“Everybody has asked the question, ‘What shall we do with the Negro?’ I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone! ” Frederick Douglas
Several weeks ago I came across the article linked here, wherein it is reported that the Student Body President and Vice President at UConn were resigning because they could not be effective tools in remedying racial supremacy, or white privilege, or racial domination, or something else, bad and white.
Without doing any research, I was very sure that they were wrong, and that blacks were probably over represented in the student body. Of course, even in our multicultural country, we know that racism is a code word that refers to African Americans being somehow denigrated by whites. Well I did the math, and I was wrong about blacks, but everyone else was wrong about whites. I’ll explain further down.
But first I must address several modern racism terms:
White Supremacy: It used to be attached to people like Hitler and the Nazis, who targeted people of other races for elimination or subjugation. We always thought that USA government was not a bastion of white supremacy, having tied itself in knots trying to raise the status of non-whites in our country, even to the point of “rebalancing” our racial demographics by allowing large numbers of non-whites to immigrate here. Well it appears, having lost over 600,000 mainly white lives in the Civil War, having given African Americans their freedom and reparations following the Civil War, having deconstructed the Jim Crow governance in the 1950s and allowing blacks to go to white schools, having instituted busing in the 1970s to further integrate, having funded the Greater Society and the War on Poverty in the 1960s and 70s, having instituted equal opportunity and minority preference laws over the last 50 years or more: The USA is still a white supremacist country. Now I could go to all the trouble to contrast the anti-racist deeds listed above with the racist deeds done by the Nazis, but it would be to no avail. We must simply point out that the USA is founded on Western European Culture, and hence by definition is therefore systemically white supremacist-so say the Marxist leaders of BLM and Antifa.
I now understand where they are coming from, but I have to point out a few obvious problems with their thinking. The first problem would be that 70% of our country is white, non-Hispanic and Hispanic, both groups’ being founded on Western European principles. African Americans makes up only 13% of the population. Furthermore, at the founding of our nation the population was 80% white with roots in Western European culture. Is it any surprise that our culture, government, etc. is founded on Western European practices and principles? The majority of our citizens, people of all nationalities, are comfortable with that. If they weren’t then they would probably leave. I think most Latinos and Asians are glad that we are not using the entrails of chickens to determine who is guilty, nor are we chopping hands off for theft. I know this may be white supremacist of us, but the good thing is: We don’t hold anyone here against their will. Anyone can leave our Western European based culture and move to India, China, North Korea, or Kenya. Depending on their race, individuals may find life less white supremacist in some of these countries.
Unfortunately, I have to inform you that most of those countries cultures and governances have a strong infusion of Western European culture and governance in their system, even China. Communism is, after all, a Western European idea, howbeit a bad one.
White Privilege: A new hocus pocus term which means that whites get all the benefits of our society and everyone else get none, nor has any power. We’ll overlook the blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Indians in congress, etc. Still, I can understand the term when applied to South Africa, where whites make up 9% of the population and owned most of the businesses, farms, etc. However, I find the term difficult in a country where whites make up 100% of the population. How can you have white privilege when the entire economic and influence spectrums are populated by white people. That is, in a white country how does the poorest family have “white privilege?” I hope you are smart enough to realize that the term is nonsensical there. So what about a country that is 70% white, and indeed where the Asian subpopulation is faring better than the white sub group? Does the term white privilege make sense where more whites are at the poverty level than any other racial group? Does the term make sense in a country where the lowest racial group by income, African Americans, has 60% of its population at average or higher income levels? And where 15% of African American families make $100,000 or more per year?
You could go on all day about the statistics of race, but I think it is clear to any fair minded individual that there are rich people in every racial group, and there are poor people in every racial group, and that the rich people have an advantage over the poor people. But there is a big caveat here: There is no cast system. In this country, unlike most other countries of the world, the wealthiest people are in continual flux. That is, there is no nobility class that is continually in charge. The wealthiest families today are not the same as they were 50 years ago. Bill Gates, Oprah Winfree, Steve Jobs, Lebron James, etc. etc. all came from low or middle income families and rose to be the most wealthy. If your parents are not wealthy, then you may not get into an Ivy League school, but you can still end up richer and more influential than those who did get into those schools.
So is UConn a racist institution and were the student president and VP morally righteous to resign in preparation for a brave new world run by the tiniest racial minority? Surely, we should seek the tiniest minority not the blackest, to take charge, right?
Okay, my premise is that IF UConn demographics closely match the state demographics, then we can’t say there is systemic racism at the university. Granted, this may not the be perfect measure of racism, but can’t we use it as a moniker? Surely, if the university were applying systemic racism against a group, then the first step would be to exclude that group from the university, or reduce their numbers as much as possible. Another minority suppression method might be to prevent them from having their own cultural or minority group clubs. If you can’t stop them from having those clubs, then you might organize demonstrations against them, badger them, demean their group or club, protest any events they sponsor, etc. I’m sure the irony of that is lost on the righteous progressives. However, I didn’t try to see if certain groups were being badgered and demonstrated against on campus, but I did check the campus racial demographics against the state demographics.
Next we might ask whether minorities have been excluded from the student government at UConn. Now it might represent systemic racism by the students themselves, if they continue to elect one racial group disproportionally, or exclude one group disproportionally from positions of influence.
I’ve prepared the table below using data from various web sites:
|Connecticut State Racial Demographics|
|UConn Racial Demographics|
|UConn Student Senate Demographics by Race|
When we compare UConn demographics to Connecticut state demographics, we immediately see that two groups are underrepresented on campus: White students are present at about 76% of their state racial percent and black students are present at about 57% of their state racial percent. Asians and Other are at 250% and 480% respectively. So, if we are going to have unbiased racial representation on campus then we’re going to have to increase black and white student numbers and reduce Asians. That is so only if race is more important than rewarding hard working or brilliant high school students with the opportunity to expand their intellect, graduate, and then use their work ethics and brilliance to improve society for all people regardless of race. I mean I guess a university could make brilliance and hard work the condition for admission, rather than hand out seats using racial proportions.
Next let’s look at the student government racial proportions and see if they match the entire student body racial proportions. First, I have to say that I think students should vote for who they think is best and not be constrained to think about racial groups. I also think that if the students elected you, then you have an obligation to serve, and not force your pompous self righteousness on them by: 1) declaring them to be bigots for electing you, 2) resigning based on some dizzy headed principle that you just thought up, or that Marxist idiots suggested that you follow.
In the student senate, blacks are over represented at 166%, so maybe a few should resign to keep the racial balance. Asians are overrepresented at 190%, so some of them might resign too. Whites are statistically the same as they are in the general student population. There seems to be no reason for whites to resign to protest racial favoritism. Actually, when the white president and VP resigned, they just aggravated the existing prejudice against white students which is exhibited by the underrepresentation of white students based on the state population.
So what do we do about the student body president and VP? My answer is that it is good they resigned. Also they should be kicked out of school for being dupes and for being too stupid to waste a college education on. Since whites and blacks are underrepresented at the school, one each of those who applied and had the requisite test scores should be admitted in their places. Okay throw out some of the white professors too (link to my previous article on Defund Your University).
Epilogue: Well I didn’t stop there. I wondered whether UConn was the odd ball out of state flagship universities, or was it typical. So, I gathered data on 47 states and their flagship universities to determine whether any racial groups were consistently statistically under represented. I did this for Blacks, Whites, and Hispanics. I’m not going to post all the data here, but in the end we find that the pattern at UConn is fairly representative of all state flagship universities (e.g. University of Texas, University of Michigan, etc.). When each university’s student population is compared to the state population, Whites and Blacks are underrepresented. Hispanics are proportionally represented. Specifically, we can say with 98% certainty that Whites are underrepresented on those campus; we are almost 100% certain that blacks are underrepresented, and that Hispanics are fairly represented.
This does not say anything about what is going on at the other state institutions or the Ivy League schools. However, just out of curiosity I looked at the largest state college system in the USA, the California State System, and found this: Whites are the most underrepresented racial group with the white portion of the student population being only 64.5% of the white portion of the state population, black students were 69.5% of their state portion, Hispanics students were at 101%, and the Asians student portion was only 88% of their state population portion.
According to my hypothesis, there is systemic racism against blacks and whites at the leading state universities. Since whites are discriminated against with 98% certainty, the concept of white privilege, at least in this setting, is nonsensical. White students should not be resigning from office, but should be using their political clout do get fair racial representation for their racial group, unless maybe, like I said way back there, a university education should be about demonstrated hard work and intellect, not race.
P.S.- It appears that Yahoo Comments is dead. The conservatives had been using the comment section to shred everything written by Yahoo’s insipid juvenile propagandists with such alacrity that Yahoo turned tail and ran, pulling the plug on the comments section. Now they can print their delusionary articles without ever having to face rebuttal from the thinking public.
Sad, I used to get a lot of good ideas from the comments at Yahoo. Maybe you can post comments here, and it is okay to refer to Yahoo articles if you want.