Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Asians like Ice People

Half Sigma recently rehashed the familiar reasons why Asians are, as the so-called "model minority", also the inconvenient minority:
Asians also make SWPL whites uncomfortable because of all of the white male/Asian female couples and the lack of mixed-race couples who run in the other direction. This brings up a lot of HBD issues that good white liberals don’t want to think about. Asians also make liberal whites uncomfortable because the existence of a successful minority lends support to the taboo idea that maybe blacks don’t succeed because of their genes and not because they are a minority. The best way to avoid thinking about these things is to avoid Asians.
A Pew survey on Asians in the US adds another reason for why Asians are the left's stickiest minority group, even though they tend to be socially liberal on issues like abortion and mostly vote Democratic (and also act like Belmont SWPLs in their personal lives). The following table shows what we'll deem a harmony index, computed by taking the percentage of Asians who say they get along "very well" with each racial group and subtracting from it the percentage of Asians who say they get along either "not too well" or "not well at all" with that group. The higher the score, the greater the perceived harmony between Asians and the group in question is:

Getting along with...Harmony
Other Asians+13

Asians report getting along with whites even better than they get along with other Asians, far better than they get along with Hispanics and far, far better than they get along with blacks.


Anonymous said...

Okay, but don't all groups report getting along better with whites?

Audacious Epigone said...


The Pew report also compares the Asian numbers with those for whites, blacks, and Hispanics. Blacks report getting along better with Hispanics than with whites (there are no blacks with other blacks, or whites with other whites questions like there are for Asians, for whatever reason). Hispanics report slightly better relations with whites than blacks, but not by much (the values used in the post's table would be -21 and -26, respectively).

JayMan said...

I'd imagine that, overall, Whites are the easiest group to get along with. Whites seem to have a much higher load of "reciprocal altriusm" genes than other groups.

I will say that the vast majority of my friends are White.

pat said...

I used to be an AFDC Social Worker in San Francisco. I remember a black woman on my caseload who lived in Hunter's Point. She was a remarkable woman. In those days the Welfare Department would grant what the called "special needs".

Nominally a recipient was expected to live on their grant but if something special happened the social worker could grant an extra payment. As you might expect this was abused by the leftist social workers who just wanted to give away as much public money as fast as possible.

Other more responsible ones tried to refuse special needs. But social workers are no good at that sort of thing and soon there were clients who got more money from special needs than they did from their official monthly grant.

So the Department raised the standards. Only disasters like a fire would qualify.

This woman responded by organizing her whole building. She would have them all move their personal property elsewhere and then she would torch the building. She had done this at least twice when I knew her. The Department and the Housing Authority would move everyone to a new building and pay them for the loss of all of their supposed burn property.

The Housing Authority and the Welfare Department knew all about this scam but but welfare fraud and cheating is never prosecuted.

The woman told me that she was mad. She was being discriminated against. The HA wouldn't move her from Hunter's Point. That was their policy. Hunter's Point was the least desirable housing project. Also the blackest.

This woman also told me she didn't want to live amongst all those black people. She wanted me to help her get an apartment in one of the projects reserved for old - largely white - people.

The Housing Authority - which had a black management - disciplined their bad black tenants the only way they could . They made them live near other black people.


Audacious Epigone said...


It's a personal question that you don't need to answer, but as I've started following you I've wondered how you'd describe the racial perception others have of you at first glance (black/white/Chinese second-gen Jamaican leaves a lot to the imagination!).


I understand the reality of welfare fraud being lightly or not at all prosecuted, but arson, really? It's even more depressing than I'd imagined it to be, and that was how many years ago?

Ed Tom Kowalsky said...


I don't know how anybody with any knowledge of the Holder "Justice" Department could be the least bit surprised at the refusal, at any level of government, to prosecute welfare fraud of ANY sort. The prosecutoral component of criminal justice in America is manipulated to absolve as many blacks as possible. And this goes a fortiori for blacks who commit "hate" crimes. What all this means is that the black crime rate, already stratospheric, is actually understated.

pat said...

I was a social worker for about two and a half years in the late sixties.

That woman was not my only client who was an arsonist. The other one was clearly my fault. She had been transferred to me because the department couldn't stop giving her special needs. I think she had gotten five refrigerators. And sure enough she soon called me up and asked for a refrigerator. Which I refused. Like a fool I blurted out that special needs were now only for things like fire.

Sure enough that very night she had her two beds catch on fire. I turned her in to the police and the fire department but they did nothing. This really was very dangerous. She lived in a crowded fire trap in the Tenderloin. She could have killed everyone on the block. Unlike the other one at Hunter's Point she didn't carefully alert her neighbors before she torched the place.

This case ended funny. She had been sent to me because I as one of the few male social workers and I got a lot of the problem cases. She called my boss to complain. He announced that we must have had a personality clash. He took over the case himself. After only a week or so, he gave her another refrigerator.


Olave d'Estienne said...

I don't know how anybody with any knowledge of the Holder "Justice" Department could be the least bit surprised at the refusal, at any level of government, to prosecute welfare fraud of ANY sort. - Mr. Kowalksy

I hear you, and I don't disagree, but I'm also told that civil servants have tremendous freedom to do whatever they want. Why can't someone prosecute welfare fraud even against Holder's wishes? (I asked a similar question regarding immigration at Chris Roach's site.)

I'm thinking, shouldn't there be a silver lining to civil service independence somewhere?

pat said...

The idea of the Justice Department prosecuting welfare fraud is just too bizarre. It's really nothing like that.

When I was in Welfare it was said that there was about 1% fraud. Maybe less. That figure was plucked from the sky as I later learned.

Ronald Reagan sent a task force to look for fraud in San Francisco. As it happened one of my cases got pulled for the sample. I was pleased. You see I had just done a renewal. Every six months we were supposed to reaffirm eligibility with a home visit. I was new and unlike anyone else in my unit I actually did home visits. All the others signed out for the field after lunch to visit two or three cases but just went home. Since the average Social Worker only read the newspaper until ten in the morning, this gave them a two hour work day.

But I had actually visited this woman and asked all the questions. She was eligible - no income, no car, no property, no husband.

But its seems she had a new Oldsmobile, worked full time and had a husband. This however was not enough to kick her off the rolls or charge her with fraud. I just revised her grant down a bit.

I also looked at my other cases and estimated that 50% of my caseload was committing fraud. I'll stick with that figure, half of all welfare payments are fraudulent.

Sometimes they would be caught. There was a clerk at the front desk who noticed that the same woman kept kept coming to the desk in response to a whole series of different names. I think they found that she had thirteen cases under thirteen different names. This was fairly common. In the Bay Area pimps would drive their girls from San Francisco to Oakland to Vallejo and to San Rafael establishing an AFDC case wherever they went. Since the welfare departments were so corrupt they never could control this.

The main reason that fraud was never prosecuted was the odd logic of entitlement. The mother didn't get the money for herself but for the child. So if you caught the mother cheating what were you going to do. Put her in the pokey? If you did that you would be harming the child more. Make her pay back the money? That would take the food out of the mouth of the kid. Welfare recipients are paid not for merit but for need. A scummy rotten welfare cheat still has needs so she is still entitled to her grant. Social Workers soon learned they were the only one punished.


Ed Tom Kowalsky said...

My mention of the Holder Klan was intended to show the legal zeitgeist in this country more than anything else. Hence, when the US Attorney General, who is constantly in the spotlight, feels free to run American "justice" according to a flaming racial double standard, what can we expect from urban AGs who are far less subject to media oversight?

Peter A said...

I've noticed that liberal activists have begun lumping Hmong, Laotians, Filipinos, Samoans and other Pacific immigrants into "Asian" in order to demonstrate that "Asians" as a group are not a "model minority" because those groups do have significant poverty, social maladjustment, etc. That sort of fraudulent racial grouping shows how threatening the East Asian (Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean) success really is to liberal ideas.

Anonymous said...

racial grouping along continent lines is so misleading. race doesn't exist in clearly divided lines anymore than it exists as an 'optical illusion'.

smarter than european asians are namely the Han Chinese, Koreans, and Yamato Japanese. But of course people from Southern or Western Chin, indochina and Insulindia will be part han chinese and part cantonese, turkic, or malay respectively.
Ironically Samoans are also Malay, but auatralian abos are not.
Hmong is (the most famous) just a mountain tribe as thousnds exist in zomia or the asian highlands.

Bloomberg said...

*** race doesn't exist in clearly divided lines anymore than it exists as an 'optical illusion'. ***