetical and destructive to supporting Israel and eliminating anti-Semitism on campus.'”

I googled ADL and Canary Mission, and could not find any ADL report analyzing or condemning Canary Mission. So I emailed ADL’s media folks yesterday morning, and asked if they could “please point me to the underlying evidence that ADL has relied on in support of it accusation of racism and Islamaphobia?” I sent a follow up email six hours later, and received this response: “Our research team is pulling together examples for you, so please stand by.”

It’s now the next morning, and still nothing. One would think that the ADL, an organization whose reputation depends on correctly identifying anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry, wouldn’t accuse a fellow Jewish organization, or anyone for that matter, of racism without having the research on hand to support it. It shouldn’t take a post hoc research effort, much less one that hasn’t borne fruit more than twenty-four hours after an initial inquiry.


Bathroom graffiti off campus. Racist rocks in a park. A student (identified later as Ellie Locke) engaging in nondescript “offensive” behavior. And now the campus is convulsing.

On Wednesday, university president Mark McCoy and vice president Alan Hill held a press conference on campus, the day after a student mob disrupted an appearance by an actress.

“I’m hurting too, but nowhere near like our students are hurting today,” said Alan Hill, who is black. The language is remarkable. You would think by the way he was talking that these students had witnessed a massacre. President McCoy mewled about “this time of pain on our campus.”

At just past the five minute mark during the press conference, the president agrees to let a student mob into the event. Bad move. The group, mostly black students, took the thing over, chanting, “Meet our demands! We’re not safe!”

It only gets worse from there.

DePauw’s annual tuition is $47,838, plus room and board. Parents and students, choose where to spend your money wisely.

THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST: Lawsuit Alleges Google Told Managers ‘Objectivity,’ ‘Colorblindness’ Are Racist.

STOP ME IF YOU THINK YOU’VE HEARD THIS ONE BEFORE: Morrissey says Loony Left calls everyone racist to change the subject.

K-12 IMPLOSION UPDATE: New high school history textbook teaches Trump is mentally ill and his supporters are racists.

YOUR DAILY TREACHER: Even Starbucks Is Racist Now, Apparently.

In three years, Starbucks has gone from this…

…To facing this:

As Treacher writes:

I hope this fiasco proves instructive to Howard Schultz and everybody else at Starbucks. No matter how liberal you are, no matter how hard you work to establish and maintain your #woke credentials, all it takes is one slip-up. Just one viral video, taken on one of the cameras that we all carry now, and the angry mob will descend on you. Nothing you do or say will appease them. No apology will be sufficient. You can’t grovel low enough.

Read the whole thing.

ANNALS OF LEFTWING AUTOPHAGY: #BoycottStarbucks trends on Twitter after video shows arrest of two black men at Philadelphia location.

Amid outrage, Starbucks issued a statement online, writing, “We apologize to the two individuals and our customers and are disappointed this led to an arrest.”

During a Facebook Live statement uploaded Saturday afternoon, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross described the incident. He said the men were “trespassing,” because they were non-paying customers who wanted to use the bathroom. When Starbucks employees asked the men to leave, they refused and the police were called. He said the officers “did absolutely nothing wrong.”

However, several on social media disagreed and #BoycottStarbucks soon became a trending topic on Twitter Saturday. Many called the arrest racist and discriminatory.

Starbucks’ CEO (now executive chairman) Howard Schultz, a self-proclaimed “life-long Democrat,” floated the idea of having his baristas lecture customers on racial tolerance, trashed Trump, openly endorsed Hillary and afterwards, vowed “to hire thousands of refugees after President Donald Trump’s first executive order that temporarily banned travel from seven mostly-Muslim nations.”

Naturally, in response, #BoycottStarbucks is trending today, as the revolution eats its own – and washes the remains down with really mediocre coffee.

THE LEFT’S VENEZUELAZATION OF AMERICAN CITIES PROCEEDS APACE:  Liberal Cities Embrace Homelessness.  But it’s okay so long as they convince voters that actual competent people are racistsexisthomophobic.

GEORGE KORDA: ‘Student-led’ in-school events; who’s in charge around here? “Would students wishing to either protest, or support, Roe v. Wade be allowed to hold an approved in-school event with poetry, student art exhibits, student-led songs, and student speeches? What about students who want to wear T-shirts with the Confederate Flag, who make the argument that they’re not racist, but they feel they ought to have the freedom to wear the shirts if they wish, either as a First Amendment issue or just because they like it? What about any other subject or issue about which students feel inspired to leave class to demonstrate?”

These are like the “student-led” prayers schools used to do in an attempt to get around the Constitution. Just in service of a different religion.

MICHAEL BARONE: How genetic science is undercutting the case for racial quotas.

Reich obviously wishes to avoid the demonization endured by Murray, who was attacked by a mob at Middlebury College just last year. He is careful indeed to make clear that his findings should not be used to justify racist practices like the slave trade, the eugenics movement, and the Holocaust.

Reich also makes a point that is obvious to the ordinary person but which he — along with some of his critics who wrote to the Times — thinks needs reiteration. Which is, as one puts it, “differences in individuals vary far more widely than in populations.” When we are comparing traits of people with different genetic ancestry, we are looking at averages, like the differences between American whites’ and Asians’ IQ scores (Asians’ on average are higher). But within the white and Asian populations there is wide variety — which can be represented as an actual bell curve.

The assumption of “well-meaning people” is that ordinary Americans aren’t capable of grasping this. My view is that they understand it very well. They have learned, from school, from work, from everyday life, from public events, that there is a wider variation within each measured group than between measured groups.

Read the whole thing.

AMBER ATHEY: In Honor Of Kevin Williamson’s Firing: The Atlantic’s Worst Takes. My favorite is the one about the eclipse being racist. But who can forget Trump Is Probably Sleeping With His Daughter.

ANTISOCIAL MEDIA: YouTube Shooting Highlights Frustration Among Some ‘Creators.’ “Some independent video makers complain YouTube has limited their viewership and shortchanged them on ad payments.”

As the number of creators has grown and uploaded a wider range of videos, advertisers have grown more skittish about putting their messages next to what they deem objectionable content. Top brands including Procter & Gamble Co. pulled spending from the site last year after discovering YouTube running their ads before extremist, racist and hateful videos.

In response, YouTube last year began requiring video producers to have more than 10,000 views from their combined videos before they can start making any money from ads. The company also hired more human reviewers to vet videos, removing clips or entire accounts they see as violating their terms of service.

YouTube prohibits nudity, violence, and other categories of content it deems potentially harmful or dangerous. Its terms also restrict copyrighted content and personal information uploaded without consent.

Earlier this year, YouTube raised the bar even more for its video creators that want to carry ads. Rather than 10,000 views, YouTube channels must now have accumulated at least 4,000 hours of watch time in the past 12 months and 1,000 subscribers. YouTube said a “significant” number of channels would be affected but declined to provide more details. The company said nearly all affected channels make less than $100 a year in ad revenue.

The changes had little impact on YouTube’s most popular stars, some who make more than $100,000 on a single video, including sponsorships, according to Evan Asano, chief executive of Mediakix, a marketing agency for YouTube creators. But the new policies cut tens of thousands of smaller video makers off from getting paid, Mr. Asano said.

Some of them, like Chris Thompson, said the company has gone too far in removing content without being clear about what rules it violates.

Indeed. YouTube has been deplatforming countless conservatives without cause or explanation — and yet it was a lone progressive who went on a shooting spree.


Shephard was that Canadian university TA who was summoned before a Diversity Kangaroo Court to explain why, as part of an issues-in-media class, she had played a debate (which aired on a liberal Canadian tv station) about the use of made-up trans pronouns. The debate featured Jordan Peterson on the “against” side, and one or more students complained that being forced to listen to a debate (in which the other side was represented, too) about a contentious issue in the media was like Hitler invading the Issues in Media class.

She used to consider herself a leftist, but she says she now knows what leftism actually is, and she’s not that, any longer.

Related: Novelist Lionel Shriver: “…it seems I was cited on Twitter as a ‘racist provocateur’”

We’re well on our way to the label becoming a perverse badge of pride; if you’re outside the far-left faithful, your first charge of racism constitutes a losing of your political cherry, inoculating against any further sense of injury. This commonplace code for ‘not one of us’ is morphing into a meaningless playground taunt, just as forgettable as ‘stupid’.

QED: MSNBC Sees Trump ‘Playing the Race Card’ Against ‘Uppity Black Person’ Obama.

As James Taranto likes to say, if you can hear the dog whistles, you’re the dog.

NIALL FERGUSON IN THE BOSTON GLOBE: Enough With The Hating On White Men.

“Masculinity, not ideology, drives extremist groups,” was another recent headline that caught my eye, this time in The Washington Post.

Got it.

I have had to listen to a variation on this theme rather too much in recent weeks. Last month I organized a small conference of historians who I knew shared my interest in trying to apply historical knowledge to contemporary policy problems. Five of the people I invited to give papers were women, but none was able to attend. I should have tried harder to find other female speakers, no doubt. But my failure to do so elicited a disproportionately vitriolic response.

Under a headline that included the words “Too white and too male,” The New York Times published photographs of all the speakers, as if to shame them for having participated. Around a dozen academics — male as well as female — took to social media to call the conference a “StanfordSausageFest.” . . .

I was raised to believe in the equal rights of all people, regardless of sex, race, creed, or any other difference. That the human past was characterized by discrimination of many kinds is not news to me. But does it really constitute progress if the proponents of diversity resort to the behavior that was previously the preserve of sexists and racists?

Publishing the names and mugshots of conference speakers is the kind of thing anti-Semites once did to condemn the “over-representation” of Jewish people in academia. Terms such as “SausageFest” belong not in civil academic discourse but on urinal walls.

What we see here is the sexism of the anti-sexists; the racism of the anti-racists. In this “Through the Looking Glass” world, diversity means ideological homogeneity. “The whitesplaining of history is over,” declared another heated article by Satia last week. Hideous Newspeak terms such as “whitesplaining” and “mansplaining” are symptoms of the degeneration of the humanities in the modern university. Never mind the facts and reason, so the argument runs, all we need to know — if we don’t like what we hear — are the sex and race of the author.

Well, that’s how racists think, and academia is a cesspit of racism. Plus:

The process of indoctrination starts early. My six-year-old son stunned his parents the other day when we asked what he had been studying at school. He replied that they had been finding out about the life of Martin Luther King Jr. “What did you learn?” I asked. “That most white people are bad,” he replied.

This is America in 2018.

You want more Trump? This is how you get more Trump.

JUST NBC THE SHARK JUMPING! On Easter Sunday, Christians must remember how easily and often our faith is used defend white supremacy.

That’s pretty rich coming from the network that employs Al Sharpton, a Louis Farrakhan supporter with decades of racist and anti-Semitic baggage all his own.

Related: NBC’s Chuck Todd slammed on Twitter for Good Friday comments.

ANDREW SULLIVAN: Denying Genetics Isn’t Shutting Down Racism, It’s Fueling It.

Reich simply points out that this utopian fiction is in danger of collapse because it is not true and because genetic research is increasingly proving it untrue. On the male-female divide, for example, Reich cites profound differences, “reflecting more than 100 million years of evolution and adaptation.” On race, he is both agnostic about what we will eventually find out with respect to the scale of genetic differences, and also insistent that genetic differences do exist: “You will sometimes hear that any biological differences among populations are likely to be small, because humans have diverged too recently from common ancestors for substantial differences to have arisen under the pressure of natural selection. This is not true. The ancestors of East Asians, Europeans, West Africans and Australians were, until recently, almost completely isolated from one another for 40,000 years or longer, which is more than sufficient time for the forces of evolution to work.” Which means to say that the differences could be (and actually are) substantial.

This will lead to subtle variations in human brains, and thereby differences in intelligence tests, which will affect social and economic outcomes in the aggregate in a multiracial, capitalist, post-industrial society. The danger in actively suppressing and stigmatizing this inconvenient truth, he maintains, is that a responsible treatment of these genetic influences will be siloed in the academic field of genetics, will be rendered too toxic for public debate, and will thereby only leak out to people in the outside world via the worst kind of racists and bigots who will distort these truths to their own ends. If you don’t establish a reasonable forum for debate on this, Reich argues, if you don’t establish the principle is that we do not have to be afraid of any of this, it will be monopolized by truly unreasonable and indeed dangerous racists. And those racists will have the added prestige for their followers of revealing forbidden knowledge. And so there are two arguments against the suppression of this truth and the stigmatization of its defenders: that it’s intellectually dishonest and politically counterproductive.

I felt a genuine relief reading the op-ed because it was so nuanced and so low-temperature.

Many people, of course, have a vested interest in fueling racism.

SAM HARRIS: Ezra Klein: A Dishonest Editor-in-Chief.

I knew that having a friendly conversation with [Charles] Murray might draw some fire my way. But that was, in part, the point. Given the viciousness with which he continues to be scapegoated—and, indeed, my own careful avoidance of him up to that moment—I felt a moral imperative to provide him some cover.

In the aftermath of our conversation, many people have sought to paint me as a racist—but few have tried quite so hard as Ezra Klein, editor in chief of Vox. In response to my podcast, Klein published a disingenuous hit piece that pretended to represent the scientific consensus on human intelligence while vilifying me as, at best, Murray’s dupe. More likely, readers unfamiliar with my work came away believing that I’m a racist pseudoscientist in my own right.

After Klein published that article, and amplified its effects on social media, I reached out to him in the hope of appealing to his editorial conscience. I found none. The ethic that governs Klein’s brand of journalism appears to be: Accuse a person with a large platform of something terrible, and then monetize the resulting controversy. If he complains, invite him to respond in your magazine so that he will drive his audience your way and you can further profit from his doomed effort to undo the damage you’ve done to his reputation.

Since then, Klein has kept at it, and he delivered another volley today. I told him that if he continued in this way, I would publish our private email correspondence so that our readers could judge him for themselves. His latest effort has convinced me that I should make good on that promise.

Harris made good on his promise, which you can read in its entirety at the link.

GOOD: In response to racist violence, more African Americans look to bear arms. An armed society is a polite society, as a great man once said.

NO ENEMIES TO THE LEFT: Liberals refuse to face the left’s growing anti-Semitism.

Resorting to hateful stereotypes in response to accusations of anti-Semitism is, sadly, a bit of a trend on the left. When the Republican Jewish Coalition demanded the resignations of seven Democratic members of Congress who have met with Farrakhan while in office, one of the RJC’s targets, Andre Carson, responded by refusing to denounce the preacher of hate and asking Jewish Republicans to denounce Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — playing the classic anti-Semitic dual-loyalty card.

Read the whole thing. Late last week, presumably because I had retweeted several anti Farrakhan pieces, Twitter, err, helpfully suggested that I follow him:

Note that he still retains his blue checkmark. As Erick Erickson asked three weeks ago, “Twitter has revoked blue checkmarks of white supremacists and other racists. Why does Farrakhan still have one?” And why is he still in their algorithm for follow suggestions? Twitter has long been accused of “shadow banning” conservatives its censors don’t approve of, but Louis Farrakhan? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Apparently “no enemies to the left” really is Twitter’s policy.

OUT: POLICE ARE RACIST AND TRIGGER HAPPY. IN: “Guns are for the police and the government,” a 13-year-old girl confidently assured me.


t wasn’t just these three—from what I saw and heard at the rally, dying in school was a remarkably ubiquitous fear among young people. I spotted a little girl, perched on her father’s shoulders, waving a sign bearing the text “Am I Next?”

Marissa, a teenage girl from Michigan, told me she felt unsafe in school, and thought more security would help. Teenager after teenager testified that their fears of death were all-consuming, ever-present, and more justified than ever before.

Missing from these conversations was any awareness of a very basic, indisputable fact: Gun violence has declined precipitously over the past 25 years, and most Americans are much safer today than they were a generation ago.

Schools are no exception. They are “increasingly free of mass shootings,” according to researchers James Alan Fox and Emma Fridel. . . .

Obviously, it’s understandable for the survivors of the horrific events in Parkland to be feeling unsafe, given what happened to them. But mass shootings are not the norm, and kids don’t need to be terrified of going to school.

Actually, they do need to be terrified — if they’re to be put to proper political use by the Democrats.

YOU WANT TO BE A SHITHOLE COUNTRY? THIS IS HOW: More Racist Rhetoric From South Africa: Whites ‘Must Leave Everything;’ ‘Not calling for the slaughter of white people‚ at least for now.’

This sort of sentiment dominated Zimbabwe for decades as it went from breadbasket to, well, shithole. Over a decade ago, Nick Kristof reported that Zimbabweans were nostalgic for the old days of Rhodesia:

The hungry children and the families dying of AIDS here are gut-wrenching, but somehow what I find even more depressing is this: Many, many ordinary black Zimbabweans wish that they could get back the white racist government that oppressed them in the 1970’s.

“If we had the chance to go back to white rule, we’d do it,” said Solomon Dube, a peasant whose child was crying with hunger when I arrived in his village. “Life was easier then, and at least you could get food and a job.”

Mr. Dube acknowledged that the white regime of Ian Smith was awful. But now he worries that his 3-year-old son will die of starvation, and he would rather put up with any indignity than witness that.

An elderly peasant in another village, Makupila Muzamba, said that hunger today is worse than ever before in his seven decades or so, and said: “I want the white man’s government to come back. Even if whites were oppressing us, we could get jobs and things were cheap compared to today.”

His wife, Mugombo Mudenda, remembered that as a younger woman she used to eat meat, drink tea, use sugar and buy soap. But now she cannot even afford corn gruel. “I miss the days of white rule,” she said.

Nearly every peasant I’ve spoken to in Zimbabwe echoed those thoughts.

You’d think that Zimbabwe would be a cautionary example for South Africa, but it seems to be more of a how-to guide. And hey, the political insiders got rich.


Is pizza racist? Is Kim Kardashian an Asian-American because she’s half Armenian and Armenia is in Asia? Oh, and should a less-qualified black student be given a place at Yale over a more-qualified white student? What if the white kid is a child of privilege? What if the black kid is, too?

Such are the questions raised in Admissions, Joshua Harmon’s scathing and searching new play at Lincoln Center, directed con brio by Daniel Aukin. It’s a relentless, often very funny exposé of the hypocrisies and self-contradictions of the diversity craze that defines virtually every elite campus in America.

* * * * * * * *

The New York City theater scene is so insular — virtually everyone on both sides of the curtain is of the Left — that it paradoxically offers far more space for self-questioning than you’d expect. Because it’s simply assumed that no Republicans are listening in, ever, progressives in theater fall into animated quarrels among themselves about the defects in their own moral reasoning. Admissions is what happens when they’re forced to work through the injustices created by their social-justice obsession. Late at night. After a couple of glasses of pinot noir.

Read the whole thing.

ZIMBABWE REDUX: A White Farmer Is Killed Every Five Days in South Africa and Authorities Do Nothing About It, Activists Say.

If the numbers are accurate, then South Africa’s ethnic cleansing is just getting started — wait until the locals grasp just how much they can get away with.

In the meantime, I’m sure we can soon expect a few popular protest songs, along with calls for divestiture and sanctions on South Africa’s racist regime.

SHE HAS. REPEATEDLY. Hillary Should Just Admit She Hates Half of America.

Yes, she basically called half the country racist. Yes, she basically characterized women who voted for Trump as thoughtless vacuums for their husband’s opinions rather than as actual human beings. But I’m still kind of shocked that the comments made the news. Why? Because she has said these things before; we already know that she thinks this way.

During the election, Clinton said that “half” of Donald Trump’s supporters belonged to a “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic . . . basket of deplorables.” In an interview with NPR last year, she talked about women being “under tremendous pressure from fathers and husbands and boyfriends and male employers not to vote for ‘the girl.’” Despite the breathless news coverage, these comments weren’t really news so much as they were what we already know.

After the comments received backlash, Clinton insisted that she “meant no disrespect” by her comments — but she’s lying. Disrespect is exactly what she meant.

Even Clinton’s sorry-not-sorry non-apologies drip with contempt.

DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH: As a Rotherham grooming gang survivor, I want people to know about the religious extremism which inspired my abusers.

I’m a Rotherham grooming gang survivor. I call myself a survivor because I’m still alive. I’m part of the UK’s largest ever child sexual abuse investigation.

As a teenager, I was taken to various houses and flats above takeaways in the north of England, to be beaten, tortured and raped over 100 times. I was called a “white slag” and “white c***” as they beat me.

They made it clear that because I was a non-Muslim, and not a virgin, and because I didn’t dress “modestly”, that they believed I deserved to be “punished”. They said I had to “obey” or be beaten.

Fear of being killed, and threats to my parents’ lives, made it impossible for me to escape for about a year. The police didn’t help me.

Well, you were raped, and feared being killed, but they couldn’t risk being called racist.

YOUR DAILY TREACHER: When Hillary Clinton Called You a Racist, Misogynist Idiot, She Was ‘Misinterpreted.’

THE INSTAWIFE: Penis Facial: Boys’ Pain, Vain Women’s Gain.

KURT SCHLICHTER: Don’t Let Leftists Win By Making You Care. “Perhaps we fail to meet the moral standards of people who already call us racist, sexist, greedy, stupid, and all sorts of other stuff. You heard what Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit said about us. Hell, we are murdering children by sticking up for the Constitution, remember? But gee, it seems that this time we have really disappointed them. This time it’s totally serious. We’ve really done it now. Now our enemies are going to think really, really badly of us. Whatev.”

SHE’S STILL NOT READY FOR HER CLOSE-UP: Jonah Goldberg on Hillary’s Other America.

For years, I’ve been writing that the great myth about Hillary Clinton is the notion she shared even a fraction of her husband’s political skills. There is no transitive property to marriage. If Bill Clinton could play the xylophone, Hillary Clinton wouldn’t have gained the skill when she said, “I do.” So it goes with politics. Bill Clinton would never dream of saying anything like this. Having risen in Arkansas politics — not an over-performing state GDP-wise — he understood how to talk to working-class voters in ways Hillary never learned in 40 years of standing next to him sagely nodding.

So, what’s wrong with what she said? Well, nearly everything, starting with the fact that she probably believes all of it. It shows that she really doesn’t like large swathes of the country. She has a Manichaean view that says people who voted against her are backward, racist, sexist, and kind of dumb. I didn’t love the slogan “Make America Great Again,” and Lord knows I didn’t like Trump’s campaign style. But for millions of decent Americans, Trump’s program was optimistic. “We’re gonna make America great again” may sound unequivocally racist to the race-obsessed, but that’s not how everyone who liked it heard it. How easy and comfortable it must be to think that anyone who voted against you is against “black people getting rights.”

At Ricochet, this week’s GLoP (short for Goldberg, Rob Long and John Podhoretz) podcast is titled “A Cheeseburger of Schadenfreude,” because Hillary’s Deplorables on Steroids speech vindicates what conservatives have been saying about her for decades. Near the end of the podcast, the guys riff on her Norma Desmond-ish tone and joke that somebody should make an “I’m ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille” parody video of her. But someone already did; Obama-supporting comedienne Lisa Nova – back in 2008. It speaks volumes about where the left was in 2016 that someone who they had rhetorically beaten like a bongo eight years prior in the rush to nominate The One ended up being their nominee. (Well that, and arguably rigging the race to avoid Bernie getting the nomination.)

Click to watch.

I’M SURE THIS IS SOMEHOW RACIST: Tim Scott Tells ‘Communities Of Color’ To Celebrate Trump Tax Cuts As Black Unemployment Continues To Drop.

ASKING THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS: Is It Racist to Call Maxine Waters Stupid, Considering How Stupid She Is?

I REMEMBER WHEN EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT MS-13 WAS RACIST: WaPo: MS-13 is “taking over the school,” one teen warned before she was killed.



LOUIS FARRAKHAN, RACIST:  Louis Farrakhan: ‘Jews are my enemy,’ ‘white folks are going down’.

#METOO IS RACIST? Woman Who Lied to Police About 3 Black Men Raping and Kidnapping Her Faces Zero Years in Prison. Sadly, it’s newsworthy when women get prison time for lying about rape in any circumstances.

WRITERS BLOCKED: Lionel Shriver on how the new call-out culture is killing fiction.

[T]hese days, straight white fiction writers whose characters’ ethnicity, race, disability, sexual identity, religion or class differs from their own can expect their work to be subjected to forensic examination—and not only on social media. Publishers of young adult fiction and children’s literature hire “sensitivity readers” to comb through manuscripts for perceived slights to any group with the protected status once reserved for distinguished architecture.

The publishing magazine Kirkus Reviews assigns “own voices” reviewers with a matching “marginalised” pedigree to assess young adult books that contain a diverse cast. Last autumn, the magazine yanked both a positive review and its coveted “star” after online activists accused Laura Moriarty’s dystopian novel American Heart, which imagines a future in which US Muslims are sent to internment camps, of using a “white saviour narrative.” (Yes, whole plot lines are becoming unacceptable. This year’s film Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri has attracted heavy flak because its racist cop rounds into a half-decent human being. Writers can refurbish murderers into good guys, but must never redeem a racist.)

As for adult literature, it’s impossible to gauge the degree of politically correct censorship going on behind the scenes at publishing companies and literary agencies. Editors and agents are unlikely to assert directly that a submission’s content is too hot to handle. Having tackled divisive subjects or deployed characters who don’t hew to the rules of identity politics—rules that are often opaque, or at least until you break them—authors are left with uneasy suspicions about why their manuscripts might be attracting no takers, but with no hard evidence.

Read the whole thing.

ANNALS OF LEFTIST AUTOPHAGY: As Obama Presidential Center comes closer to reality, tensions on race, class surface.

When Bronwyn Nichols Lodato began pushing to prevent a portion of Chicago’s Midway Plaisance from being developed into a parking garage by the Obama Foundation, she never expected to be criticized as anti-black.

After all, she is an African-American woman who has lived in Hyde Park for more than a decade and is sensitive to both the city’s racial tensions and the needs of her neighbors.

“All I wanted to do was make sure my kids could play with no garage in their park,” she said. “I have three young children and we live in a condo and the Midway is our yard. My story is simply, how can we keep the park so our kids could play there?”

But soon after taking up her campaign, Lodato, who believes the South Side deserves what she calls “jewels” of open space, found herself under fire by people who believed that the garage would foster business in the area. Some accused her of siding with her well-off white neighbors and taking a stance that hurts the struggling communities around hers.

But of course — any action that might prevent Mr. Obama from achieving a desired goal is by its very nature automatically racist. Additionally, I’m told by reliable media figures that merely uttering the word “Chicago” is doubly racist.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Did NYU serve a racist dinner to celebrate Black History Month? The black students complain, and two black dining-service employees lose their jobs. From the comments: “She got 2 low level black workers fired. Her tuition is probably more than their annual wages (used to be). I hope she’s proud.”

Diversity and inclusion!


Apparently, there’s been some controversy about the film after leftists realized that what seemed like a feminist screed was, in fact, something else entirely. Well, good. Feminists have lost their way. Let them go and watch another showing of Wonder Woman and assuage their endless anger with dreams of a world that never was. Three Billboards is about this world, and the God who loves it in all its terrible beauty.

Read the whole thing.

BLUE ON BLUE: The Left’s War Against The New York Times.

The Times has flourished under Trump, witnessing a surge in digital subscriptions and regularly breaking major news about the administration and the Russia inquiry (not to mention #MeToo). Yet liberal criticism of the Times has also intensified, especially on social media. Not a day passes, it seems, without a prominent Twitter user complaining that the Times is biased against the left, too friendly to Trump and his supporters, or engaging in false equivalences between Democrats and Republicans.

Reporter Michael Schmidt was criticized for not asking more follow-up questions during an impromptu sit-down with Trump in December. His colleague Richard Fausset was accused of normalizing a neo-Nazi in his profile of an Ohio white nationalist the month before. Critics frequently charge that the Times is preoccupied with giving a voice to Trump supporters or even just saying something nice about the president, and the paper has openly struggled with how to cover racists. Broader criticisms go to questions of framing and context—whether news analysis of Trump is too gentle, like when Peter Baker described the president’s “reality-show accessibility,” or why the Times’ mobile phone push notifications seem strangely favorable to the White House. And then there’s the steady moan about the Times opinion section—not just stalwarts like Brooks and Ross Douthat, but Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss, both of whom joined the paper last year from The Wall Street Journal.

“I think there’s been a lot more anger from the grassroots against the Times,” Willis told me. “They’re able to be more vocal about it because of social media and Twitter specifically.” Sean McElwee, a socialist policy analyst and columnist at The Outline, said this anger sometimes “unites everyone from a deeply anti-imperialist socialist to someone who works at a center-left think tank.”

The Left turns on its own, always.

I HAD BEEN ASSURED THAT BORDER CONTROLS WERE RACIST: Colombia tightens borders as Venezuela crisis worsens.

LAYERS AND LAYERS OF FACT CHECKERS, EDITORS, AND HR DEPARTMENTS: New York Times writer fired just hours after being hired.

“Despite our review of Quinn Norton’s work and our conversations with her previous employers, this was new information to us,” read a statement from editorial page editor, James Bennet.

“Based on it, we’ve decided to go our separate ways.”

In a series of tweets, Norton admitted to being “friends with various neo-Nazis” although she claimed she “never agreed with them.”

In one conversation from 2013, Norton wrote “Here’s the deal, f—t. Free speech comes with responsibility. not legal, but human. grown up. you can do this.”

In another oddly prescient tweet from 2014, she said “Today I realized I’d probably make a lot more money being a racist for @nytimes.”

Analysis: True, alas.

Related: New York Times Fires Writer After Deciding It Went Too Far In Its Search For Intellectual Diversity.

YEAH, BUT IDIOTS THINK “ANGLO-AMERICAN” IS RACIST OR SOMETHING: The Anglo-American Office of Sheriff: Americans’ right to elect their Sheriffs comes from ancient English legal tradition.

PEOPLE: Poor people live in “food deserts” and can’t get anything good to eat.

TRUMP: Okay, let’s send them food boxes instead of SNAP cards.

PEOPLE: That’s terrible and racist!

NEW YORK LEFTIES: TRUMP IS A RACIST FOR CALLING THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES SHITHOLES. Also New York Lefties: “Wealthy New Yorkers are furious that Mayor Bill de Blasio plans to open a homeless shelter in their ritzy Manhattan neighborhood.”

As Michael Walsh writes in response, “Yeah, well, maybe you should have thought of that in the voting booth when you re-elected de Blasio, buddy.”

No Sh*thole People, Please, We’re Rich Liberals,” Rod Dreher adds.

COIN FLIPS ARE NOW RACIST: Jesse Jackson objects to ‘unfair’ coin flip that decided tie vote for Team USA flag bearer.

To paraphrase Jon Gabriel’s classic tweet about the Obama era, my favorite part about the Olympics is all the racial healing.

LATE-STAGE SOCIALISM: Mad Max violence stalks Venezuela’s lawless roads.

In one video apparently showing a looting and uploaded to social media, people are seen gleefully dragging live chickens from a stranded truck.

The looters use tree trunks and rocks to stop vehicles, and are particularly fond of “miguelitos” – pieces of metal with long spikes – to burst tires and halt vehicles.

A ring-road round the central town of Barquisimeto, with shanty-towns next to it, is notorious among truckers, who nickname it “The Guillotine” due to the regular attacks.

In some cases, crowds simply swarm at trucks when they stop for a break or repairs. Soldiers or policemen seldom help, according to interviews with two dozen drivers.

Yone Escalante, 43, who also takes vegetables from the Andes on a 2,800-km (1,700-mile) round-trip to eastern Venezuela, shudders when he recalls how a vehicle of his was ransacked in the remote plains of Guarico state last year.

“Social media” is as close as this Reuters report gets to the words “socialism” or “socialist.”

Related: Colombia and Brazil clamp down on borders as Venezuela crisis spurs exodus.

Isn’t border control racist?