Monday, November 06, 2017

Perceived reasons for black failure among whites

The year 2016 was one of cultural upheaval, the full significance of which will become fully apparent only with the passing of time. Since the late seventies, the GSS has regularly asked about the reasons for black underachievement in "jobs, income, and housing" (correctly assessing it to be a relevant question to be put included indefinitely in the future!). As the following graph shows, in 2016, the egalitarian responses jumped up among whites while the race realist answers went down (N = 8,212):


The graphical color scheme corresponds to the people relatively likely to give a particular reason (or reasons, which is why the totals add up to more than 100%). They are as follows:

1) Discrimination (black) -- favorite of Black Geniuses and (((whites))) like Tim Wise

2) Less in-born ability to learn (green) -- a crass option that allows for a suboptimal expression of HBD-informed race realism

3) Lack of education (baby blue) -- politically correct conventionalism favored by moderate leftist SWPL-types, Jews of goodwill, and some of the more cuckier cuckservatives

4) Lack of willpower or motivation (white) -- some less cucky cuckservatives and libertarians are here, though HBD-informed race realists may be as well, as "willpower" and "motivation" certainly have genetic components

Why did discrimination and education go up among whites in 2016 relative to 2014, while willpower goes down? The 2016 result records the highest percentage of whites blaming irrational discrimination on black failure since 1989. Did BLM browbeat whites into submission? Wasit increased salience of the goodwhite/badwhite divide on account of the 2016 election? Simple noise in the year's survey sample?

With GWAS results pouring out into the public and CRISPR 2.0 coming on the scene, we're headed towards an ugly reckoning. As Z-Man is fond of saying, this will not end well.

Parenthetically, if those echo parentheses strike some as unfair, those people have partial standing. Jews go for the discrimination explanation more than white gentiles do, but their favorite explanation is the lack of educational attainment. If only Trayvon Martin could've received his aeronautical degree before a life of petty criminality was cut short instead of after it was!

The following graph shows the percentages of Jews and of white gentiles who favor each of the four explanations on offer for black underachievement (Jewish N = 217):


GSS variables used: RELIG(1-2,4-13)(3), RACECEN1(1), HISPANIC(1), YEAR(2000-2016), RACDIF1, RACDIF2, RACDIF3, RACDIF4

26 comments:

Random Dude on the Internet said...

I'm going to be cynical and say that a lot of it is due to the increased publicity of people getting fired from their jobs for not being "woke" enough on social media, private discussions, etc. these past couple of years. Racial issues are such a tinderbox that respondents may be more compelled to go for the "right" answer instead of the answer that they believe. I know for the purposes of GSS, you have to take the answers as is but I remain skeptical of radically divisive topics where people have a (legitimate) fear of losing their job the next day for a private conversation they had, whether it was posted to social media or not.

Capogambino said...

Aeronautical degree? Always knew he was a Native Son.

Sid said...

A lot of Boomers, including conservative ones, really doubled down on their cucky views of race during the Late Obama Age Collapse and the Trumpening. At this point I don't know how anyone can honestly believe that black social dysfunction will vanish with a little more education and a little more browbeating of whites, but I've seen Boomers think just that.

Changing your worldview gets harder as you age. Immanuel Kant read David Hume in his mid 40s and it completely changed his worldview, but that is just an exception that proves the rule. Boomers came of age believing in the idealism of the Civil Rights Era, and believe that at some point in the future blacks and whites will be functionally interchangable. The more conservative Boomers were starting to put more of the onus on blacks as time went on, but ultimately once their worldview was challenged, they retreated back into it.

Millennials don't believe in Civil Rights idealism with the same earnest sincerity. They tend to either believe in social justice with a kind of insecure fanaticism (SJWs) or regard it with jaded cynicism (Millennial alt-righters). It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Millennials became cuckier since 2014, but it's fundamentally different from how it is with Boomers: Boomers fell back to what they already believe in their hearts, whereas Millennials are forcing themselves to believe something they have more doubts about.

I imagine Silents are similar to Boomers in this matter. We've all discussed the Zyklons, and how they're rising up against an ideology that doesn't even pretend to care about them.

Gen X is the generational cohort whose attitudes on race relations I have the weakest understanding of. I think a lot of why Millenials are social justice fanatics is that they have Millennial parents with cucked out attitudes. Generation X begat the Zyklons, and the lack of enthusiasm for left wing social causes might be that Gen X didn't grow up on Civil Rights Era idealism.

mark auld said...

My opinion is that you do good work A.E.,which, of course, is why I drop by.

Audacious Epigone said...

Random Dude,

The venom and outright violence directed at Trump supporters throughout the 2016 campaign could've plausibly scared a lot of squishy fence-sitting types away from giving any indication that they were in any way sympathetic.

Capogambino,

I'm thinking it was more than one though I can't be bothered to verify. I don't have that kind of educational gumption. After all, he's more educated than I am!

Sid,

"Boomer parents with cucked out attitudes" I think you mean.

With boomers, it's a retreat into the shell they are most comfortable with. In the case of millennials, who have no core to retreat into, they're being herded towards the same. Because millennials are less ideologically anchored, they're more likely to swing in the other direction.

Mark Auld,

Nice of you to say, thanks. Glad to have you commenting.

Capogambino said...

Biggar couldn't learn how to fly because of racism. Except the first black aviators club in Chicago was started in the 1920s. I guess forgetting history in the service of the narrative was a thing even back in the 1930s.

Feryl said...

To be fair to Boomers, in the early 1990's they actually expressed some pretty reactionairy views. Their enthusiasm for Left activism seemed to coincide with economic booms, prior to the Obama era. They bit hard in the 1960's, 1980's, and late 90's/early 2000's. In the depressed 1970's and earlier 90's, their views became more cynical/apathetic (moreso the 70's) or frustrated with liberal busy bodies and runaway gubmint (the 90's). Rush Limbaugh built a huge Boomer base in the early 90's when many middle aged white men were getting fed up with liberals.....and especially enablers of criminals and crackhead Gen X blacks. From the late 60's-present day, bi-partisan interest in immigration reform peaked in the earlier 90's, but both parties' elites were mostly indifferent to suggested reforms.

Post-Klan Right wing terrorism peaked in the 1990's, with Gen X producing two notable terrorists (Eric Rudolph and Tim McVeigh). If you can believe it, a lot of people in the 90's had good reason to associate the Right with violence and extremism. The 80's were a time of relatively upbeat attitudes and civil discourse, then in the 90's there was an uptick in both Left PC and Right anti-government extremism. Meanwhile, an economic setback made people even more sour.

One could argue that the 80's and 90's were a time of (relative) civility among Leftists because they had been getting their way on most issues from the 60's-90's; what did they have to be upset about? Even in the 90's, a time of backlash towards immigrants and affirmative action, little was done to rein these problems in. Beginning in the Bush era and increasing with every regime since, the Left has grown more insecure and arrogant and hysterical. With Trump they for once had good reason to fear that their agenda would not be obeyed for the first time since....1960? It's striking to see so many Leftist Boomer agitators and terrorists; even the very aged among Leftists are panicking terribly over Trump, and by association conservatives in general (thus why Rand Paul was attacked, why so many apparent or presumed conservative whites are at times literally under fire).

Black Death said...

The three non-racism reasons overlap to some extent. Blacks have an IQ one SD below the white mean, so naturally they aren't going to get much education (the same is probably true for whites of IQ 85). This will also contribute to lack of motivation. The best way to look at the data is probably as a racism/non-racism binary. Even there, it's disturbing to realize that almost 40% of whites blame racism for all the problems that blacks experience. These folks are the lib-Dem-SJW-Clinton voters, of course, living on Fantasy Island, but it's still informative to see how many blame the three major problems of black communities (out-of-wedlock births, crime and drugs) on whitey.

Feryl said...

Winners don't resort to violence and hate. One of the misconceptions of this era is that both the Right and Left have become equally volatile and hostile. That's retarded. Rightists didn't, and still don't, smash in the windows of cars featuring Obama, or Hilary/Bernie stickers. And riots and mass shootings with political intent since the early 2000's are overwhelmingly the work of Leftists; moreover elite Righties and most prole Righties are mortified by violence on their side, while many on the Left openly excuse and even cheer for Lefty maniacs.

When the Right lost more and more ground from the 1950's-1990's, radical anti-gov./anti-globalist/anti-PC Right factions gained a lot of popularity and attracted sullen and desperate people. Neither side gained much ground in the 2000's, as ruling parties/figures throughout the West were resented by the Left and Right. Neither side liked the economic polices or foreign polices of the period. Evidently the lack of "progress" frustrated the Left though, as the Left started to become unhinged in the Bush era and has grown nuttier since.

Obama campaigned on being a reasoned centrist, and his first couple years were uneventful aside from his inability to punish Wall Street. But he heard the bitterness calling, and eventually Obama began to enthusiastically inflame the heavy feelings and discourse surrounding highly divisive events and issues, like the Trayvon shooting. Well la-de-da, what happens when you go from the most culturally Leftist president ever to a neo-reactionary (by the standards of his day) in Trump? A full on nervous breakdown among the Left, who're now desperately waging war against the Right and trying to beat us into submission and hound us out of not just polite society, but society in general (ostracism from gainful work, kicked off Twitter/Youtube, not allowed to share conservative stories on Facebook, etc.).

Random Dude on the Internet said...

> The venom and outright violence directed at Trump supporters throughout the 2016 campaign could've plausibly scared a lot of squishy fence-sitting types away from giving any indication that they were in any way sympathetic.

It's possible. The media has been bombarding the public nonstop about race issues since 2012 in order for Obama to get re-elected. It's been five years of nonstop agitprop yet in 2012 and 2014 it didn't really move the needle per GSS.

The big difference between 2012-2014 and 2016 is that in the past couple of years, corporations/employers really started to crack down on anything that they consider to damage their "brand" which means a couple of POCs or doughy SJWs complaining on Twitter means your ass is out on the street. It's a shame. Wish companies would grow a spine but they're not going to, not yet anyway.

mark auld said...

Well said and true,feryl,which is why it seems civil war on some level is inevitable.

Feryl said...

A lot of Gen X-ers feel like they've been guinea pigs in the far-flung experiments heralded by older generations. You're not going to have a strong opinion on much when nobody ever asked for your opinion....or even your permission. Early Gen X-ers tend to be either apathetic towards most issues, or they tend to emulate the various political identities approved by Boomers (libertarianism especially).

Later Gen X-ers often had Boomer parents, and are probably less inclined to big-gubmint hysteria. Thing is that Boomerisms are just not that appealing to the generation raised by Boomers. Although the children of Boomers respect their parents and often feel like they have an obligation to improve the world that they inherited, that doesn't mean copying the exact attitudes and behaviors of their parents. After all, how much could you improve the world by exactly copying the behavior of Boomers?

For what it's worth, it's probably too late to rescue early X-ers from the swamp. Agnostic has said that those born since the mid 1970's are the ones most embarrassed by the politics and culture of the "modern" West, and thus they'll be the real heroes in the long run. Meanwhile, people born in the 60's and early 70's are still often trying to push the ideologies and attitudes of the 60's-1990's, of which we've had more than enough. It's time to move on.

Bruce said...

The semi-cucked Republican types seem to like to blame "black culture" when I've discussed this issue with them.

Dan said...

I don't know how I would have answered. The correct answer is not available. If whites are not competitive with blacks in the 100 meter dash, that is certainly not a categorical disability on the part of whites.


Charles Dolci said...

There are other factors, but I attribute black lack of education to lack of will. If black students are at the same school as whites, are in the same classes and teacher yet perform poorly compared to his/her classmates the underlying problem is lack of will. I taught at a public high school in northern California for ten years. I had Asian, white, Hispanic and black students. Except for one academically exceptional student from Nigeria blacks were always the weakest performers. Same school, class, teacher. It is not lack of educational opportunity. Yes there plenty of lousy schools and lousy teachers, but the white and Asian students will be in the circumstances but will still do better.

dc.sunsets said...

As a very-late boomer, my anecdote of one testifies to the difficulty shedding thirty years of indoctrination. It took a decade after college to finally reframe the evidence my ("lying") eyes provided by observing blacks in groups in a college dorm.

Even now, when in completely candid conversations with my wife, I crawl a little inside just listening to what I say. My guess is that those much older than me steeped too long in the Post-'50's propaganda to ever shed its baleful influence.

To me, the reality is that "people" in general will never embrace reality (this one or any prior iteration.) Experience tells us that we generally obtain our grasp of reality (and our place in it) via stories that provide gross oversimplifications of what surrounds us. I believe that all evidence points to a slow trend-change being in play now, and that decades if not centuries of increasing leftist ascendancy is turning the other direction.

It is this vague, largely pre- or unconscious feeling that seeks out and chooses the dominant Narrative, which is the dogma that rationalizes whatever the herd wants to feel/think.

Blank Slate and Magic Dirt were handy descriptions of the dogma that rationalized the openness, trust and xenophilia that coincided with the emergence of (mostly) world-wide peace and global trade on an unprecedented scale. "They" shipped us Walmarts full of stuff, we shipped them IOU's. Kumbaya, brothers.

All of these sentiments existed prior to the mass of academic support popularized in the "press," which were nothing but confirmations of prior biases resting on social mood. Let's face it, what is "embracing" the behavioral aberration of a man getting his genitals cut off and a Frankenstein's Monster analog of female genitalia grafted, then calling himself a woman? It's Folie a Plusiers level "everything is awesome."

I await a new mood, and a new Dogma. It's rationalizations all the way down, for me, but I aver I'm sick of the old set and am willing to entertain a replacement.

dc.sunsets said...

It will be VERY interesting to see what happens to this series in coming years. I maintain that when the financial volcano blows and economic hardship slams most people, embrace of genetic explanations for dysfunction will move to the forefront, as will openly eugenic means of dealing with them.

We're slated to move from "resources are unlimited, we can afford to carry an equally unlimited number of 'brothers' who can't keep up," to "Every useless eater increases the chances my kids won't make it."

I can't decide which area promises to be more fun under this shift, Europe where guns are few, or the USA where guns and ammo are in such supply that the country could re-fight 1861-1864 ten times over. (FTR, I'm actually hoping that the breadth and depth of gun ownership in the US paradoxically precludes house-by-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood levels of chaos; too much to lose, and home-court advantage matters.)

Bruce said...

@ Charles Dolci,
Not sure why the experience you describe suggests lack of will as opposed to lack of ability (unless you consider the one Nigerian to indicate lack of ability isn't the problem). My guess is the Nigerian wasn't representative of blacks (or Nigerians) as a whole - I had the same experience with a Nigerian grad school student in the Physics department.
@ dcsunsets
I am also uncomfortable with this stuff. E.g. I'm not comfortable talking about this stuff with my wife and 5 minutes later seeing my black neighbor (who is very nice). I don't like the fact that he would probably be very offended and angry at what I think and say in private.

Dan said...

One of the choices should have been, simply Human Biological Diversity.

A majority would say, WTF does that mean?

Some other percentage would nod knowingly.

Human Biological Diversity / HBD is a great expression. I mean, diversity is good, right? Good luck to Voxdotcom tying themselves in knots explaining the growing social danger of these people who believe in (horrors!) human diversity.

Feryl said...

"As a very-late boomer, my anecdote of one testifies to the difficulty shedding thirty years of indoctrination. It took a decade after college to finally reframe the evidence my ("lying") eyes provided by observing blacks in groups in a college dorm."

Well, I posted recently about Boomer musicians forming multi-ethnic bands in the 70's (Prince, Bruce Springsteen, The Doobie Bros, etc.), and these acts favored neither rhythm nor melody. And the black riots of the 60's/early 70's were highly motivated by rage against "the system" and poverty, not so much by anti-white psychosis.

Since so many Boomers believed that it was their destiny to do things in a manner unlike their parents, well.....One of those things they earnestly wanted to change was the social isolation and tension between races. Moreover, the horrors of now defeated fascism lingered in the memory, and many whites were eager to lessen tribalism in the 50's and 60's, and the generation born back then basically agreed to continue that mission in the 70's/80's and beyond.

These are all products of a time period (the 30's-60's) which has utterly no relevance to the experiences and mindsets of Gen X-ers and Millennials. In the 80's, Gen X blacks begin to aggressively mark their physical and cultural territory.....As were, quite truthfully, some Gen X whites who often had reactionary Boomers giving their approval. That being said, most Boomers still can't grasp the anomie often quietly burning within Gen X-ers. Remember, Gen X-ers never experienced the prosperity, idealism, or good will of the 50's and 60's; nor do they have any real stake in feeling remorse or caution about authoritarian/fascist rulers and states. Hitler came from the Lost Generation, as did many of the more ruthless statesmen and esp. military leaders (hard-bitten generations like the Lost Generation and Gen X are a natural fit for leading men into battle).

If you came of age in the 80's and beyond, you remember, at an early age, hearing all kinds of horrendous things about blacks. They often join gangs, they beat their kids up more than whites do, they live in complete war zones, etc. After we gave blacks more leniency in the 50's and 60's, Boomer blacks and especially the massive wave of Gen X blacks fathered by Uncle Sam after the early 60's, proceeded to basically level massive chunks of urban America.....And that's what Gen X and Millennial whites saw and heard about at a very young age..

Feryl said...

If you read (Boomers) Strauss and Howe, a recurring theme is that Silents and esp. Boomers abhor what young people were up to in the late 70's and esp. 80's/90's; X-ers were born into a cynical, cold, chaotic, and uncaring world.....Yet it's precisely X-ers who were and still are blamed for things going sour. And for older generations, the most disheartening development is that many Gen X-ers and Millennials are not going to fight the battles of the past, or rather, the past that the older generations grew up in....And which side'll win this time? For all the praised heaped on American G.I.s, let's not forget that their Italian/German/Spanish/Japanese counterparts fought with valor.....For fascism. And truthfully, Americans, Brits, and even Scandinavians all helped pioneer ideas and practices that inspired fascism; it's just that most countries didn't have dictators enthusiastically embracing eugenics. Fascist ideology and "racist" science is often considered a "natural" outgrowth of nationalism/tribalism by Silents and Boomers....At least in the 1950's-2000's. WW2 has long since been moralistically retconned. Truthfully, Americans were threatened by the aggression of Nazi and Japanese forces; most Americans simply did not care about the ethnic chauvinism and whatever else mumbo jumbo fascist societies marketed. We didn't get involved to save Jews, we got involved to stop a couple asshole dictators from over-running a succession of hapless countries.

Audacious Epigone said...

Feryl,

I wasn't cognizant of it at the time, but I recall many leading thinkers in the HBD-sphere remark on how there was a thawing out of the PC enforcement on race realism in the early- and mid-nineties that froze back up after The Bell Curve.

Black Death,

Education is a way of acknowledging the gap without (directly) blaming whites, so generously it might be partially counted on the race realist side. On the other hand, it's the most blatantly incorrect of the four possible responses.

Random Dude,

Good point. That's been the big change wrt to dissident opinions. In my experience, normies are noticeably more accepting and tolerant of dissident thought than they were five years ago, but the corporate world is markedly less so. It really seemed to get started in earnest with same-sex marriage. I remember after the supreme court ruling that some 50+ companies had rainbow emblems ready to release to the world just minutes after it became public.

Mark Auld,

If peaceful political dissolution isn't allowed, I think you're right.

Bruce,

Yeah my experience as well. That corresponds most closely with the "willpower and motivation" response, I'd say.

Dan,

Agree. "Inborn disability" is so derogatorily loaded that it's no surprise that the responses are what they are. There's a good chance I'd have offered "willpower and motivation" as the least bad of four imperfect choices.

Charles Dolci,

Controlling for innate intelligence to the extent that you were able to, would you say Hispanics or blacks expended more effort?

dc.sunsets,

I'd much prefer be stateside when the SHTF than in Europe. We (rightly) champion the second amendment as a deterrent to the predations of a potentially overreaching government. But even that pales in comparison to how important it becomes in the case of real societal breakdown. It's the difference between a house cat let out into the wild with its claws (Americans) or having been declawed (Europeans).

Feryl said...

"I can't decide which area promises to be more fun under this shift, Europe where guns are few, or the USA where guns and ammo are in such supply that the country could re-fight 1861-1864 ten times over. (FTR, I'm actually hoping that the breadth and depth of gun ownership in the US paradoxically precludes house-by-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood levels of chaos; too much to lose, and home-court advantage matters.)"

I dunno about these.....Fantasies, esp. when they get into end of the world/prepper territory, with visions of Mad Max type stuff. People organize into groups naturally, and ice people in particular don't like mass chaos and bandits/war parties marauding about.

To use an analogy, back in 'Nam, the Tet offensive was fairly short-lived. You just can't sustain that level of violence and hostility on a wide scale for that long. Seems to me that the most privileged generation in history (Boomers) is insecure about it's toughness, and likes to dream of being a rugged warrior standing atop the rubble. Granted, later born generation aren't much better, but at least they aren't as given to Sci-Fi. It seems to that more often than not, a lot of Boomers don't think that the world turned out the way they wanted it to, and would just as soon as nuke the damn thing and start from scratch. Strauss and Howe say that Boomer type generations for whatever reason are enthralled by the idea of, sort of, purifying the world with fire (e.g. war/famine/pestilence etc.). They've lost respect for the current world, and they want to test the mettle of younger generations who they either don't give a shit about (X-ers) or are supposed to emerge from the saga as shining heroes (Millennials). Like the world's been corroded by the "bad" Boomers and all Gen X-er's, and the blood of younger generations will scrub the corrosion off and reveal the the good stuff underneath.

BTW, using the word "fun". Are you being ironic? I grew up with Boomer parents who'd make epic drama out of so many things. Fun is not a word I associate with any kind of conflict or harsh feelings. True, a lot of Gen X-ers and early Millennials ostensibly did a lot of nasty things for "fun", but it never really felt that way; more that boredom/angst/frustration was setting in and needed to be relieved, and sometimes that relief came in the form of cruelty and aggression. And we didn't fabricate reasons for acting like assholes; we knew we could be fuck-ups and didn't make up excuses or turn it into a cause. Nor did we complain when the tables got turned on us by our parents/siblings/peers/the police. Beginning in the 80's, vast numbers of teenagers were arrested and put behind bars; this wasn't possible in the previous several decades, because Silents and Boomers felt entitled to lie/cheat/steal/abuse with no serious accountability. Remember that no other generation believes in taking it on the chin like Gen X-ers do. Granted, there's over-lap in experiences and attitudes between early 60's born Boomers and Gen X-ers.

Feryl said...

I'd much prefer be stateside when the SHTF than in Europe. We (rightly) champion the second amendment as a deterrent to the predations of a potentially overreaching government. But even that pales in comparison to how important it becomes in the case of real societal breakdown. It's the difference between a house cat let out into the wild with its claws (Americans) or having been declawed (Europeans).

Gun issues are more germane to periods of individual violence (e.g., the 1960's-1990's), in terms of both perpetrating it and defending yourself from it.

After 9/11, we began to shift markedly to collective violence, where ownership and usage of guns is dicated not by self-controlled choice or whim, but rather by strong leaders. One thing that gunners don't get is that throughout the world, wherever civil instability and infighting prevails, you will find both sides owning and using arms. There are simply too man guns floating around to keep them out of the hands of a reasonably large collective. American gunners erroneously fear a period in which the ATF sweeps out en masse to confiscate every gun outside of a few hunting rifles, thereby permanently rendering the citzenry unarmed and vulnerable. The logical error here is that American gunners suffer from an individualist bias, which prevents them grasping the human reality that any group of people, given sufficient numbers, resources and competence, will procure arms if necessary. So many American Gunners are still living in the 60's-90's, where group membership, group action, and strong leaders are to be avoided and feared, and every person is an island onto himself.

And those pansies in Western Europe? Should a conflict break out between, say, a nationalist faction and a globalist faction, either side will have the means and will to attain fire arms (if they didn't have them to begin with) and use them. There are a lot of gun outlets out there.

Again, I would also note that a lot of the conflict scenarios pushed by the Right seem straight out of 1970 or 1990. It's a different era now. These days behavior and resources will be dictated from a top-down command structure. It's not going to be wild and spontaneous outbreaks of chaos and resource battles driven by individual concerns and distrust of collective groups and leadership.

And if ya'll are still listening, remember this: post 9/11, we lost more rights in 4-5 years than we'd gained from 1960-2000. In the heart rending aftermath of 9/11, most people didn't resist the shift from individual rights to collective security, and to this day a lot of people on the Right seemingly have memory holed this whole culture shift, even while still beating the drum about abortion or guns or whatever.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

> Good point. That's been the big change wrt to dissident opinions. In my experience, normies are noticeably more accepting and tolerant of dissident thought than they were five years ago, but the corporate world is markedly less so. It really seemed to get started in earnest with same-sex marriage. I remember after the supreme court ruling that some 50+ companies had rainbow emblems ready to release to the world just minutes after it became public.

We're desensitized to a lot of it since we see this stuff on the internet. In the "normiesphere", this stuff takes a lot of time to percolate. I agree that the same sex marriage ruling was a sign that businesses embraced progressivism. They did before but they really put the pedal to the metal on it 2015 or so. Now we have corporate sponsored slutwalks where that was unthinkable even three or four years ago.

It is pretty well internalized for office drones to keep your trap shut unless it's to gush about the wonders of a man in a dress taking a dump in the stall next to their daughters. Anything other than the progressive line means that you could lose your job. I believe this paranoia extends to even surveys that are supposedly anonymous. We're in a world where getting a Papa John's pizza now means you are a Nazi. We live in a crazy world right now and I don't interpret complicity as acceptance.

...or I could be totally wrong and everyone is finally waking up to the plight of the noble negro.

Audacious Epigone said...

Feryl,

Wrt gun rights, the libertarian position is more coherent than the tradcon one, but I'm on board with support for both. It's a visceral issue for me--I demand the ability to protect my family and I will see to it that I maintain that ability, irrespective of the rationality of such a demand.

Random Dude,

Yeah, it's gone from corporate acceptance/tolerance of degenerate lunacy to full-throated advocacy of said lunacy.