Displaying posts published in

June 2022

John McWhorter and Glenn Loury: Rejecting the Tokenism of “Diversity”

https://glennloury.substack.com/p/john-mcwhorter-rejecting-the-tokenism?utm_source=email#details

John McWhorter is back again for the latest installment in our ongoing, nearly decade-and-a-half-long conversation. Let’s get into it.

John starts out telling us about his current whereabouts: a Dirty Dancing-style bungalow in the Catskills. We move on to a developing story out of Princeton, New Jersey, where a group of parents has written an open letter protesting the school district’s “dumbing down” of the math curriculum in the name of DEI.

John and I are on the same page on this one: How much longer are we going to pretend that this is doing any good for the students? The way that the Princeton school district went about implementing these curriculum standards was, at best, deceptive. 

Don’t parents have the right to know how decisions that affect their kids are being made? Of course, DEI is a business, one that has created thousands of jobs for administrators and consultants who spend their days rooting out racism. And as John points out, if someone’s job depends on finding instances of racism, they’re going to “find racism,” whether it’s really there or not.

This incentive structure makes John despair. He also suggests that my theory of social capital may provide the conceptual underpinnings for some present-day arguments in favor of affirmative action. But I point out that, while social capital may partially explain disparities in outcome, it doesn’t excuse disparities in outcome.

After all, we can see that, some historically disadvantaged groups regularly over-perform when high academic performance is incentivized within their community. But incentives for middling academic performance tend to produce middling academic performance, and I fear that we’re incentivizing middling academic performance in our young black students.

Is there a way out of this mess? Is John right to despair? I close on a note of hope from my Brown University and Heterodox Academy colleague John Tomasi.

LIZ PEEK: Biden’s war on oil is funding Putin’s war on Ukraine

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/3535437-bidens-war-on-oil-is-funding-putins-war-on-ukraine/

President Biden’s bizarre and implacable hostility to U.S. oil producers is helping Russia win its war against Ukraine.

No joke, as Biden might say. Not only has the president’s unswerving effort to squash domestic oil and gas production caused higher prices for consumers, a looming recession as the Federal Reserve struggles to dampen inflation and disastrously low approval ratings, it is also funding Russia’s destruction of its neighbor.

The U.S. is the world’s largest oil and gas producer. Because of the COVID-19 shutdowns, but also because of the many restrictions and costs piled onto domestic producers by the Biden administration, and in recognition of those likely to follow, U.S. output has declined from 13.1 million barrels per day in February 2020 to 11.9 mb/d today.

Taking over 1 million barrels per day off the world market amid what was until recently a global economic expansion has helped boost prices. And higher prices are funding Putin’s war with Ukraine.

Consider: On June 10 the central bank of Russia dropped its key lending rate by 150 basis points, the fourth such cut in the past few months.

This even as financial authorities around the world, including in the U.S., are pushing rates higher to dampen demand and squash inflation.

At the Supreme Court with pro-life Democrats They waited in the rain for a decision on Dobbs

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/at-the-supreme-court-with-pro-life-democrats/

When Cockburn took a rainy-day stroll past the United States Supreme Court on Thursday, he didn’t expect to see many people. To his surprise, there were several protesters outside, anticipating a decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which could overturn Roe v. Wade.

Cockburn decided to stop and chat with both pro-life and pro-choice demonstrators, briefly catching interviews between shouting matches laced with obscenities and references to genitalia.

“Roe is a barbaric remnant of a eugenic past. [It’s] responsible for the murder of 60 million babies,” said Terrisa Bukovinac, the founder and executive director of the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising.“I believe in equity, nonviolence, and nondiscrimination. We can’t build a better world on top of dead babies.” Bukovina was one of two women who recently took home a box that was being shipped away from a Planned Parenthood clinic and found five dead babies inside.

Cockburn was astonished to see that a plurality of pro-life protesters were openly progressive or waved banners touting the Democratic Party. One of them, John Quinn, a 26-year-old affiliate of Democrats for Life, said, “We want to have a secular conversation. It is important to support women, but abortion is a violent solution, and it doesn’t solve poverty.”

Roe is gone — now what? Abortion law in America becomes a patchwork with plenty of drama to follow

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/roe-v-wade-gone-now-what/

With the recent ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, Cockburn figures it’s time to draw lines in the sand… or at least around the states. Following the decision, some states will serve as sanctuaries for the unborn, while others will be sanctuaries for women seeking abortions, sometimes right up until the moment of birth.

Let’s start with the states that have “trigger laws” to ban abortion if Roe is overturned. They are Arkansas, Kentucky, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Wyoming and Utah.

The states that codify abortion into law irrespective of the Supreme Court are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai’i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Washington, DC.

In other words, abortion states outnumber pro-life states eighteen to thirteen, while the rest have neither an immediate ban nor a codification in place. For these states, the heightened tensions will make for a vibrant debate in the coming days. People on both sides of the issue will be fighting vehemently, and abortion will become a much larger political issue in elections to come.

There are others among the nineteen states without “trigger laws” that may soon restrict abortion. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a Planned Parenthood-funded pro-choice “think tank,” states that may act against abortion in the coming days are Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Some of these states have pre-Roe legislation that will come back into effect, such as Arizona and Michigan, while others have laws that prevent abortions six weeks after pregnancy, such as South Carolina and Ohio