Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
Immigrant displacement of American workers has reached an all-time high—right as Congress returns from its August recess and, incredibly, is looking at passing some version of the Eight Gangsters’ Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill.
Employers added 169,000 jobs in August, slightly below expectations. The unemployment rate fell to 7.3%, mainly because people dropped out of the labor force and were no longer counted as unemployed. Labor force participation—the share of the working-age population that is either working or looking for work—has been dropping since the economy collapsed in late 2008, but is now at its lowest level since 1978.
The MSM and the Wall Street crowd played this as another ho-hum report. The numbers were good enough to keep current GDP growth projections intact but disappointing enough to forestall serious monetary tightening in the near term—a relief to Wall Street, which likes low interest rates.
But none of the chattering class commentary focused on the “other” employment report—of households rather than businesses. Total employment fell by 115,000 according to the Household Survey. Our analysis of BLS data finds native-born workers suffered more than 100% of the loss, while foreign-born enjoyed a big job gain.
- Total employment fell by 115,000, or by -0.08%
- Native-born employment fell by 338,000, or by -0.28%
- Foreign-born employment rose by 223,000, or by +0.95%
August is a month when seasonal factors—the change in car model years, the start of school, summer job terminations—can swamp long term economic trends. Even so, this August seems to be one for the record books. The immigrant share of U.S. employment—16.49%—was a new high for any August during the Obama years:
Foreign-born Share of Total Employment (%)
Source: Author's analysis of BLS unseasonalized data.
From August 2009 to August 2013 the immigrant share of total employment rose by 1 percentage point—from 15.49% to 16.49%. Had the immigrant share remained at its August 2009 level, 1.44 million more native-born Americans would have been employed this August, and the native-born unemployment rate would have been 6.4% instead of the 7.5% reported by BLS.
The displacement of native-born Americans by immigrants reached
It has been widely reported that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is calling on U.S. Catholic bishops and priests to turn their prayerful pulpits into political bully-pulpits this Sunday, September 8th. Patriotic American Catholics—of whom I count myself one—must think about how to respond to this indignity should they be subjected to it.
The USCCB’s immigration-mad professional bureaucrats want bishops and priests to harangue the faithful—who come to Mass to worship their God and Savior, not to be a captive audience at political pep-rallies—with stump speeches in favor of the nation-destroying Gang of Eight bill the Senate so recklessly passed and that now looms in the House.
Of course, the mass-immigration dogmatism of U.S. Catholic bishops is not the Magisterial teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on immigration and the right of countries to defend their national character.
A look at what the Church has consistently taught about nations and peoples—teachings grounded in Scripture and almost 2,000 years of tradition—must lead any honest reader to conclude that no nation is compelled as a Christian duty to throw open its borders to the point of seeing its distinctive culture and character drowned by a flood of foreign migrants.
The liberal fetish for diversity, something most of America’s Catholic bishops have adopted, is nowhere found in Holy Writ. Indeed, the dissolution of nations and their distinctive cultures into a monoculture—the end-state for Open-Borders fanatics, who see America as a “proposition nation” rather than an organic ethno-cultural entity—is exactly what we are warned against in Genesis’s story of God’s confounding the arrogance of the builders of the Tower of Babel.
No faithful Catholic is obliged to suffer in silence misguided p
Apparently, the American Indian identity is to this day the most coveted ethnic status in the entire world. That is why the white oedipal liberals are so focused on diffusing the Indian identity, and redistributing its honor on any and all non-whites. The one thing the globalist liberal cannot tolerate is a strong, male, ethnic image. The American Indian has become the bane of the white liberal’s existence.
I have noted before how Robert Redford’s Sundance Institute attempted to blur the American Indian image. When George Soros took over the documentary division of Sundance, it focused concentrated on an “Native American Initiative”—but immediately began including Pacific Islanders, Asians, Africans, and even homosexuals as part of the meaning of “Native American.” Anything non-white, non-Christian, and non-American, was to be classified as “Native,” and thus to share the incomparable historical dignity and honor of the American Indian. [See my George Soros and the Sundance Kid, FrontPageMagazine.com, February 07, 2005]
In Liberalism, all weakness, real or imaginary, must be validated. Calling Indians like me “Native American” is a standard tactic to destroy distinctions. Even the National Museum of the American Indian was early in on this racial amalgamation, disappearing American Indians in the name of validating every Third World tribe on earth, as I reported some nine years ago:
It’s official: the new National Museum of the American Indian declares all brown-skinned people of the Western hemisphere are now “American Indian.” All “indigenous” people of North, Central, and South America, and even Pacific Islanders, are aggrandized in the $219 million dollar showcase of brown pride. The NMAI is shrine for native resentment – a cultural center for anti-white, anti-European sentiments.
[The Smithsonian Redistributes Honor, FrontPageMagazine.com, September 28, 2004]
Some people thought I was neurotic to protest this racial elimination of my own people. Some thought I was beating my own war drum, so to speak, by vehemently objecting to the eradication of the historical identity of my people.
Then came the Hindu invasion. The “real” Indians, we were advised to understand. In a few years, the internet search engines were all wondrously mixed with Hindu and American Indian topics—all under the word “Indian.”
This historical dignity and honor of the American Indian simply cannot be shared with any other ethnic group in the world. Only the American Indian, however misnamed, can stand as the “natives” that fought against the United States.
Our mark is upon this grand country. And the mark of America is upon us. No other people share this honor.
I’ve written about the historical propriety of the word “Hindu” more than once on VDARE.com. It is from the ancient Sanskrit, sindhu. It means simply, “river.” The people that lived in the great river valley were called “river” people, or, people of the river.
Later, the Persians called it “hindu”, with a hard “h” sound. When Marco Polo and the Europeans came, they Latinized it by dropping the initial consonant altogether. It became the “Indus” River, and the territory, “India.” But, in the late 1600s, the English were still using “Hindou” to identify the people.
Yes, Hindus had a distinct religion, but the word hindu did not pertain to that, originally, at all.
When Christopher Columbus wrote in Spanish (1492), he called the New World natives of the Caribbean “Indians,” after the Spanish custom. They were called Indians ever after. When the English colonists encountered the North American natives, they were called “Indians” as well.
But now white liberals would have this distinction all done away with. American Indians are Hindus, and Hindus are American Indians.
A youthful, agonizingly ignorant site called Elite Daily recently published an article Tribal Man Carries Pregnant Wife 25 Miles Through Monsoon To Receive Medical Treatment. (by Sean Levinson, June 11, 2013.) It begins, “An Indian tribal man…” Not until the ninth line of the piece is the setting identified as “India.” A linguistic coincidence?
Hardly. The devious article features this giant picture of an American Indian northern plains warrior at its top, underneath the headline, before you even begin reading. There is no photograph of any Hindu person, people, village, or city. The picture is of some clay model, perhaps to avoid suit for actual ethnic fraud, or some such outrage:
Senior Editor Levinson, a white liberal elitist, clearly
Black-On-White Crime: If You Want To Get To Grips With Hatefacts, You Need To Understand The Hatenumbers
My August 29th column on the effort by Tim Wise to explain away the great imbalances in inter-racial crime stats brought in a lot of email. I’m going to give over a column to dealing with some of the issues raised by readers.
Inter-racial crime: The context.
Kent Falls, CT, Beautiful…until America’s Immigration Disaster (illegal AND legal) reached it
$17,200!—that’s about how much VDARE.com had raised (tax-deductibly) as of today, September 3, counting snailmailed checks, towards our $30,000 Summer Appeal goal.
So, despite suspending our Appeal over the Labor Day weekend, we’re already over 57% there!
I want personally to thank all of our readers who have contributed—above all our old friends. We owe you everything.
We now hope we’ve resolved the technical software problems that caused us to suspend the Appeal. So (to ape the immigration enthusiasts) let’s get this done! We don’t want to be forced into a supplementary Appeal later this year.
Congress reconvenes this Friday, September 6th and the Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill is still hanging fire. There’s just too much going on!
- If you have already purchased a VIP Summer Appeal Pass for $100, you will be able to access the site throughout the rest of this Appeal! Of course, if you are among the generous group that gives more, that will enable us to open VDARE.com all the sooner!
- If you can’t afford $100—and we know that all too many of our readers cannot
[For more Colorado politics, see Losing A State, Losing A Nation—What's At Stake In Colorado by James Kirkpatrick]
COLORADO SPRINGS -- Out: The boy who cried wolf. In: The girl who cried birth control. Desperate Democrats are imposing false-alarm feminist politics on a high-stakes recall election in Colorado this month. It's a golden opportunity for independent-minded women to reject empty femme-a-goguery and tear up the Sandra Fluke card.
On September 10, Colorado Springs and Pueblo will decide whether to boot two top state Democrats (state Senate Majority Leader John Morse and state Sen. Angela Giron) over their support for radical gun- and ammo-control measures spearheaded by outside special interests. Left-wing billionaires Michael Bloomberg of New York City and Eli Broad of Detroit have poured $700,000 between them into defending the endangered Colorado Democrats.
A whiff of elitist progressive panic
As goes Colorado, so goes the nation.
Under the “all seeing eye” of the Centennial State's seal, there has been a remarkable political transformation: this onetime bulwark of the New Republican Majority is now the model for the Permanent Democratic Regime. But not for the reason you hear in the Main Stream Media.
The MSM is quick to credit the demographic change resulting from immigration—all evidence of The Growing Power of the Latino Vote [By Kathleen Geier, Washington Monthly, November 7, 2013]. But the real story in Colorado: wealthy Democratic donors built a media/ organizational/ activist machine that cut into the Republican share of Colorado whites.
Colorado has long been important to patriotic immigration reformers. Dick Lamm, the leading Democrat to oppose mass immigration, was the longest-serving governor in Colorado history. In the immigration battles of the last decade, Colorado enacted some of the toughest anti-illegal immigration legislation in the nation, with the reluctant acquiescence of then-Republican Governor Bill Owens. And, of course, Colorado was the launching pad for Congressman Tom Tancredo, who stopped George W. Bush's Amnesty efforts and almost reduced the Republican Party to a single-digit share in his 2010 Third-Party run for governor. [Hickenlooper wins easily, by John Moore, Denver Post, November 5, 2010]
So when Colorado turned blue for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, MSM pundits were eager to credit the change to the much-vaunted Latino colossus. [Latino voters helped Colorado stay blue -- more so than in any other battleground state, By Sam Levin, Westword, November 7, 2012.
According to CNN exit polls, Romney won 54% of the white vote, with Obama picking up 44%. But Obama also won about 75% of the Latino vote, which constitutes 14% of the electorate. And that was enough to make up the difference.
But this misses what is really remarkable: whites in this traditionally right-leaning state, home of conservative bastions like Focus on the Family and the Air Force Academy, voted for Romney at a rate lower than whites nationwide. According to the New York Times,
EPI’s home page does have some stories about immigration, but they are significantly abstract—here’s a sample, with my comments:
A standard wonkish point, totally disconnected from real-world mass legal (and illegal) immigration. “Numbers are of the essence”—Enoch Powell.
- July 19, 2013 Is Senate Immigration Bill Better Than the Status Quo?
EPI’s answer: a resounding, Politically Correct fudge. But it does say: “Shockingly, the bill does not increase staffing or funding for the enforcement of labor standards.”
Doesn’t shock me.
However, EPI also has stories that are really about immigration, but don’t acknowledge it:
- August 21, 2013 A Decade of Flat Wages: The Key Barrier to Shared Prosperity and a Rising Middle Class
- August 19, 2013 State Jobs Numbers Show Sluggish Growth
- August 6, 2013 There Has Been No Improvement in the Hires Rate in Two Years
All of that is caused by sluggish labor markets swamped by too many immigrants.
Here are a couple of other EPI items that ought to reference immigration.
- August 22, 2013 A Well-Educated Workforce Is Key to State Prosperity
EPI’s approach to prosperity:
States can increase the strength of their economies…by investing in education and increasing the number of well-educated workers.
- June 24, 2013 Brazilian Protests: Could They Happen Here?
Well, the answer to that is: it’s much more likely that the United States will suffer riots of the kind that rocked Brazil in June if it keeps importing the kind of people who do that kind of rioting.
Happy Riot-Free Labor Day to all our readers!
Previous Labor Day Columns
No American patriot should have failed to study the recent New York Times cheerleading reportorial Catholic Push to Overhaul Immigration Goes to Pews (by Ashley Parker and Michael D. Shear, August 21 2013). A huge offensive is about to be launched against US citizens by a (tax-exempt) church, led by a foreign power, for its own secular and selfish motives:
Catholic bishops and priests from major dioceses across the country will preach a coordinated message next month backing changes in immigration policy, with some using Sunday Masses on Sept. 8 to urge Congressional passage of a legislative overhaul that includes a path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants.
"We want to try to pull out all the stops," said Kevin Appleby, the director of migration policy at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, who said the immigration issue was at a now-or-never moment. "They have to hear the message that we want this done, and if you’re not successful during the summer, you’re not going to win by the end of the year."
Catholic leaders, who have tried to wield their clout against Mr. Obama on issues like abortion, birth control and same-sex marriage, are betting that their congregations will be able to exert pressure on reluctant Republicans and wavering Democrats to support the president on immigration. They say they are motivated by the Bible’s teachings and by the reality that many Latino immigrants are Catholics and represent a critical demographic for the church.
[Emphases and links added throughout].
This Appleby point man [email him] makes clear the rhetoric will be emotional and manipulative:
‘Sometimes [the bishops] are criticized that they're encouraging lawbreaking, but the fact is, these folks are here, and their families are getting separated, and what the bishops are trying to do is change the law so they can help them,’ said Kevin Appleby, director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' migration policy and public affairs office.
Bishops' immigration outreach based on 'pastoral' concern, by Carl Bunderson, Catholic News Agency, Aug. 30, 2013
Whoa! Come here illegally and that gives you the right to stay?
Pass this kind of legislation and the U.S. on the way to becoming a banana republic.
And note that there’s no discussion of overall numbers, of
America’s college students are returning to their campuses as you read this. So, as VDARE.com’s Athena Kerry once did, I am writing to inform you of the desperate state academia is in—from the inside. Unfortunately this means that both my name, and the particular college, I attend must stay secret.
Kerry seems to have assumed that because her college was Catholic, it would not suffer greatly from the Cultural Marxism now often found in higher education. My mistake was similar. I assumed that attending a college featured in VDARE.com contributor John Zmirak's otherwise valuable book All-American Colleges: Top Schools for Conservatives, Old-Fashioned Liberals, and People of Faith would be a place where someone could agree with VDARE.com publicly.
I had followed Zmirak's advice in looking over the college's curriculum and everything seemed right. There were classes on ancient philosophy, the Bible, medieval Christian thought, Shakespeare, etc. Beyond that, there were no required classes on multi-culturalism and there was a place of worship on campus.
The blind spot: I did not have the presence of mind to consider the student body itself. My mistake may seem laughably foolish to some, and perhaps it was, but I cannot emphasize this enough: If you or your children are looking for a college, talk at length with many different students who currently attend. No matter how conservative or traditional the college's curriculum or ethos may seem, a bad student body can ruin it.
Here are some instructive examples of the mindset that many students now have, even in a place that prides itself in teaching many of the "Great Books":
- In a class on International Relations, Iran came up and I noted how ironic it was that a man as deeply religious as Ruhollah Khomeini would consider the atheist USSR a "lesser Satan" compared to "Great Satan" America, where freedom of religion was respected.
At this, the class stopped as one student after another explained
For example, SLATE’S Aisha Harris proclaimed Are You White? Then You Should Probably Watch This, August 16, 2013. (She’s black, by the way). And The Huffington Post’s C.C. Stinson (also black) wrote in BLACK VOICES, the Huffpo section dedicated to articles of interest to blacks:
“Mr. Wise has been an educator for many years teaching the masses about White Privilege and the psychological effects of our societal norm to ignore it…Numerous professors and subject matter experts are lined up to discuss this issue including John H. Bracey, professor and author of How Racism Harms White Americans, Imani Perry, a feminist and author of More Beautiful and More Terrible: The Embrace and Transcendence of Racial Inequality in the United States and Michelle Alexander, civil rights advocate and author of The New Jim Crow..” [Links added]
[Exploring Race With Tim Wise's film White Like Me, June 21, 2013]
Five years ago, I also released a documentary film about “racism,” A Conversation About Race. In it, I used taped interviews with a diverse group of adults to raise the question: if America does, truly, have a problem with “racism,” wouldn’t it be wise to take the time necessary to define just what “racism” is—before stripping citizens of their constitutional rights in ill-conceived schemes aimed at eradicating it? My film then demonstrated how all humans are “racist” to some degree.
Now, the reason I’m writing this is that I’ve noticed, shall we say, a distinct difference in how those in a position to judge greeted the release of these two, very different racism films.
The release of Wise’s film was celebrated, as seen above, and its content was acknowledged by both academia and MSM as being “educational.” (Wise is often described as an “educator” although his connection with educational institutions is minimal. He seems to be a professional anti-white agitator. Perhaps “educator” is Cultural Marxist-speak for “brainwasher.”)
The release of my film was, on the other hand, unanimously ignored.
Now, I concede
A military jury sentenced unrepentant Fort Hood jihadist Nidal Hasan to death on Wednesday.
A friend passed this on to me: It’s an August 25th posting by “antiracist essayist, author, and educator” Tim Wise. Nazis Can’t Do Math, chortles the heading.
I note of the latter (p. 383) that: “In 1933 at Berlin University, Bieberbach was conducting spoken examinations of doctoral candidates in full Nazi uniform.”
Of Teichmüller I have the following thing to say (p. 256)—it should be of interest to anyone who likes his history to have more than one dimension, a category that probably does not include Tim Wise:
We are accustomed to think of Nazi activists as thugs, low-lifes, opportunists, and failed artists of one sort or another, which indeed most of them were. It is salutary to be reminded that they also included in their ranks some people of the highest intelligence.
But in fact Tim Wise was not talking about the NSDAP at all. He is deploying the word “Nazi” to refer to contemporary race realists in the U.S..
Wise’s tacit assumption: the Nazis thought race was real and important; therefore a person who thinks that race is real and important is a Nazi. He wants his nation to avenge itself against France, reduce the Slavic peoples to serfdom, and exterminate European Jewry. I guess.
That’s Uncle Tim for you, though. He is a Left ideologue of the most passionate and committed kind, who—like Marx and Lenin!—believes in deploying the lowest, vilest kind of vituperation against enemies of the Cause. Back in the days when it was possible for an intelligent person to be a communist (or a Nazi), he would have been a formidably good one.
For intelligent Wise surely is, though in a narrow and entirely verbal, lawyerly kind of way. He is a terrific debater, wonderfully fast on his feet, with his ripostes and evasions all thoroughly rehearsed and ready to hand.
Listen to him in this debate with Jared Taylor, for example. Jared is a friend of mine, a man I admire greatly, and no mean debater himself (let me tell you); but I have to give this one to Wise on points.
It’s all facile, though. Wise’s great mass of memorized facts and research results sound great on the fly, but they generally turn out to be factoids and one-offs (scientific method demands R-E-P-L-I-C-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y of results) when you have time to dig into them.
To take an example: In the debate with Jared, this snagged my attention, and stopped Jared in his tracks, at 56m10s:
Two years after, three years after [Murray and Herrnstein’s book The Bell Curve] came out, researchers at Washington University in St. Louis, using the very same longitudinal database that Murray and Herrnstein had used for their research, which had demonstrated this persistent IQ gap between whites and blacks, looked at the same data and were able to take what Murray and Herrnstein didn’t mention in their book from the data, which was that when African Americans in the U.S. go to college they raise their IQ four times faster than whites who go to college and in the process close the average IQ gap between white and black in half in just four years.
Anyone who knows anything about psychometry will go “Whoa!” on hearing that. IQ just isn’t that malleable at college age.
People interested in arguing about race and IQ tend to have all read the same books, though, so I know the study Wise is talking about. It’s referred to in Nisbett’s Intelligence and How to Get It (2010), pp.146-7, and I’d assume that Wise, like me, learned about it from there. The actual study is archived on JSTOR here, but you need a sign-on; I can’t find a full version elsewhere.
So far as I know the study has never been replicated. The blogger at Unamusement Park cites a counter-study here. There are spirited critiques of Nisbett’s book on VDARE.com: Advocacy By Omission: Richard E. Nisbett's Intelligence and How to Get It by the late J. Philippe Rushton, and Selling Out And How To Do It—The Case Of Richard E. Nisbett, by Steve Sailer.
Those clear, eloquent certitudes that are so effective in debate all disappear like this in a fog of ambiguity when you look them up; but that’s the debater’s art. I say again: Wise is a terrific debater.
As a blogger he’s much less impressive. Partly this is the schoolyard vituperation, which he seems unable to restrain in writing. Mainly, though, it’s that he doesn’t organize his thoughts well.
In that Nazis Can’t Do Math piece that my friend passed on, for example, Wise seems at times to be arguing against the proposition that there is “a widespread black-on-white crime spree.” At other times he is taking on those who believe that whites are “being targeted by black offenders.” The two things are not the same, but Wise wobbles from one to the other as he goes along.
No doubt there are people who believe one or other of those things (or both: they are not mutually exclusive), but they are not major themes on the race realist websites, which I am pretty well acquainted with.
By far the commonest complaint on those websites is the conspiracy of silence about black-on-white crime, as in the Knoxville Horror case, and the contradictory inflation of white-on-black crime, as in the James Byrd case. Wise has nothing to say about that.
Among those of us in the race-realist camp who write about these things, the impression is that the cover-up has intensified under the Obama administration. Wise has nothing to say about that, either.
In a previous post, for instance, Wise takes the (black) economist Walter Williams to task for noting, “as many a white nationalist has over the years” (yep) that five-sixths of single-offender interracial violent crime is black against white. He adds that Williams used Justice Department data from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS):
According to the 2008 data Williams relied on (see Table 42), which is the most recent comprehensive data published by the Justice Department on violent crime victimizations . . .
Wise, in that post dated August 22nd, 2013, does not pause to tell us why Williams had to use 2008 data for interracial crime. So why did he? Because the Justice Department stopped publishing the data after 2008.
What happened in 2008 to make Justice stop publishing interracial crime statistics? Hard to figure.
(A reader of mine who actually worked in NCVS data collection told me the information about victims’ and offenders’ race is still gathered. It’s just not published.)
Also in that August 22nd post, Wise has some fun with the crime statistics. His goal here is to show that while blacks may be offending disproportionately against whites, they are not targeting them. So, he concludes, whites should stop thinking that blacks are dangerous! Uh . . .
Along the way he tells some little pork pies. “The biggest racial disproportion for violent crime, numerically—and year after year—is in the area of robbery.”
Is it? On those 2008 numbers, for example, we see 35.6 percent of 198,330 robberies are black-on-white: that’s 70,605. The corresponding number for white-on-black is 6,988. The proportion there is a tad more than ten to one.
For rape and sexual assault, on the other hand, the black-on-white number is 19, 293 (16.4 percent of 117,640). The white-on-black number is shown as 0.0 percent, which, on standard rounding methodology, means less than 0.05 percent of the 46,580 black victims, i.e. 23 or less. The proportion there is at least 839 to one.
So how does Wise figure that: “The biggest racial disproportion for violent crime, numerically . . . is in the area of robbery”? The only wriggle-out I can see there is his qualification of “numerically.” The numerical difference for robberies is 63,617 (70,605 minus 6,988); for rape/sexual assault it’s a maximum of 46,580 (46,580 minus zero). That’s a difference, though, not a disproportion. For a proportion, or a disproportion, you have to carry out a division.
Further down that August 22nd post Tim Wise, striving mightily to bend the data to his purposes, tells us about differential encounter rates.
The argument here is that blacks move among whites much more than whites move among blacks. We encounter blacks much less frequently than they encounter us, so of course we commit fewer crimes against them! If we moved among blacks more, we’d commit more crimes against them!
Er, possibly: but wouldn’t they also commit more crimes against us? And are we sure that the whites who avoid moving among blacks (why?) are just as criminally inclined as those who mingle?
In the later, August 25th post—the one headed “Nazis Can’t Do Math”—Wise tackles homicide, and comes up with a statement which is going to sound great in debate—expect to hear it a lot—but is mathematically unsurprising.
This needs a little arithmetical preamble.
Suppose a population of N persons has B blacks and W whites: B+W = N. Suppose the races commit murder at equal rates, say one in M per annum. So every year B/M murders are committed by blacks and W/M by whites.
Assuming no bias, the B/M black murders include (B/M) × (W/N) with white victims; number of murders times white proportion of the population. The W/M white murders similarly include (W/M) × (B/N) with black victims. Those two interracial numbers are the same: Both are (BW)/(MN). There are more whites to go committing murder, but there are fewer blacks to be random victims; and vice versa. It’s a wash.
Under these idealized assumptions, we’ll have the same number of black-on-white murders as white-on-black. Let’s say this number is K.
Then of America’s 42.0 million blacks, one in 42,000,000/K will be murdered by a white in any year. Of our 196.8 million whites, again on these idealized, no-bias assumptions, only around one in 196,800,000/K will be murdered by a black. Divide 196,800,000/K by 42,000,000/K, you get 4.6857 Ergo:
Any given black person in the United States is about 4.7 times more likely to be killed by a white person than any given white person is to be murdered by a black person.
Of course, those idealized assumptions—identical black/white offending rates, zero bias in choice of victims—are not the case. What is the case? If 4.7 is not the right number in that last paragraph, what is the number?
In Nazis Can’t Do Math, Tim Wise comes up with this:
Any given black person in the United States is about 2.8 times more likely to be killed by a white person than any given white person is to be murdered by a black person.
That’s the thing I expect to be hearing a lot. The 2.8 isn’t actually as impressive as the 4.7; but if you don’t know about the 4.7, it’s pretty striking.
The true number is less impressive yet, because Tim Wise has bollixed up his math again.
He’s working from this database, using 2010 data. He gets his 2.8 from dividing 277,000 by 100,000. The first of those numbers is the white population (196.8m) divided by black-on-white homicides from the database (704). The second is the black population (42.0m) divided by white-on-black homicides from the database (413), though he didn’t do a precise division, which would give final result 2.7, not 2.8.
All right: but for a real civilian (non-dysfunctional non-cop) danger figure you’d want to exclude a lot of those homicides. I’ll filter out the following: Justified homicides (felon killed by police or civilian), juvenile gang killings, gangland killings, drug-related violence.
That gets the black-on-white number down to 639, the white-on-black to 241. Wise’s 2.8 has now dwindled to 1.8. Remember, the equal-offending-rate, zero-bias assumption gives black risk 4.7 times white risk.
(And there is more to that database than meets the eye. If the only filters you apply are: Year 2010, Killer black, you do indeed get 704 white victims, as Wise did. However, if you apply filters: Year 2010, Victim white, you get 985 black killers. If you follow the math all the way through on that route, Wise’s 2.8 is ground down to 1.5. A free, signed copy of From the Dissident Right to any reader who can plausibly get it down below 1.0 by juggling filters.)
I still think Tim Wise is a first-rate debater. These attempts at number-crunching, though, left me with the definite impression that Cultural Marxists can’t do math.
Those who can, see sensationally higher crime rates for blacks, far beyond anything that can be explained away as artifacts of reporting methodology or arithmetic manipulations. The data from the 2008 Bureau of Justice Statistics, noted by Walter Williams (and me), telling us that five out of six single-offender interracial crimes of violence involve a black perp and a nonblack victim, stand stark and clear against all Tim Wise’s fudging.
We patiently await the corresponding figures for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, . . .
John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. His most recent book, published by VDARE.com com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.
Readers who wish to donate (tax deductible) funds specifically earmarked for John Derbyshire's writings at VDARE.com can do so here.